Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Individual and fleetwide bycatch thresholds in regional fisheries management frameworks

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fisheries can adversely affect threatened bycatch species and vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs). Thresholds are unique amongst bycatch management methods in providing flexibility in individual participants’ approaches to avoid exceeding limits, and particularly for individual vessel quotas, in incentivizing the innovation of effective and commercially viable solutions. This study assessed bycatch thresholds for sharks and relatives, air-breathing marine species and macroinvertebrate indicators for identifying benthic VMEs of 21 intergovernmental organizations and arrangements (IGOs). Seven IGOs lacking bycatch thresholds, who tended to have fewer members, might rely on bycatch management by national authorities. Sharks were the predominant focus. IGOs did not know if thresholds were reached for almost half of measures, likely due to compliance monitoring deficits. Individual vessel limits may be more equitable and prevent a race for fish. However, risk pools and fleetwide thresholds may be more effective when mitigation approaches for individual vessels are limited. No IGO uses individual transferable bycatch quotas or risk pools, which would be challenging to implement regionally. No thresholds were reference points of a harvest strategy. There were limited incidences of thresholds being reached. Thresholds might be set too high to meet objectives. When reached, there was high variability in management responses being systematically implemented. Addressing deficits of thresholds being set too low, inadequate compliance monitoring and inconsistent management response implementation could improve performance. Thresholds have the potential to be an effective component of regional bycatch management strategies, incentivizing fishers to minimize their individual and collective bycatch fishing mortality and adverse effects on VMEs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data supporting the study are available within the article and the supplementary material file.

References

  • Abbott JK, Wilen JE (2009) Regulation of fisheries bycatch with common-pool output quotas. J Environ Econ Manag 57:195–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbott JK, Wilen JE (2010) Voluntary cooperation in the commons? Evaluating the sea state program with reduced form and structural models. Land Econ 86:1131–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abe K, Anderson CM, Reimer MN (2022) Catch more to catch less: estimating timing choice as dynamic bycatch avoidance behavior. Environ Resour Econ 82:953–984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams D (1996) Bycatch and the IFQ system in Alaska: A fisherman’s perspective. In: Alaska sea grant college program. Solving Bycatch. Considerations for Today and tomorrow. Alaska sea grant college program report No. 96–03. Alaska Sea Grant College Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, pp 211–217

  • Agnew D (2019) Who determines sustainability? J Fish Biol 94:952–957

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • AIDCP (2017) Agreement on the international dolphin conservation program (amended). International dolphin conservation program. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, La Jolla, USA

  • AIDCP (2022) Report on the international dolphin conservation program. Document AIDCP-45-01 rev. International dolphin conservation program, inter-American tropical tuna commission, La Jolla, USA

  • Amande MJ, Chassot E, Chavance P et al (2012) Precision in bycatch estimates: the case of tuna purse-seine fisheries in the Indian Ocean. ICES J Mar Sci 69:1501–1510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson O et al (2011) Global seabird bycatch in longline fisheries. Endanger Species Res 14:91–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnason R (1994) On catch discarding in fisheries. Mar Resour Econ 9:189–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auster PJ, Gjerde K, Heupel E et al (2011) Definition and detection of vulnerable marine ecosystems on the high seas: problems with the move-on rule. ICES J Mar Sci 68:254–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babcock E, Pikitch E, Hudson G (2003) How much observer coverage is enough to adequately estimate bycatch? Pew institute for ocean science, Miami, and Oceana, Washington, D.C.

