Download - Final iceland presentation
1
Reconsidering the role of fishers in recreational fisheries management:
The case of the blue cod fishery in Marlborough, New Zealand
Alyssa Thomas, Victoria University of WellingtonSupervisors: Taciano Milfont (VUW) and Michael Gavin
(Colorado State)
2
Presentation OutlineLiterature backgroundStudy aimsSite informationMethodsResults & DiscussionManagement Implications
3
BackgroundGrowing recognition that social and ecological aspects
of fisheries management are linked (Berkes, 2010)Fisher participation in the management process can
positively influence awareness and compliance (Jentoft & McCay, 1995)
Fisher attitudes towards and awareness of regulations also shown to influence compliance (Page et al. 2004; Pierce & Tomcko, 1998)
But attitude and knowledge further influenced by demographic variables (Page & Radomski, 2006; Schill & Kline, 1995)
From http://www.fish.govt.nz
4
Study AimsAs part of a larger research project: 1) Assess fisher knowledge of the new blue cod regulations
2) Evaluate fishers’ views on the new blue cod regulations
3) Explore the influence of demographic factors such as region of residence, age and local fishing experience on the main variables considered
Lack of research on social dimensions of current management strategy
5
Marlborough Sounds Blue CodFishery
• Popular holiday spot• Intense recreational
fishing pressure•~60% decline in blue cod
between 1995/1996 and 20074 year ban on blue cod fishing
implemented October 2008
6
Current Management StrategyReopened in April 2011
1. Slot limit: 30-35cm2. Daily bag limit: 2/person3. Closed 4 months a year (September-20 December)4. Fish cannot be filleted at sea (filleting rule)5. Size and daily limits apply regardless of where
caught (transit rule)Initial proposal by Blue Cod Management Group
(BCMG), finalized by Ministry of Primary Industries
Frustration as fishers believe feedback is being ignored
7
MethodsFace to face surveys of 311 fishers at four
popular launching spots in January/February 2013
Asked about:Overall satisfaction with regulations and fishingInfluence of regulationsCorrect knowledge of filleting & transit rule and
agreement withAwareness of BCMG and knowledge of their role
8
Results: SatisfactionWidespread discontentment
and significant feelings of frustration and anger
Fishers negative towards regulations (M=2.47)Age, fishing experience and
residency differences observed
Only marginally satisfied with fishing itself (M=3.20)Because of regulationsRegion of residency
influence
9 or less 10-19 20-29 30-39 40 or more
1
2
3
4
5
2.992.38 2.38 2.61
1.78
Years fishing in the Marlborough Sounds
Mea
n le
vel o
f sa
tis-
fact
ion
20-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over1
2
3
4
5
2.922.53 2.38
2.02
Estimated age (years)
Mea
n le
vel o
f sa
tisf
acti
on
9
Regulation SatisfactionFilleting Rule: 71% agree
Effects from age and experienceDoes n0t make much differenceNon-compliance because of attitude likely
fairly lowTransit Rule: 34% agree
Residency a significant influenceUnfair, confusing, not legitimatePotential for high levels of non-compliance
Agree
Disagree
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
24.8
75.2
46.4
53.6
Non-Marlborough ResidentMarlborough Resident
Percentage
10
Regulation KnowledgeKnowledge of size and bag limits quite high92% correctly knew filleting rule
Increases with experience and residencyApplies to all fishers
Not likely to be a driver of non-compliance
60% correctly knew the transit ruleIncreases with local fishing experienceDoes not apply to all fishers
Good possibility this is a driver of non-compliance
11
Regulation Influence on FishingLevel of influence is small (M=2.38)
Age, fishing experience and residency all significant
Rules mainly influence where and how often Not a primary driver of non-compliance
9 or less 10-19 20-29 30-39 40 or more1
2
3
4
5
2.0676 2.254 2.28 2.38782.9831
Years fishing in the Marlborough Sounds
Leve
l of
influ
ence
12
Blue Cod Management Group50% of the fishers had heard of the BCMG
Age, fishing experience and residency all significantBut only 34% provided accurate details on
roleAge significant Belief that BCMG responsible for the new regulations
Never heard of group50%
Heard of group and knew their role
16%
Only heard of group34%
13
Influence of age and experienceSignificant for five (age) and six (experience) variables
Lowered satisfaction, increased knowledge and influenceLeast experienced/youngest fishers
Only known a depleted fisherySome similar regulationsLess distinct preferences
Quicker to accept changesMost experienced/oldest fishers
“the good old days”Less restrictive regulationsMore set in their habits
Tougher to gain support from this group
14
Influence of local residencySignificant effect on six variables
Lowered satisfactionIncreased knowledge and influence
Local fishers:Struggle to see improvementsCan afford to be more particularHigher levels of investment in the fisheryIncreased exposure to fishery information
Rules affect them to a greater degree, may be more hesitant to accept
15
ParticipationCommon complaint regarding lack of participation
Yet limited knowledge of the official forum (BCMG)But fishers with more negative attitudes more
likely to believe in lack of participation or consultation
Fisher participation can lead to more widely accepted rulesFilleting vs. transit rules
Fishers believe BCMG just a “token gesture”Negative attitudes towards regulations,
management processStrong potential for non-compliance
16
Management ImplicationsNecessity of determining fisher knowledge of
and attitudes towards regulations Difficult to design regulations all fishers will
acceptFisher involvement in management should be
ongoing, not just at the startEven a perceived lack of participation may lead
to negative attitudesFor the Marlborough Sounds results suggest
high-levels of non-compliance may be occurringUndermining effectiveness of the new regulations
17
Thanks to:Taciano Milfont and Michael GavinSchool of Geography, Environment & Earth
Sciences; Victoria UniversityParticipating fishers
Alyssa [email protected]
18
ReferencesBerkes, F. (2010). Shifting perspectives on resource management: Resilience and the Reconceptualization of 'Natural Resources' and 'Management'. Maritime Studies, 9(1), 13-40.
Jentoft, S., & McCay, B. (1995). User participation in fisheries management: Lessons drawn from international experiences. Marine Policy, 19(3), 227-246.
Page, K. S., Grant, G. C., Radomski, P., Jones, T. S., & Bruesewitz, R. E. (2004). Fish total length measurement error from recreational anglers: causes and contribution to noncompliance for the Mille Lacs walleye fishery. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 24(3), 939-951.
Page, K. S., & Radomski, P. (2006). Compliance with sport fishery regulations in Minnesota as related to regulation awareness. Fisheries, 31(4), 166-178.
Pierce, R. B., & Tomcko, C. M. (1998). Angler Noncompliance with Slot Length Limits for Northern Pike in Five Small Minnesota Lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 18(3), 720-724.
Schill, D. J., & Kline, P. A. (1995). Use of random response to estimate angler non compliance with fishing regulations. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 15(4), 721-731.