Toward an Ecosystem-Based Approach to Fisheries: a Risk Analysis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GALAPAGOS REPORT 2007-2008 Toward an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries: a risk analysis Charles Darwin Foundation Fisheries management in the Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) has tradition - ally focused on the establishment of regulations for specific species, such as the sea cucumber and lobster. However, the white fish fishery targets nine species (Peñaherrera, 2007), with an additional 87 associated or incidental species (Murillo et al. , 2003). In fact, the white fish fishery encompasses three very separate sub-fisheries: (i) deep sea fishing, using SCUBA and hand lines with multiple hooks; (ii) fishing with trammel nets, and (iii) trawl - ing for minor pelagic fishes (Peñaherrera, 2007). Due to the variety of tech - niques used, the intrinsic differences among the species, and lack of suffi - cient biological knowledge, it is not practical to have regulations for every single species. The new Management Plan for the Galapagos National Park (GNP, 2005) presents an ecosystem approach that attempts to maintain the functionality of the insular and marine ecosystems through rational use of the resources. This focus also recognizes that human actions involving a single species may have direct and indirect consequences for other species within the ecosys - tem. For this reason, the Charles Darwin Foundation (CDF) is applying a new methodology, called “Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing” (ERAEF) to analyze the white fish fishery. This methodology was designed in Australia where it has been applied to various industrial and artisanal fish - eries (Griffiths et al. , 2006; Hobday et al. , 2006; Smith et al. , 2007). Given the GNP’s strong interest in ecosystem-based management, this is an impor - tant tool that supports the Park’s management objectives. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the applicability of the ERAEF as a tool to evaluate and manage Galapagos fisheries and demonstrate its usefulness for future analyses within the GMR. What is ERAEF? The ERAEF is a multi-tiered analytical tool involving a preliminary literature review followed by three levels of analysis, with each level examining the previous one in greater detail (Hobday et al. , 2006) (Figure 1). The literature GALAPAGOS REPORT 2007-2008 review (Preliminary Level) identifies all of among others. If an activity or impact the possible activities and impacts associ - occurs in the fishery that is being ana - ated with a particular fishery, such as lyzed, it is studied further in Level One; if engine emissions, fishing activities, not, it is eliminated from the analysis. onboard processing, and navigation, Preliminary level or scope Analysis: Fishery/Sub-fishery Establish the scope and context Identify threats Analysis: Most vulnerable element for each component Risk evaluation Level One (species, habitats, and communities). Filter: Activities with minor consequences and potentially low risk. Low risk Medium or high risk Analysis: Complete set of elements for each Risk evaluation Level Two component Filter: Elements with low risk Management response Low risk Medium or high risk to risk Analysis: Selected elements (species, habitats, and communities): Risk evaluation Level Three spatial and temporal dynamics Low risk Medium or high risk Figure 1. Organizational chart of the ERAEF evaluation system. Modified from Hobday et al. (2006). Level One involves a qualitative analysis of sured using available information on maxi - the intensity of each activity and its mum age and size, age and size at sexual impact on five ecosystem components: 1) maturity, number of eggs, reproductive target species; 2) associated species that strategy, and its nutritional relationship accompany the target species or bycatch with prey and predators (trophic level). (those not kept by the fisherman); 3) pro - Susceptibility categorizes the risk according tected, threatened, or endangered species to area and depth of the fishing activity in (PTE); 4) habitats, and 5) communities. relation to the distributional depth of each The results of Level One show the level of species, the selectivity of the method of risk using a scale of “low-medium-high”, fishing in relation to size at sexual matu- with risk level assigned by the evaluators rity, and post-catch mortality of the species. based on the consequences that an activity In determining the risk for each generates for each component of the species, susceptibility is more important ecosystem. If the level of risk of an activity than productivity. If a species has high pro - on a specific component is low, no manage - ductivity and low susceptibility, the risk is ment measures are required. If the risk is low. On the