  • Batsleer J, Hamon KG, van Overzee HMJ et al (2015) High-grading and over-quota discarding in mixed fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fish 25:715–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belton B, Thilsted SH (2014) Fisheries in transition: food and nutrition security implications for the global South. Glob Food Sec 3:59–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Béné C, Barange M, Subasinghe R et al (2015) Feeding 9 billion by 2050—putting fish back on the menu. Food Sec 7:261–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoit HP, Allard J (2009) Can the data from at-sea observer surveys be used to make general inferences about catch composition and discards? Can J Fish Aquat 66:2025–2039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branch T, Hilborn R (2008) Matching catches to quotas in a multispecies trawl fishery: targeting and avoidance behavior under individual transferable quotas. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 65:1435–1446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buri M, Hothorn T (2020) Model-based random forests for ordinal regression. Int J Biostat 16:20190063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterworth DS (2007) Why a management procedure approach? Some positives and negatives. ICES J Mar Sci 4:613–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers TR, Hordyk AR (2018) The data-limited methods toolkit (DLMtool): an R package for informing management of data-limited populations. Methods Ecol Evol 9:2388–2395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CCSBT (2008a) Part one. Self assessment. Report of the performance review Working Group. Commission for the conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, Deakin West, Australia

  • CCSBT (2008b) Part two. Report of the independent expert. Commission for the conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, Deakin West, Australia

  • CCSBT (2021a) Resolution to align CCSBT’s ecologically related species measures with those of other Tuna RFMOs. Updated at the 28th annual meeting, 11–13 October 2021. Commission for the conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, Deakin, Australia

  • CCSBT (2021b) 2021 CCSBT performance review. In: Sinan H, Huang H, Jaya I, Vallieres D, Commission for the conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna, Deakin West, Australia

  • Chaloupka M (2002) Stochastic simulation modelling of southern great barrier reef green turtle population dynamics. Ecol Modell 148:79–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaloupka M (2004) Exploring the metapopulation dynamics of the southern great barrier reef green turtle stock and possible consequences of sex-biased local harvesting. In: Akcakaya H, Burgman M, Kindvall O et al (eds) Species conservation and management case studies. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 340–354

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Croll DA, DeWar H, Dulvy NK et al (2015) Vulnerabilities and fisheries impacts: the uncertain future of manta and devil rays. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 26:562–575

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Dias MP et al (2019) Threats to seabirds: a global assessment. Biol Conserv 237:525–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dicks LV, Hodge I, Randall NP, Scharlemann JP et al (2014) A transparent process for evidence-informed policy making. Conserv Lett 7:119–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dulvy NK, Davidson LNK, Kyne PM et al (2016) Ghosts of the coast: global extinction risk and conservation of sawfishes. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 26:134–153

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Dulvy NK et al (2021) Overfishing drives over one third of all sharks and rays toward a global extinction crisis. Curr Biol 31:4773-4787e8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Emery TJ, Noriega R, Williams AJ et al (2019) Measuring congruence between electronic monitoring and logbook data in Australian Commonwealth longline and gillnet fisheries. Ocean Coast Manag 168:307–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS et al (2011) Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science 333:301–306

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Estes JA, Heithaus M, McCauley DJ et al (2016) Megafaunal impacts on structure and function of ocean ecosystems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 41:83–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2009) International guidelines for the management of deep-sea fisheries in the high seas. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. ISBN 978-92-5-006258-7

  • FAO (2010) Guidelines to reduce sea turtle mortality in fishing operations. FAO technical guidelines for responsible fisheries. Prepared by Gilman E, Bianchi G, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. ISBN 978-92-106226-5

  • FAO (2011) International guidelines on bycatch management and reduction of discards. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

  • FAO (2016) Vulnerable marine ecosystems: processes and practices in the high seas. FAO fisheries and aquaculture technical paper 595. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

  • FAO (2020) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture. Sustainability in action. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

  • FAO (2023) Regional fishery bodies (RFBs). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

  • Ferretti F, Worm B, Britten G et al (2010) Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean. Ecol Lett 13:1055–1071

