Closing English Waters: The Mismanagement of Pollock in the English Channel and the Celtic Sea
By: Alex Kim
Fisheries management and conservation is critical in creating a sustainable fishery that will exist for generations to come. In this particular situation, the Pollock (Pollachius pollachius), fishery in the English Channel and Celtic Sea had been subjected to years of mismanagement and overharvesting. So much so that the 2024 Pollock season in these regions had to be closed.
This closure had drastic effects on the small local commercial fishermen throughout the country. Research was done on the impacts faced by these small-town fishermen during the sudden closure. The the researchers involved in this project include Paul S. Kemp, Freya I. Palmer, Noa Steiner, Philippa Grundy, and Sarah Coulthard. When writing the article, took a holistic view on the situation through examining the economic, ecological, and social factors that were affected by the sudden closure.
First off, they looked at the economic factors. When collecting data on the economic factors, they examined and analyzed changes in quota allocations and fish landing statistics of pollock leadings in the years leading up to the closure. Through this analysis, it was made clear that there was definitely a noticeable decline in the Pollock population due to the fact that fisherman have been landing less and less percent of the quota each year leading up to the closure. Back in 2014 UK fishermen landed 88% of their allowed quota as compared to 2022 where these fishermen landed 37% of their quota. That is a 51% drop in the span of 9 years.
Next, the group looked at the ecological factors. To get the data, they calculated the maximum sustainable yield in the long term by dividing the pollock’s estimated realized mortality by the biological reference for fishing pressure. The was acquired the data to make these calculations from ICES. Through this, they were able to find that Pollock stocks in this region have been overfished going back at least 40 years. This was due to the fact that the oldest data they could find on this topic in these regions was from 1986. The article finds this to be a result of failure to maintain the target biomass. This is interesting because of the fact that the quota has been reduced throughout the years.
Finally, the team examined the social factors that contributed to this situation. Inorder to collect data for the social factors, the group conducted surveys and interviewed 10 captains. They focused the majority of their efforts on the ports in Plymouth and Mevagissey. They collected data regarding the number of active vessels, the number of full-time employees on each vessel, the amount of fish landed by each vessel, and each vessel's income. Through these surveys and interviews, they found that pollock fishing was the primary source of income for these captains and the loans on their boats were secured by their house. The main impact they saw was a loss of identity in the sense that the families of these captains had been in the industry for generations and don’t really know anything else. This resulted in the fishermen feeling like a burden to their families during the closure. This caused many to switch gears and fish for a different species in order to continue making money from fishing.
In conclusion, this study took a look at the closure though a holistic view. They determined that policy makers need to have more of an understanding surrounding the exploitation of natural resources while taking the other factors into account seeing that this is primary income of many watermen around the country.
Source
Kemp S. P., Palmer I. F., Steirner N, Grundy P, Coulthard S. (2026). “Lessons in marine fisheries resource management: Anatomy of the Celtic Seas and English Channel pollack fisheries closure.” Marine Policy. Volume 191. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X26001181#bib24
Megan Reed
To maintain sustainable recreational fisheries, when we vacation, we must manage the area's carrying capacity to ensure there is good fishing for years to come. A study concerning this was recently published in Fisheries Management and Ecology. The study was conducted by Leopoldo Palomo of the Universidad Marista de Meridad, in Meridad, Mexico, and by Addiel U. Perez from the Bonefish & Tarpon Trust in Miami, Florida. The study investigated protecting fishing flats in Yucatan, Mexico, a popular fishing destination. The coastal economies of the Yucatan rely on ecotourism-centric fishermen to keep their economy running. Many of the fishermen in this area follow catch-and-release practices, which is helpful for sustainable fisheries practices as it results in far fewer fish kills. But in order to have a truly sustainable fishery, the number of boats in the area must be managed. The study aimed to estimate the boating capacity of the flats fishery, a Marine protected area around the Yucatan, as well as create a framework for other management practices to follow.
