Michael C. Melnychuk, Charmane E. Ashbrook, Richard J. Bell, Lyall Bellquist, Kate Kauer, Jono R. Wilson, Ray Hilborn, Jay Odell
{"title":"美国沿海海洋州和领土国家管理和非管理渔业的特点","authors":"Michael C. Melnychuk, Charmane E. Ashbrook, Richard J. Bell, Lyall Bellquist, Kate Kauer, Jono R. Wilson, Ray Hilborn, Jay Odell","doi":"10.1111/faf.12756","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The status of federally managed fisheries in the United States is well monitored, but the condition of other marine fisheries, whether state-managed, territory-managed or unmanaged, is less understood and often unknown. We used expert surveys to characterize the management systems of non-federally managed fisheries in US coastal marine states and overseas territories. For 311 fisheries, we estimated an overall Fisheries Management Index (FMI) and a qualitative stock status score. These measures were positively correlated, and while a wide range of research, management, enforcement and socioeconomic criteria were partially met (FMI ≥ 0.5) for 66% of fisheries, stock status was considered as partially acceptable (score ≥ 0.5) for only 45% of fisheries and acceptable (score = 1) for only 16% of fisheries. Higher FMI was typically observed in fisheries with greater commercial landed weight, value, or greater recreational catches. Fisheries from continental states had higher FMI than those from overseas territories. Invertebrates and diadromous fish species had higher FMI on average compared to those of marine fishes. Extrapolating results for surveyed fisheries to nearly 2000 non-federally managed US fisheries while stratifying by state and importance designation (based on commercial, recreational, cultural or ecological importance), we estimate a mean overall FMI of 0.48, and estimate that only 19% of fisheries have a reliable estimate of stock status available; both measures are lower than similar estimates for federally managed fisheries. Funding or capacity constraints and information or data limitations were identified as common challenges faced by state agencies in managing fisheries under their jurisdiction.</p>","PeriodicalId":169,"journal":{"name":"Fish and Fisheries","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.12756","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characterizing state-managed and unmanaged fisheries in coastal marine states and territories of the United States\",\"authors\":\"Michael C. Melnychuk, Charmane E. Ashbrook, Richard J. Bell, Lyall Bellquist, Kate Kauer, Jono R. Wilson, Ray Hilborn, Jay Odell\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/faf.12756\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The status of federally managed fisheries in the United States is well monitored, but the condition of other marine fisheries, whether state-managed, territory-managed or unmanaged, is less understood and often unknown. We used expert surveys to characterize the management systems of non-federally managed fisheries in US coastal marine states and overseas territories. For 311 fisheries, we estimated an overall Fisheries Management Index (FMI) and a qualitative stock status score. These measures were positively correlated, and while a wide range of research, management, enforcement and socioeconomic criteria were partially met (FMI ≥ 0.5) for 66% of fisheries, stock status was considered as partially acceptable (score ≥ 0.5) for only 45% of fisheries and acceptable (score = 1) for only 16% of fisheries. Higher FMI was typically observed in fisheries with greater commercial landed weight, value, or greater recreational catches. Fisheries from continental states had higher FMI than those from overseas territories. Invertebrates and diadromous fish species had higher FMI on average compared to those of marine fishes. Extrapolating results for surveyed fisheries to nearly 2000 non-federally managed US fisheries while stratifying by state and importance designation (based on commercial, recreational, cultural or ecological importance), we estimate a mean overall FMI of 0.48, and estimate that only 19% of fisheries have a reliable estimate of stock status available; both measures are lower than similar estimates for federally managed fisheries. Funding or capacity constraints and information or data limitations were identified as common challenges faced by state agencies in managing fisheries under their jurisdiction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fish and Fisheries\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.12756\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fish and Fisheries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12756\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FISHERIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fish and Fisheries","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12756","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Characterizing state-managed and unmanaged fisheries in coastal marine states and territories of the United States
The status of federally managed fisheries in the United States is well monitored, but the condition of other marine fisheries, whether state-managed, territory-managed or unmanaged, is less understood and often unknown. We used expert surveys to characterize the management systems of non-federally managed fisheries in US coastal marine states and overseas territories. For 311 fisheries, we estimated an overall Fisheries Management Index (FMI) and a qualitative stock status score. These measures were positively correlated, and while a wide range of research, management, enforcement and socioeconomic criteria were partially met (FMI ≥ 0.5) for 66% of fisheries, stock status was considered as partially acceptable (score ≥ 0.5) for only 45% of fisheries and acceptable (score = 1) for only 16% of fisheries. Higher FMI was typically observed in fisheries with greater commercial landed weight, value, or greater recreational catches. Fisheries from continental states had higher FMI than those from overseas territories. Invertebrates and diadromous fish species had higher FMI on average compared to those of marine fishes. Extrapolating results for surveyed fisheries to nearly 2000 non-federally managed US fisheries while stratifying by state and importance designation (based on commercial, recreational, cultural or ecological importance), we estimate a mean overall FMI of 0.48, and estimate that only 19% of fisheries have a reliable estimate of stock status available; both measures are lower than similar estimates for federally managed fisheries. Funding or capacity constraints and information or data limitations were identified as common challenges faced by state agencies in managing fisheries under their jurisdiction.
期刊介绍:
Fish and Fisheries adopts a broad, interdisciplinary approach to the subject of fish biology and fisheries. It draws contributions in the form of major synoptic papers and syntheses or meta-analyses that lay out new approaches, re-examine existing findings, methods or theory, and discuss papers and commentaries from diverse areas. Focal areas include fish palaeontology, molecular biology and ecology, genetics, biochemistry, physiology, ecology, behaviour, evolutionary studies, conservation, assessment, population dynamics, mathematical modelling, ecosystem analysis and the social, economic and policy aspects of fisheries where they are grounded in a scientific approach. A paper in Fish and Fisheries must draw upon all key elements of the existing literature on a topic, normally have a broad geographic and/or taxonomic scope, and provide general points which make it compelling to a wide range of readers whatever their geographical location. So, in short, we aim to publish articles that make syntheses of old or synoptic, long-term or spatially widespread data, introduce or consolidate fresh concepts or theory, or, in the Ghoti section, briefly justify preliminary, new synoptic ideas. Please note that authors of submissions not meeting this mandate will be directed to the appropriate primary literature.