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Finucci B, Cheok J, Ebert DA et al (2021) Ghosts of the deep—biodiversity, fisheries and extinction risk of ghost sharks. Fish Fish. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrest RE, Walters CJ (2009) Estimating thresholds to optimal harvest rate for long-lived, low-fecundity sharks accounting for selectivity and density dependence in recruitment. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 66:2062–2080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geange SW, Rowden AA, Nicol S et al (2020) A data-informed approach for identifying move-on encounter thresholds for vulnerable marine ecosystem indicator taxa. Front Mar Sci 7:155. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Chaloupka M (2023) Applying a sequential evidence hierarchy, with caveats, to support prudent fisheries bycatch policy. Rev Fish Biol Fish 33:137–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-022-09745-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman EL, Dalzell P, Martin S (2006) Fleet communication to abate fisheries bycatch. Mar Policy 30:360–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Kobayashi D, Swenarton T et al (2007) Reducing sea turtle interactions in the Hawaii-based longline swordfish fishery. Biol Conserv 139:19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Passfield K, Nakamura K (2014) Performance of regional fisheries management organizations: ecosystem-based governance of bycatch and discards. Fish Fish 15:327–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Weijerman M, Suuronen P (2017) Ecological data from observer programs underpin ecosystem-based fisheries management. ICES J Mar Sci 74:1481–1495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Legorburu G, Fedoruk A et al (2019) Increasing the functionalities and accuracy of fisheries electronic monitoring systems. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 29:901–926

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Hall M, Booth H, Gupta T, Chaloupka M, Fennell H, Kaiser MJ, Karnad D, Milner-Gulland EJ (2022) A decision support tool for integrated fisheries bycatch management. Rev Fish Biol Fish 32:441–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Chaloupka M, Benaka LR, Bowlby H, Fitchett M, Kaiser M, Musyl M (2022) Phylogeny explains capture mortality of sharks and rays in pelagic longline fisheries: a global meta-analytic synthesis. Sci Rep 12:18164. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21976-w

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Gilman E, Chaloupka M, Booth H, Hall M, Murua H, Wilson J (2023) Bycatch-neutral fisheries through a sequential mitigation hierarchy. Mar Policy 150:105522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant AM (2012) An integrated model of goal-focused coaching: an evidence-based framework for teaching and practice. Int Coach Rev 7:146–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory R, Failing L, Harstone M, Long G, McDaniels T (2012) Structured decision making a practical guide to environmental management choices. Wiley-Blackwell, New Jersey

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hall S, Mainprize B (2005) Managing by-catch and discards: How much progress are we making and how can we do better? Fish Fish 6:134–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall MA, Gilman E, Minami H, Mituhasi T, Carruthers E (2017) Mitigating bycatch in tuna fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fish 27:881–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen S, Ward P, Penney A (2013) Identification of vulnerable benthic taxa in the western SPRFMO convention area and review of move-on rules for different gear types. SPRFMO document number SC-01-09. South Pacific regional fisheries management organisation, Wellington

  • Heino M, Díaz Pauli B, Dieckmann U (2015) Fisheries-induced evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:461–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heithaus MR et al (2014) Seagrasses in the age of sea turtle conservation and shark overfishing. Front Mar Sci 1:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday AJ, Smith ADM, Stobutzki IC et al (2011) Ecological risk assessment for the effects of fishing. Fish Res 108:372–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland DS (2010) Markets, pooling and insurance for managing bycatch in fisheries. Ecol Econ 70(1):121–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland DS, Jannot JE (2012) Bycatch risk pools for the US West Coast groundfish fishery. Ecol Econ 78:132–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland D, Martin C (2019) Bycatch quotas, risk pools, and cooperating in the Pacific whiting fishery. Front Mar Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollins J, Thambithurai D, Köeck B et al (2018) A physiological perspective on fisheries-induced evolution. Evol Appl. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12597

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • IATTC (2023) Memorandum 0171–410 on resolution C-21-06 on silky sharks. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, La Jolla, USA

  • ICCAT (2019) Report of the 2019 shortfin mako shark stock assessment update meeting

  • ICCAT (2020) Report of the 2020 porbeagle shark stock assessment meeting. Collect Vol Sci Pap ICCAT 77:1–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Iceland Ministry of Fisheries (2011) Icelandic fisheries management. Fiskistofa Directorate of Fisheries, Hafnarfjordur

    Google Scholar 

  • IMF (2022) World economic outlook database. International monetary fund, Washington, D.C

  • IPHC (1979) Protocol amending the convention between the United States of America and Canada for the preservation of the halibut fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea. International pacific halibut commission, Seattle