This case study allowed researchers to engage with local fishermen about their fishing practices to gather information to build their estimates for what a sustainable boating limit would look like in this area. Multiple approaches were used to find sustainable limits for this fishery. They found that a range of 14 to 28 boats, distributed across the flats fishery, an area of about 1.7 square miles, could be sustainable. They noted that closer to the lower end of the range, around 14 boats would allow for more space and better fishing quality, with less competition from other boats. At the upper end of the range, around 28 boats in the flats fishery area, fishing quality would decrease due to other boats nearby. Staying closer to the lower estimated sustainable limit would be ideal for both the ecosystem and the recreational fishermen, as they would have better success on their fishing trips, making it more worthwhile to book fishing charters in that area.
A case study like this is a great example of how using multiple types of information and multiple approaches can give the best insight into how we can sustainably fish in protected destinations. This allows more people over time to visit and experience these beautiful locations. This case study was also able to take into account the type of fishing experience you would have while out on the water, something that not many studies take into account. By doing this, management is able to take into account both the ecological perspective and the human experience that would be had. Additionally, being able to quantify what these regulations look like in the number of boats in the area allows for clear management to be put into place. By having good management of our fisheries, particularly in highly desirable destinations for recreational fishermen, we can better protect these areas for years to come.
Palomo, L. and Perez, A.U. (2026), Estimation of Boating Carrying Capacity for Recreational Fishing as a Conservation Tool for Caribbean Flats Fishing and Other Fisheries. Fish Manag Ecol, 33: 105-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.70011
Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1111%2Ffme.70011
By: Ryan Dodson
The Baltic Sea has long been considered a prime example of international cooperation, with regional countries coordinating efforts through the EU and HELCOM, scientists sharing data, and policymakers frequently committing to marine environmental protection. However, a persistent issue, abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded fishing gear, commonly referred to as "ghost gear", remains unresolved despite these extensive efforts.
According to a 2026 study by Boteler, van Leeuwen, Dodd, etc., the long-standing obstacles to progress are not technical issues like broken equipment or poor conditions, but rather entrenched problems of power dynamics, political resistance, and deep-rooted mistrust. Ghost gear is more than just discarded gear that settles on the bottom of the ocean like most people think. Once nets, traps, and lines are abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded in the ocean, this gear can continue to "ghost fish" for decades, indiscriminately catching and entangling fish, marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles.
Ghost gear also contributes to marine plastic pollution, breaking down into microplastics that spread through the food web.These microplastics are then ingested by marine life at all trophic levels, introducing harmful chemicals into the food chain, ultimately impacting both ecosystem health and, potentially, human health. Addressing the issue of ghost gear requires not only large-scale retrieval efforts but also preventative measures, such as implementing mandatory gear marking, improving waste management at sea, and developing biodegradable materials.
The team interviewed fishers, government agencies, NGOs, and port officials, and analyzed decades of regional policies. What they found was a web of power imbalances that quietly shapes who gets heard and who doesn’t. The EU holds the legal authority to regulate fisheries, while HELCOM, the regional environmental body, can only coordinate. National ministries vary widely in their commitment and capacity. Fishers are invited to participate but often feel mistrusted. NGOs raise concerns but lack the authority to act. And the gear producers themselves are almost entirely missing from the conversation.
These gaps create what the authors call “power vacuums.” No one is clearly responsible for retrieving old gear that has been sitting on the seafloor for decades. Extended Producer Responsibility, policies that would require manufacturers to help manage waste, is only partially implemented. And unclear mandates leave agencies hesitant to take action, even when they want to as they either fear being sued for being where they are not supposed to or fearing having to shoulder the costs and responsibility for the clean up.
Just as influential are the narratives that shape how people think about the problem. Some officials argue that fishers already try to avoid losing gear, so the issue must be minor. Others claim there isn’t enough data to justify stronger rules. Still others say retrieval is too dangerous or expensive. These stories, the researchers argue, limit what solutions seem possible long before policies are even drafted. The study’s message is clear that ghost gear is not simply a technical issue, it is a governance challenge rooted in relationships, authority, and the stories people tell about who is responsible for all parts of the issue. And until those deeper issues are addressed, even the best technology won’t solve the problem.
But the authors also point to a path forward; Bringing missing actors, especially gear manufacturers, into the governance system could help close responsibility gaps, Strengthening regional coordination would reduce the patchwork of national approaches, and building trust with fishers, who hold essential knowledge of local waters, could make policies more effective and fair. This research suggests that solving the ghost gear problem will require untangling the human systems that manage the ocean itself before anything else can get done.
