Changes in fishing behaviour of two fleets under fully documented catch quota management: Same rules,different outcomes |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 8130, 6700 EW, Wageningen, The Netherlands;2. LEI Wageningen UR, Alexanderveld 5, 2585 DB, The Hague, The Netherlands;1. Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Sopot, Poland;2. Akvaplan-niva; Fram Centre for Climate and the Environment, Tromsø, Norway;3. University Centre in Svalbard, Longyearbyen, Norway;1. Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 8130, 6700EW Wageningen, The Netherlands;2. Environmental Studies and Policy, Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80,115, 3508TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands;3. Forest and Nature Conservation Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 8130 6700EW, Wageningen, The Netherlands;4. Science & Society Group, Faculty of Mathematics & Natural Sciences, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 221 9700AE, Groningen, The Netherlands;1. TI Institute of Sea Fisheries, Palmaille 9, 22767 Hamburg, Germany;2. CNR—IAMC, Via G. da Verrazzano 17, 91014—Castellammare del Golfo, TP, Italy;3. Deltares, Marine and Coastal Systems Unit, PO Box 177, 2600 MH Delft, The Netherlands;4. Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES), PO Box 68, 1970 AB, IJmuiden, The Netherlands;5. Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR), 46.7 km Athens-Sounio, 19013 Anavyssos, Greece;6. Marine Biology Research Group, Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281, Campus Sterre—S8, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium;7. Cefas, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, UK;8. Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research, Animal Sciences Unit, Aquatic Environment and Quality, Bio-Environmental Research Group, Ankerstraat 1, B-8400 Oostende, Belgium;9. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Management Unit of the Mathematical Model of the North Sea (MUMM), Marine Ecosystem Management Section, Gulledelle 100, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium;10. Institute of Marine Research, PB 1870 Nordnes, N-5817 Bergen, Norway;11. AquaBiota Water Research, Löjtnantsgatan 25, SE-115 50 Stockholm, Sweden;12. AZTI-Tecnalia, Marine Research Division; Herrera Kaia, Portualdea s/n, 20110 Pasaia, Spain;13. International Centre for Island Technology, Heriot-Watt University, Old Academy, Stromness, Orkney KW16 3AW, UK;14. Institute of Oceanology Polish Academy of Sciences, Powstancow Warszawy 55, PL-81712 Sopot, Poland;15. Capture Fisheries Section, Ministry for Resources and Rural Affairs (MRRA), Fort San Lucjan, Marsaxlokk BBG 1283, Malta;1. Department of Construction Management and Engineering, University of Twente, PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands;2. Scenarios and Policy Analysis, Deltares, PO Box 85467, 3508 AL Utrecht, The Netherlands;3. Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands |
| |
| Abstract: | A Dutch pilot study of fully documented fisheries provided the opportunity to observe actual changes in fishing behaviour under catch quota management (CQM). Interviews with fishers in the pilot study aided in interpreting the results and giving insight in the decision making process and reasoning of fishers. The CQM pilot study entailed a fleet of small and large demersal vessels. For these vessels, all cod catches were counted against quota, including catches of individuals below minimum landings size. To obtain reliable catch data all vessels were equipped with electronic monitoring (EM) systems. These systems recorded videos of all fishing and processing activities on board. In return, fishers received a 30% quota bonus for cod and were compensated with more flexibility on effort regulations. It was hypothesized that vessels in the CQM will (i) increase their landings by 30% according to their quota bonus, (ii) increase the use of gear with large mesh size, and (iii) change effort towards fishing locations with high catch rates of large cod and avoid areas with high catch rates of undersized cod. The results showed that CQM had no effect on fishing behaviour of the small vessels. In contrast, large vessels significantly increased their cod landings (216%) and avoided undersized cod. This difference in response of different fleets suggested that implementation of CQM, for instance in the context of the European Common Fisheries Policy, should consider fleet characteristics. It seemed that larger vessels in this study more easily adapted their behaviour to new management regimes and that the quota bonus opened up new fishing strategies, that were not envisaged during the implementation. |
| |
| Keywords: | Catch quota management Fully documented fisheries Fishing behaviour Landing obligation Mixed fisheries Electronic monitoring North Sea cod |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