  • IPHC (2023) International pacific halibut commission fishery regulations 2023. IPHC-2023-FISHR23. International pacific halibut commission, Seattle

  • JNRFC (2021) Protokoll for Den 51. Sesjon I Den Blandete Norsk-Russiske Fiskerikommisjon. www.jointfish.no/OM-FISKERIKOMMISJONEN/PROTOKOLLER.html

  • Kaplan IC, Gaichas S, Stawitz C et al (2021) Management strategy evaluation: allowing the light on the hill to illuminate more than one species. Front Mar Sci 8:1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauer K, Bellquist L, Gleason M et al (2018) Reducing bycatch through a risk pool: a case study of the US West Coast groundfish fishery. Mar Policy 96:90–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kebe P, Restrepo V, Palma C (2002) An overview of shark data collection by ICCAT. Col Vol Sci Pap ICCAT 54:1107–1122

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewison RL, Crowder L, Wallace B et al (2014) Global patterns of marine mammal, seabird, and sea turtle bycatch reveal taxa-specific and cumulative megafauna hotspots. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:5271–5276

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Little AS, Needle CL, Hilborn R, Holland DS, Marshall CT (2015) Real-time spatial management approaches to reduce bycatch and discards: experiences from Europe and the United States. Fish Fish 16(4):576–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge M, Anderson D, Lobach T, Munro G, Sainsbury K, Willlock A (2007) Recommended best practices for regional fisheries management organizations. Chatham House, Royal Institute of International Affairs, London

  • McCauley DJ et al (2015) Marine defaunation: animal loss in the global ocean. Science 347:1255641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merrifield M, Gleason M, Bellquist L et al (2019) eCatch: enabling collaborative fisheries management with technology. Ecol Inf 52:82–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musick JA (1999) Criteria to define extinction risk in marine fishes: the American Fisheries Society Initiative. Fisheries 24:6–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NASCO (1983) The convention for the conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean. North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization, Edinburgh, UK

  • NASCO (2021) Decision regarding the Salmon fishing in Faroese Waters in 2021/2022, 2022/2023 and 2023/2024. NEA(21)16. North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization, Edinburgh

  • NASCO (2022) Multi-annual regulatory measure for fishing for Atlantic Salmon at West Greenland. WGC(22)10. North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization, Edinburgh

  • Nelms SE, Alfaro-Shigueto J, Arnould JP et al (2021) Marine mammal conservation: over the horizon. Endanger Species Res 44:291–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Kendall WL, Boomer GS (2019) Accumulating evidence in ecology: once is not enough. Ecol Evol 9:13991–14004. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5836

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ning FT, Zhang C, Fujita R (2009) Quantitative evaluation of the performance of a permit auction system in reducing bycatch of sea turtles in the Hawaii swordfish longline fishery. Mar Policy 33:101–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NMFS (2012) Taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations; false killer Whale take reduction plan. Fed Reg 77:71260–71286

    Google Scholar 

  • NPAFC (2021) North Pacific anadromous fish commission annual report 2021. North Pacific anadromous fish commission, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

  • Oliver S, Braccini M, Newman SJ, Harvey ES (2015) Global patterns in the bycatch of sharks and rays. Mar Policy 54:86–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacoureau N et al (2021) Half a century of global decline in oceanic sharks and rays. Nature 589:567–571

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Pardo SA, Kindsvater HK, Reynolds JD, Dulvy NK (2016) Maximum intrinsic rate of population increase in sharks, rays, and chimaeras: the importance of survival to maturity. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 73:1159–1163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascoe S, Innes J, Holland D et al (2010) Use of incentive-based management systems to limit bycatch and discarding. Int Rev Environ Resour Econ 4:123–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peacey J (2003) Managing catch limits in multispecies ITQ fisheries. New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries, Wellington

  • Priede I, Froese R, Bailey D et al (2006) The absence of sharks from abyssal regions of the world’s oceans. Proc Bio Sci 273:1435–1441