By: Talyn Blunt
In Australia, St George's Basin and Lake Macquarie are never used for commercial fishing and are instead exclusively used for recreational fishing. This estuary, with a mix of salt and freshwater, is home to a variety of fish species, including many bream species, dusky flatheads, and sand whiting. These fish are monitored through independent fishery studies where fish are caught in nets and then measured in length. This is very normal for fishery management, but in this study, they also interviewed and asked anglers about what fish they had caught, and how long they were. These fishermen mostly did traditional fishing, but in various spots, such as along the shore, in a small boat, or in a larger charter boat. While the amount of fish caught and measured by the anglers was much smaller, it had different results than the independent survey.
The traditional method found a larger number of sub-legal-sized fish in both St. George's Basin and Lake Macquarie. The anglers' data seemed to have larger individuals, a broad range of sizes as well. This disparity in data length was true for the breams and sand whiting, but for the dusky flathead, the lengths were very similar. Both methods were very different, and the results showed that. With a larger range of sizes of breams being found, the author believes this could be better for understanding the length of these fish in these bodies of water. The disparity for sand whitlings is only found between the two methods in Lake Macquarie. This could mean that not only the effectiveness of accurately measuring lengths of fish across the population depends on the species, but also the conditions of the body of water.
Measuring fish and only allowing certain sizes and amounts is important and is not just to get under anglers' skin, but it also ensures the success of species that are often fished. Sizing the populations of fish in an area can help scientists understand how many juvenile fish are present and how many adult breeding fish are present. Which is why you fishman can not keep small versions of these fish, as most of the time it means that the fish has not matured and reproduced. This measurement data can help them make decisions on how long to make the fishing season, what size fish can be kept, and what species can be kept. These decisions are very impactful on the anglers in the community, and by providing information there, scientists can start to grasp which methods are best for measuring the lengths of fish in an area. This helps researchers get the best data they can, so the best decisions for St George's Basin and Lake Macquarie can be made. This will ensure that recreational fishing in the area can thrive.
Ochwada‐Doyle, Faith A, and Daniel D Johnson. “Monitoring Populations in Partially Protected Marine Areas: Comparisons of Length Data Derived from Recreational Angler Surveys and Fishery‐Independent Surveys.” Marine and Coastal Fisheries [Bethesda], vol. 11, no. 6, 2019, pp. 454–71, https://doi.org/10.1002/mcf2.10093.
Available:
Arabella Bear
In the last few decades, much of the world has started making efforts to move towards sustainable management of natural resources like our fisheries. This is largely due to impacts from overfishing and poor environmental practices. Consequently, a form of management that has developed is based around local communities, allowing people to have a sense of ownership in resources that are important to them and participate in the management of their resources. Having skin in the game is a great motivator for pushing sustainability, but this can sometimes be a double-edged sword.
Recently, Rafaella Lobo and colleagues published a paper in Marine Policy that reviews a 10-year project revolving around community-based natural resource management in Northern Mozambique. This project, led by the CARE-World Wildlife Fund Alliance, focused on the Primeiras e Segundas region, well known for its rich biodiversity and artisanal fisheries. The communities in this region of Mozambique have historically suffered from chronic, high levels of poverty and often do not have access to basic community services such as education, healthcare, and roads. Because of this, these communities are highly dependent on the sensitive natural resources around them for survival needs such as food, water, and shelter.
This paper aimed to examine factors contributing to unsuccessful community-based natural resource management. This was done through a series of household surveys and group discussions of different types. The household surveys conducted aimed to gather information about socio-economic information. In each community, four different types of discussions took place to gather information about the observed and perceived changes in human well-being, status of resources, governance, food security, and conservation outcomes. The information collected from these methods was then analyzed to determine whether or not communities succeeded in following research-backed guidelines for this management strategy.
Three of the four communities in this project successfully formed a resilient resource-management system, even after funding and support were withdrawn. In these communities, local enforcement and strong ties between community members and governmental/regional entities were very important to the success of these systems. In the case of the unsuccessful management system, community members understood that conservation rules had long-term benefits, but in the face of hunger, the present harm was felt to be greater than the benefits of the conservation system put in place.
