376
M.W. Russell et al.
The bottom line is that if an aggregation is known and fi shed, it is most likely
already overfi shed and in need of management. Indeed, the best-protected aggregations are those that are not yet known. Moreover, management measures on fi shing
a species outside of aggregations may also be necessary depending on the type and
intensity of the fi shery, the species and on enforcement capabilities.
11.3 Management Options
The types of fi sheries input and output management controls, and conservation
options for management of aggregations vary widely. Management tools include
species-specifi c protection (the sale, export or possession of a species may be
prohibited seasonally or year-round), temporal and spatial protection (a general area
or specifi c geographic location may be closed to fi shing or entry, either seasonally
or permanently), and fi shery input and output restrictions such as limited entry to a
fi shery, catch quotas, fi sh size limits, or fi shing gear limitations.
Because of the many information gaps regarding species-specifi c spawning
behaviours and aggregation status, and concerns over declines in aggregating species,
precautionary approaches are necessary to ensure sustainable management (NRC
1999 ) . This is clearly articulated in the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries (FAO 1995 ) , which states “ The absence of adequate scientifi c information
should not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and
management measures … States should ensure that the level of fi shing permitted is
commensurate with the state of the fi shery resource under exploitation ” using the
‘best available scientifi c data’. Deciding upon and implementing an appropriate
precautionary approach early enough to prevent declines is not straightforward
given that immediate short term socio-economic considerations may infl uence
decision makers to be less precautionary, or an aggregation fi shery still appears to
be in good condition (see ‘hyperstability’ below). As a result, management to date
has largely been reactive (Sadovy de Mitcheson 2009 ) . Clearly, the longer term
benefi ts to the overall fi shery of preserving high reproductive potential through
maintaining aggregations need to be more widely appreciated. For some species,
such as the Nassau grouper, it may well be that the best fi shery production overall
will occur if aggregations are fully and permanently protected and left to perform
their reproductive function.
Single management measures alone are unlikely suffi cient to manage aggregating
species, especially when they are fi shed both during and outside of the aggregating
time period, or if they are threatened. More emphasis needs to be placed on
coupling management measures directed at protecting spawning aggregations with
measures also directed at the non-aggregation component, i.e. the wider fi shery. For
many species, especially migratory species that move over large distances to and
from transient aggregation sites as adults, multiple management approaches may be
needed to minimize the risks of overfi shing in all areas where the species of interest
may be vulnerable to fi shing. Multiple management measures should be complementary and may be needed if enforcement is a problem. For example, while a
M.W. Russell et al.
The bottom line is that if an aggregation is known and fi shed, it is most likely
already overfi shed and in need of management. Indeed, the best-protected aggregations are those that are not yet known. Moreover, management measures on fi shing
a species outside of aggregations may also be necessary depending on the type and
intensity of the fi shery, the species and on enforcement capabilities.
11.3 Management Options
The types of fi sheries input and output management controls, and conservation
options for management of aggregations vary widely. Management tools include
species-specifi c protection (the sale, export or possession of a species may be
prohibited seasonally or year-round), temporal and spatial protection (a general area
or specifi c geographic location may be closed to fi shing or entry, either seasonally
or permanently), and fi shery input and output restrictions such as limited entry to a
fi shery, catch quotas, fi sh size limits, or fi shing gear limitations.
Because of the many information gaps regarding species-specifi c spawning
behaviours and aggregation status, and concerns over declines in aggregating species,
precautionary approaches are necessary to ensure sustainable management (NRC
1999 ) . This is clearly articulated in the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries (FAO 1995 ) , which states “ The absence of adequate scientifi c information
should not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and
management measures … States should ensure that the level of fi shing permitted is
commensurate with the state of the fi shery resource under exploitation ” using the
‘best available scientifi c data’. Deciding upon and implementing an appropriate
precautionary approach early enough to prevent declines is not straightforward
given that immediate short term socio-economic considerations may infl uence
decision makers to be less precautionary, or an aggregation fi shery still appears to
be in good condition (see ‘hyperstability’ below). As a result, management to date
has largely been reactive (Sadovy de Mitcheson 2009 ) . Clearly, the longer term
benefi ts to the overall fi shery of preserving high reproductive potential through
maintaining aggregations need to be more widely appreciated. For some species,
such as the Nassau grouper, it may well be that the best fi shery production overall
will occur if aggregations are fully and permanently protected and left to perform
their reproductive function.
Single management measures alone are unlikely suffi cient to manage aggregating
species, especially when they are fi shed both during and outside of the aggregating
time period, or if they are threatened. More emphasis needs to be placed on
coupling management measures directed at protecting spawning aggregations with
measures also directed at the non-aggregation component, i.e. the wider fi shery. For
many species, especially migratory species that move over large distances to and
from transient aggregation sites as adults, multiple management approaches may be
needed to minimize the risks of overfi shing in all areas where the species of interest
may be vulnerable to fi shing. Multiple management measures should be complementary and may be needed if enforcement is a problem. For example, while a