380
M.W. Russell et al.
to the black grouper aggregation. Mechanisms to adjust or add to MPA boundaries in such instances could be considered as part of adaptive management.
Since the best protection is when site locations are entirely unknown, it would be
counterproductive to publicize discovery of little or formerly unknown sites in an area
unless there is effective legislation already in place to ensure immediate protection
from fi shing on discovery, and confi dence that enforcement would be successful.
11.3.2 Fishery Input and Output Controls
Conventional fi sheries management tools such as limited entry, commercial catch
quotas, recreational possession limits, fi sh size limits, and fi shing gear controls are
indirect controls for protecting fi shes that aggregate to spawn. However, if used
without some form of direct spatial, temporal or species protection aligned with
spawning locations or timing, these measures alone are unlikely to be effective at
preventing overfi shing of aggregations (Chap. 8 ). Approaches to consider include
regulating input and/or output controls for specifi c aggregations, regulating input
and/or output controls for the overall fi shery for the species, and a mixed strategy,
which probably represents the strongest level of protection.
Limiting the number of fi shing licenses or permits, and the amount of time
fi shers can fi sh will reduce the overall impact on aggregating species. However, an
increase in fi shing power or gear modifi cation that often follows such controls can
offset the management effect over time (Chap. 12.7 ).
Commercial catch quotas and recreational possession limits may be set at conservative levels fi shery-wide, and if complied with are effective ways to ensure
catch is limited to within a predetermined sustainable level (see Chap. 12.12 ).
However, these limits can be diffi cult to enforce because of multiple catch landing
locations, and ensuring catch records are accurate is typically a challenge. Setting a
sustainable catch level, whether fi shery-wide or specifi c to an aggregation, depends
on having reliable fi sheries data, which are not readily available for most fi sheries.
Where there is a signifi cant recreational fi shery, a possession ban for the managed
species can be used in addition to a sales ban, which may accompany a seasonal ban
at the time of aggregation. Another form of quota management is export control.
Sales controls are most effective when there is suffi cient enforcement capacity to
monitor the markets. However, this becomes a challenge if there are numerous markets or landing points. Unless penalties are appropriate for breaching such bans,
fi shers may take the risk of marketing protected species, or fi llet them to avoid identifi cation because the potential fi nancial gain is large in comparison to the penalties.
One way to mitigate fi lleting is to implement a rule to keep skin attached to fi sh fi llets
to aid in species identifi cation. In Belize (Janet Gibson personal communication
2010) and on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia (Martin Russell personal observation 2010), certain commercially caught reef fi sh must have a portion, or all, of the
skin remaining on a fi llet (‘skin patch’). Recreational fi shers are not permitted to
fi llet fi sh at sea.
M.W. Russell et al.
to the black grouper aggregation. Mechanisms to adjust or add to MPA boundaries in such instances could be considered as part of adaptive management.
Since the best protection is when site locations are entirely unknown, it would be
counterproductive to publicize discovery of little or formerly unknown sites in an area
unless there is effective legislation already in place to ensure immediate protection
from fi shing on discovery, and confi dence that enforcement would be successful.
11.3.2 Fishery Input and Output Controls
Conventional fi sheries management tools such as limited entry, commercial catch
quotas, recreational possession limits, fi sh size limits, and fi shing gear controls are
indirect controls for protecting fi shes that aggregate to spawn. However, if used
without some form of direct spatial, temporal or species protection aligned with
spawning locations or timing, these measures alone are unlikely to be effective at
preventing overfi shing of aggregations (Chap. 8 ). Approaches to consider include
regulating input and/or output controls for specifi c aggregations, regulating input
and/or output controls for the overall fi shery for the species, and a mixed strategy,
which probably represents the strongest level of protection.
Limiting the number of fi shing licenses or permits, and the amount of time
fi shers can fi sh will reduce the overall impact on aggregating species. However, an
increase in fi shing power or gear modifi cation that often follows such controls can
offset the management effect over time (Chap. 12.7 ).
Commercial catch quotas and recreational possession limits may be set at conservative levels fi shery-wide, and if complied with are effective ways to ensure
catch is limited to within a predetermined sustainable level (see Chap. 12.12 ).
However, these limits can be diffi cult to enforce because of multiple catch landing
locations, and ensuring catch records are accurate is typically a challenge. Setting a
sustainable catch level, whether fi shery-wide or specifi c to an aggregation, depends
on having reliable fi sheries data, which are not readily available for most fi sheries.
Where there is a signifi cant recreational fi shery, a possession ban for the managed
species can be used in addition to a sales ban, which may accompany a seasonal ban
at the time of aggregation. Another form of quota management is export control.
Sales controls are most effective when there is suffi cient enforcement capacity to
monitor the markets. However, this becomes a challenge if there are numerous markets or landing points. Unless penalties are appropriate for breaching such bans,
fi shers may take the risk of marketing protected species, or fi llet them to avoid identifi cation because the potential fi nancial gain is large in comparison to the penalties.
One way to mitigate fi lleting is to implement a rule to keep skin attached to fi sh fi llets
to aid in species identifi cation. In Belize (Janet Gibson personal communication
2010) and on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia (Martin Russell personal observation 2010), certain commercially caught reef fi sh must have a portion, or all, of the
skin remaining on a fi llet (‘skin patch’). Recreational fi shers are not permitted to
fi llet fi sh at sea.