This displays a very important concept that is especially important when working with disadvantaged communities: In order to achieve long-term goals, people often need to feel secure in their livelihoods and survival first. If basic needs are not met, these end up being a community's primary goal.
But why is this even important? Well, generalized management guidelines even in first-world countries often overlook localized communities that may not have their needs fully met, which consequently contributes to poor management practices. Examining points of failure in a management system is a very important aspect of fisheries management. As we move towards further implementation of sustainable management within our fisheries, community-based management is an essential tool that can help support not only the fisheries within a community, but also help to support communities in the long-run.
Lobo, R., Skinner, A., Clark, M., Xavier, M., Epstein, G., Andrachuk, M., Sequeira, D., De Nardo, M., Fisher, B., & Mahajan, S. L. (2026). Catalyzing community-led conservation governance through integrated conservation and development in coastal Mozambique. Marine Policy, 189, 107089.
Avaliable: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2026.107089
Do you ever look out at the water when at the beach or at a coastline and wonder what is going on beneath the surface? Do you wonder about the relationship between humans and the coastal ecosystems? A recent study by Lucas P. Griffin and colleagues, published in Fisheries 2025 Vol. 50: “Habitat management and restoration as missing pieces in flats ecosystems conservation and the fishes and fisheries that they support”, asked these questions and more. The study outlines 10 guiding principles necessary to integrate habitat management and restoration to ensure the conservation of interconnected flat ecosystems.
Flats are shallow intertidal ecosystems found in nearshore waters, often spanning from coastlines to open coastal water or occurring around isolated atolls. Flats support numerous living and non-living habitats. Coastal towns and cities are often built adjacent to these ecosystems because of the services they provide. These are known as ecosystem services and range from storm and flood protection, plants burying carbon from the atmosphere, and many more.
Coastal cities also negatively impact these ecosystems. Over half of coastal flats are subject to moderate to high levels of human impacts that contribute to the loss of these habitats and can cause serious ecological and economic consequences. It is important to understand how flats habitats provide us with ecosystem services so we can better inform management decisions.
There is little initiative for proper assessments of flats fisheries. It is crucial to restore and maintain the ecological integrity and biodiversity. This aligns with worldwide initiatives to transition to ecosystem-based management (EBM) approaches. This approach considers the human-ecological connections between these areas, prioritizes up-to-date science, and understands that these habitats are not confined to political borders. The ten guiding principles are as follows:
Embrace flats fishes as flagship and umbrella species. These are species that conservation practices designate as management surrogates to fill two roles. Flagship species can motivate the public to engage in conservation efforts, and umbrella species extend those benefits to many co-occurring species.
Flats fishes highlight the connectivity with other fragmented habitats. Some species, like Tarpon, will migrate thousands of miles through many habitats. Recognizing seascape connectivity, if these are disrupted, the role and effectiveness of singular habitats may be diminished. Considering this is a shift towards EBM approaches.
Insert habitat protection and restoration into development and planning processes. Due to coastal developments' frequent proximity to flats habitats, it is necessary to incorporate marine spatial planning (MSP) to balance environmental protection and human development. MSP can designate areas for important ecological functions and human activities simultaneously. It is important to consider the connections between marine, terrestrial, and freshwater environments.
Learn from habitat management and restoration in other realms. This guideline highlights the importance of adapting management strategies from other ecosystems that have had more informed and comprehensive management.
Engage in effective partnerships. It is important to engage with organizations at a local, state, national, and even international levels. These can be governmental, non-profit, non-governmental, or community organizations. It is crucial to engage these stakeholders at every stage of the management process, such as planning, implementation, and evaluation.
Build the evidence base. This guideline prioritizes building sufficient data on these habitats to effectively inform management. The article highlights specific goals for ensuring this.
Think and act at the systems level. Managers must consider the cause-and-effect relationships between species and ecosystems and how they form a complex system. Considering the habitat needs of flats species at a systems level, including natural predators and human impacts, creates more effective restoration that supports seascape complexity.
Embrace transdisciplinary perspectives. Any individual, no matter their background, is not capable of understanding all aspects of these environments. So it is important to create diverse study and management teams to ensure comprehensive management.
Emulate nature. To maintain these ecosystems for years to come, it is important to develop restoration efforts that work with nature. Managers must develop plans that use up-to-date science and prioritize using these areas' natural ability to maintain themselves and provide services to humans.