other hand, if the productivity medium or high, it requires management is low and the susceptibility high, the risk is measures to reduce possible consequences high. The results of this analysis indicate or it is evaluated at the next level. which of the species affected by the activ- Level Two analyzes the risk to each ity require management measures. species (target, associated, PTE) based on When the implementation of manage - its biological productivity and its suscepti - ment plans does not diminish the level of bility to the fishery. Productivity is mea- risk for a particular species, the species | 116 GALAPAGOS REPORT 2007-2008 will be evaluated at Level Three. This level The first step in the evaluation of the deep includes in-depth analyses such as the sea sub-fishery is to determine all of the evaluation of population status, maximum units of analysis that form each ecological sustainable catch levels, and reproduction component. These analysis units serve as and recruitment models. indicators of the effects of the activities The technical team implementing the evaluated at Level One and form the ana - ERAEF methodology in Galapagos includes lytical base for Level Two. They include: scientists from various institutions involved in ecological and fisheries studies Ten target species (Table 1); in the GMR, including the National Institute of Galapagos, the Spanish organ - 74 associated species, including fish ization Instituto de Promoción y Ayuda al and mollusks such as black jacks, Desarrollo (IPADE), the University of conches, parrotfish, and moray eels; Melbourne (Australia), Galapagos National Park, World Wildlife Fund, and the CDF. 73 PTE species, such as whales, dol - The results obtained thus far and summa - phins, sharks, and marine birds; rized in this paper are those of the anal- ysis of the deep sea sub-fishery. 16 habitat types (Table 2); and Does the deep sea sub-fishery pose any 15 types of marine communities threats? Are any species at risk? (Table 3). Table 1. Target species identified for the sub-fishery – deep sea fishing. Family Scientific name Common name Labridae Semicossyphus darwini Galapagos sheephead wrasse Lutjanidae Lutjanus novemfasciatus Dog snapper Malacanthidae Ca ulolatilus princeps Ocean whitefish Scorpaenidae Pontinus clemensi Mottled scorpionfish Serranidae Cratinus agassizii Grey threadfin bass Serranidae Epinephelus mystacinus Misty grouper Serranidae Mycteroperca olfax Gal apagos sea bass (bacalao) Serran idae Paralabrax albomaculatus White spotted sand bass Carangidae Seriola rivoliana Jack Source: Murillo et al. (2003) and Molina et al. (2004a and b). Table 2. List of habitats in the GMR evaluated using ERAEF. n n o i i t Depth a Type of habitat Cover c (m) o L Land Coastline above sea level * Not available Intertidal lagoons Not available 0 - 2 Coastal lagoons Not available 1 - 2 r 2 a ) l Sediment i ntertidal Ap proximately 4,622 ,745 m 2 - 2 s u m s Rocky i ntertidal More than 80% 3- 2 m n 0 r i Rock substrate Not available 2 - 500 0 o r f 5 t o Soft substrate Not available 3 - 500 i a - r l e p More than 50 walls considered 2 t ( Vertical walls 4 - 500 n I important Hydrothermal crater No t available 400 - 500 Seamount Not available 100 - 400 Embankment or slope No baseline 500 - 3 500 s ) r r Hydrothermal crater Not available > 2 000 o m m i a r l 0 r Deep rock substrate No baseline 1000 - 3000 o u e 0 f t s t 5 Deep sediment substrate No baseline 1000 - 3000 x n a i l > E ( p Seamount No baseline 400 - 1000 Deep sea floor No baseline > 3000 * Includes all of the exposed areas of the islands above high tide. Source: Based on Chadwick (2006), Banks (2007), and information from ecological monitoring by CDF (D. Ruiz, unpublished). 117 | GALAPAGOS REPORT 2007-2008 Table 3. List of communities under evaluation according to the biogeographical regions of the GMR. 1 Sub- Vertical Name of community Spatial location biome position Elizabeth Bay Far North North West Southeast Land Suprali ttoral Terrestrial o rganisms x X x x x ) Mangroves or unsubmerged x x x x m vegetation 0 Intert idal 0 (0 - 2 m) Intertidal meiofauna x x x x 5 ~ Rocky intertidal x X x x x - s m Soft substrate benthos x X x x x r o f t Rock substrate benthos x X x x x a l p Marcroalgae beds and kelps f F f x f r a l Sub tidal u Hermatypic corals X f f s (2 - 500 m) n i Filtering organisms X x x x r o i r Bentho -pelagic on seamounts x e t n I Chemosynthetics x r a l Deep seafloor benthos x x x x x ) u Sub tidal s s m m n (~500 - Seamount bentho -pelagics x x x i r 0 o r f 0 3 000 m) t o i 5 Chemosynthetics x a r l > e p ( t Abyss x Deep sea benthos x x x x E (> 3 000 m) 1 The spatial location is coded as follows: x = present; f = fragmented; empty = absent. Source: Based on Wellington (1975); Edgar et al. (2004); Chadwick (2007); and information from ecological monitoring by CDF (D.