Future-proof restoration is a guideline that recognizes future environmental changes and considers the impacts of climate change to ensure long-term ecosystem benefits.
Although there is imperfect knowledge of these ecosystems and the species that inhabit them, it is crucial to guide informed management and restoration so they can continue to benefit humans for years to come.
This news piece reports on original research in:
Griffin, Lucas P., Andy J. Danylchuk, Grace A. Casselberry, Jacob W. Brownscombe, Jessica A. Robichaud, Morgan L. Piczak, Anne L. Haley, Danielle Morely, and Steven J. Cooke. “Habitat Management and Restoration as Missing Pieces in Flats Ecosystems Conservation and the Fishes and Fisheries That They Support.” Fisheries 50, no. 7 (2025): 287–300. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/fshmag/vuae032
Salmon are a staple of Canadian culture. They are painted in artwork and offered at restaurants around the region. The indigenous Haíłzaqv people of British Columbia have been reliant on salmon populations for thousands of years. They managed populations by waiting until the salmon runs began in the fall, and they would harvest only what the tribe needed to survive for the winter, allowing the rest of the salmon to swim upstream to spawn. This allowed the tribes to keep track of how well the populations were doing, and adjust their harvesting accordingly.
An article published in FACETS by Jade R. Steel, and a couple additional researchers from Universities in British Columbia discussed a study that worked to highlight what the barriers to salmon access are for the local indigenous Haíłzaqv community members. A large number of dockside interviews were conducted over the course of the summer, from mid May to mid September in Bella Bella, the region of British Columbia where many of the Haíłzaqv people live. These interviews took place in order to try and better understand how Haíłzaqv communities are being impacted by the reduction in salmon populations, and how they feel limited in their ability to harvest what they need. The interviews were structured around 10 questions, including how many salmon were caught, how much fuel was used, where on the water they were, an estimate of the amount of competitive commercial boats were on the water at the same time, and how many hours they were fishing for.
The study found that the average age of interviewees was around 45 years old, and that the majority of individuals feel very frustrated by the decrease in salmon numbers. Many of the interviewees expressed concern with “creek robbers” which describes fishermen who harvest salmon at the mouth of the river , often in areas where they aren't supposed to be. Interviewees expressed that they believe this practice is largely to blame for the decrease in salmon populations. This is argued because they catch the salmon as they are swimming their way upstream to spawn, so harvesting too many at this point in the life cycle can cause impacts on the populations.
Another important thing to note is that 80% of Haíłzaqv interviewees wish that commercial fishermen were regulated more heavily as there aren't enough salmon to meet their needs, and 89% stated that commercial fishing is no longer a viable career option for Haíłzaqv people due to the overall reduction in fishing abilities in the region. Some of the main barriers to entering fishing that were identified were lack of salmon abundance, competition with other fishing sectors, climate change, expensive gas prices, and high costs associated with owning and maintaining a boat.
All of this is significant because the traditions and cultural practices the Haíłzaqv have had for thousands of years are reliant on access to the species that they are so culturally connected to. However, governing bodies often have a hard time balancing the needs of indigenous people and the needs of commercial fishermen, due to the sheer impact that fishing of this species has on the global economy. However, studies like this one are important because they are able to illuminate some of the struggles that the indigenous people go through in order to maintain access to natural resources that their cultures and livelihoods rely on.
This news piece reports on original research in:
Jade R. Steel, William I. Atlas, Natalie C. Ban, Kyle Wilson, Jayda Wilson, William G. Housty, and Jonathan W. Moore. 2021. Understanding barriers, access, and management of marine mixed-stock fisheries in an era of reconciliation: Indigenous-led salmon monitoring in British Columbia. FACETS. 6: 592-613. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2020-0080
When Fishing Rules Collide: How Coral Reefs and Coastal Livelihoods Intersect in the Philippines
In the waters off the coast of Southern Luzon, in the Philippines, fishing is far more than a job, it is a way of life. However, newly published research shows that the very rules set in place to protect the marine ecosystems, and the livelihoods of people who rely on them, are having negative impacts on these coastal communities. A study published in 2025 by Carmela Therese T. Novilla and Michael Fabinyi in Maritime Studies, examines the intersection between two key fisheries that help to sustain local communities. The two fisheries involved in this study include the relationship between the coral reef fishery and the small pelagics fishery. The target small pelagics fishery focus is the dulong fishery which is the harvest of juvenile anchovies and sardines with fine mesh nets. Coral reefs are often protected through various marine conservation policies, while the small pelagic fisheries take place in open water nearby. These fisheries are a critical source of food and income for local communities of Southern Luzon.
At first glance, these two systems might appear to be separate; however, the research concludes that they are deeply connected on biological, social, and economic levels. Local communities, and fishermen, rely on both of these fisheries. Their reliance on one fishery over the other is strongly influenced by the season, weather, and regulations for that time. While the availability of two different fisheries can be beneficial at times, the separate governance currently seen between the two systems can create challenges for fishermen to sustain their livelihoods as it can create times when fishermen are unable to participate in either fishery and. One of the issues that fishermen face is that conservation policies, such as Marine Protected Areas (MPA’s), are designed to protect coral reefs by banning fishing in those designated zones. Although these restrictions can help relieve pressure on the ecosystem, and ultimately allow it to recover, they can also limit reef access to fishermen who rely on the resource for their livelihood, and as a source of food. During seasonal closures for the dulong fishery, which typically occur between December and March, fishermen may struggle to harvest a sufficient catch. This deep interconnection between coral reefs and the dulong fishery led researchers to suggest a co-management strategy involving both marine fisheries.
The overall conclusion of this research is that instead of treating fisheries and conservation as two separate issues, they must be integrated to be successful. The effective governance of these resources needs to account for fair access to the resource for all of the activities that help to support the livelihoods of people in these coastal communities. Although the current restriction and protection policies that are in place create a challenge for locals, the implementation of better and more inclusive policy can help to protect the ecosystem while also protecting the livelihood of the local people in Southern Luzon for generations to come.
Source:
Novilla, C.T.T., Fabinyi, M. Coral reefs and small pelagic fisheries: livelihood and governance interactions in Southern Luzon, Philippines. Maritime Studies 24, 26 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-025-00417-0
Available: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40152-025-00417-0
By: Kinsey Perkins
A new study by Kevin Adeli, Bryan Neff, and Steven Cooke questions this idea. In many water ways, rivers, lakes, and the ocean, anglers who catch invasive species are required to kill them instead of releasing the species. This is known as Must-Kill. This rule is designed to protect ecosystems but new research is suggesting that it might not be a fully effective way to protect the ecosystems. Fishery managers around the world rely on strict regulations like this to control invasive species from taking over, this study is questioning whether or not must-kill rules are actually working in practice.
The research was led by Adeli, Neff, and Cooke, who study fisheries governance and environmental management. Their work focuses strongly on how policies shape the way that humans interact with aquatic ecosystems.
The study was published in Fisheries Management and Ecology and it takes a closer look at how must-kill regulations are actually implemented and followed by recreational anglers, instead of focusing only on whether the rules exist on paper. The researchers examined how people behave in real world fishing situations and if must-kill regulations are actually helping the ecosystems that the invasive species are taking over.
In theory, must-kill rules are meant to reduce or kill invasive fish or plant populations by setting the rule that once that animal is caught they cannot be returned to the water if they are able to reproduce. However, the researchers found that compliance is not always straightforward. In some cases, fishers may be reluctant to kill fish due to their own ethics, the inability to identify the species, and other things.
This creates a major gap between the policy goals and real world outcomes. When regulations are clear, they may not lead to meaningful reductions in invasive species if fishers do not consistently follow them or if enforcement is limited.
The study also looks at fisheries strict rules that are not super effective but might have seemed like they would be in theory. Sometimes the rules can reduce the support of fishers and the public. Fishers will not participate in things that they do not believe in or if it conflicts with their values. This raises broader questions about how wildlife management policies can balance ecological goals with human behaviors.
Must-kill rules should not be eliminated entirely but fishery managers should be more flexible and make more adaptive approaches. For example, educating the public, easy to understand species identification tools, and improved communication between fisheries managers and fishers.
Ultimately, the study suggests that managing invasive species is not just a biological challenge, but also a social one. Success depends not only on the rules themselves, but also on how people understand, accept, and follow the rules in their own practices.
This research contributes to a growing body of work in fisheries governance that emphasizes the importance of human behavior in conservation outcomes. It suggests that improving fisheries management may not require not only stronger regulations, but also better integration of social science perspectives into environmental policy design.
Overall, the research suggests that while must-kill rules are well-intentioned their real world effectiveness depends on more than regulation alone. It is the interaction between policy design, human behavior, and ecological systems that ultimately determines whether these rules succeed or fail.
This article reports original research from:
Adeli, K. A., Neff, B. D., & Cooke, S. J. (2025, September 13). Fisheries management and ecology | aquatic biology journal | wiley online library. Wiley Online Library. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fme.70021
Picture From:
Red lionfish - facts, Diet, Habitat & Pictures on animalia.bio. (n.d.). https://animalia.bio/red-lionfish
Fishing in the Mediterranean can often take place in unsustainable forms like “towing”. This technique involves dragging a weighted net across the bottom of the seafloor, resulting in massive damage to benthic communities and a disastrous amount of bycatch. Catsharks can often fall victim to this type of fishing, even if they are not a targeted species. Even though fishermen in the Mediterranean may not be attempting to catch these sharks, they will still occasionally be processed and used commercially. Instances of AMV were not included in the study if the sharks were not discarded after being caught.
A team of researchers performing on-board observations of two catshark species, S. canicula and G. melastomus, recently published a journal article detailing their findings on what factors most greatly influence at-vessel mortality (AMV) rates for these two species. This project came as a response to increasing pushes by organizations across Europe and the UN to minimize damage to ecosystems from unsustainable fishing. These species of sharks are currently of “Least Concern” when it comes to their extinction, but rising rates of habitat loss and mortality due to harmful fishing practices is expected to make them more vulnerable to extinction in the future. Rates of bycatch and AMV are notoriously difficult to calculate because many fishermen don’t carefully record these instances, and there’s a distinct lack of enforcement of international law that plagues the fishing industry; this is especially true in the open ocean. Furthermore no studies released previously have taken as many factors into account when calculating AVM rates as this one. Predictor variables used in the study included environmental and biological factors: Body size, maturity, sex, tow depth, effective towing duration, towing speed, total biomass in net, time on deck, cloud cover, sea state, wind force, atmospheric temperature, change from atmospheric temperature to seafloor temperature. The recorded information was entered into R, a program used to analyze and model data.
Over 2400 total individuals from both catshark species were captured in nets throughout 66 surveyed tows despite not being the desired catch. Despite both species being catsharks that were caught in the same net by the same vessel at approximately the same time, the AMV rates were drastically different. S. canicula specimens had a mortality rate of 27.4% while specimens of G. melastomus had a mortality rate of 80.6%. The main drivers of AMV varied slightly for each species but shared some similarities. One of the most important factors for both species was the depth at which they were caught. G. melastomus often lives in deeper waters than S. canicula. This means that when they’re fished from the seafloor they often experience a larger shift in temperature and pressure, which can result in shock or internal injury. Another leading cause of AMV in each species was time on deck before being released back into the water. It’s interesting to note both species experienced a large jump in AMV rate at a certain time of exposure, with G. melastomus seeing this jump occur about three times as quickly as S. canicula. It’s thought that this difference between the species is caused primarily by their adaptations to their respective range of depth. Interestingly, environmental factors like wind speed and cloud coverage had little impact on rates of AMV. The only exception to this rule is atmospheric temperature, with G. melastomus dying at much lower temperatures than their shallow-water counterparts.
As stated previously, illegal fishing happens across the world despite the industry being tightly regulated due to the practical nightmare of policing most fishing vessels. The researchers concluded that the most effective way to reduce AMV for catshark species was to eliminate bycatch, but that is not a possibility at this time. Instead they hope that their findings can be used to shape policy creation in the future and may even inform new procedures for carefully handling sharks that have accidentally been caught in nets. While much more work needs to be done in order to ensure this valuable information is put to good use, this novel study provides keen insight into how we can better manage and protect some of the ocean’s most fascinating and important animals.
Ruiz-Garcia et al., (July 3rd 2025), Key drivers of at-vessel mortality in demersal sharks, Conservation Biology, conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com, https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cobi.70100