    Google Scholar 

  • PSC (2022) Treaty between the government of Canada and the government of the United States of America concerning Pacific Salmon. Pacific Salmon Commission, Vancouver

  • Pudden E, VanderZwaag D (2007) Canada-USA bilateral fisheries management in the Gulf of Mexico: under the radar screen. RECIEL 16:36–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Punt A (2010) Harvest control rules and fisheries management. In: Grafton R, Hilborn R, Squires D, Tait M, Williams M (eds) Handbook of Marine Fisheries Conservation and Management. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 582–594

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayns N (2007) The Australian government’s harvest strategy policy. ICES J Mar Sci 64:596–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RECOFI (2021) Implementation status of RECOFI recommendations. RECOFI/XI/2021/7. Regional commission for Fisheries. FAO regional office for Near East and North Africa, Giza City, Egypt

  • Roberson LA, Wilcox C (2022) Bycatch rates in fisheries largely driven by variation in individual vessel behaviour. Nat Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00865-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roheim CA, Bush SR, Asche F, Sanchirico JN, Uchida H (2018) Evolution and future of the sustainable seafood market. Nat Sustain 1:392–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sainsbury KJ, Punt AE, Smith AD (2000) Design of operational management strategies for achieving fishery ecosystem objectives. ICES J Mar Sci 57:731–741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selig ER, Kleisner KM, Ahoobim O et al (2017) A typology of fisheries management tools: using experience to catalyse greater success. Fish Fish 18:543–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpfendorfer CA, Dulvy NK (2017) Bright spots of sustainable shark fishing. Curr Biol 27:R97–R98

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skirtun M, Pilling GM, Reid C, Hampton J (2019) Trade-offs for the southern longline fishery in achieving a candidate South Pacific albacore target reference point. Mar Policy 100:66–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith SE, Au DW, Snow C (1998) Intrinsic rebound potentials of 26 species of Pacific sharks. Mar Freshw Res 49:663–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somers K, Pfeiffer L, Miller S, Morrison W (2019) Using incentives to reduce bycatch and discarding: results under the west coast catch share program. Coast Manag 46:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Squires D, Lent R, Dutton PH, Dagorn L, Balance LT (2021) Credit systems for bycatch and biodiversity conservation. Front Mar Sci 8:613279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squires D, Ballance LT, Dagorn L et al (2021) Mitigating bycatch: novel insights to multidisciplinary approaches. Front Mar Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.613285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley RD, McElderry H, Mawani T, Koolman J (2011) The advantages of an audit over a census approach to the review of video imagery in fishery monitoring. ICES J Mar Sci 68:1621–1627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens JD, Bonfil R, Dulvy NK, Walker PA (2000) The effects of fishing on sharks, rays, and chimaeras (chondrichthyans), and the implications for marine ecosystems. ICES J Mar Sci 57:476–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strobl C, Malley J, Tutz G (2009) An introduction to recursive partitioning: rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychol Methods 14:323–348

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor N, Ortiz M, Kimoto A, Coelho R (2022a) Preliminary closed-loop simulations for northeast porbeagle: illustrating the efficacy of alternative management procedures and assessment frequency. Collect Vol Sci Pap ICCAT 79:216–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor N, Ortiz M, Kimoto A, Coelho R, Cortes E, Forselledo R (2022) The effect of non-linear relationships between CPUE and abundance on the management procedure performance for northeast porbeagle. Collect Vol Sci Pap ICCAT 79:231–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson A, Sanders J, Tandstad M, Carocci F, Fuller J (eds) (2016) Vulnerable marine ecosystems: processes and practices in the high seas. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Tutz G (2022) Ordinal trees and random forests: score-free recursive partitioning and improved ensembles. J Classif 39:241–263

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Udyawer V, Barnes P, Bonnet X et al (2018) Future directions in the research and management of marine snakes. Fron Mar Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN (2022) Per Capita GDP at current prices – US dollars. Statistics Division, United Nations, New York. http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=SNAAMA&f=grID:101;currID:USD;pcFlag:1;crID:836

  • van Helmond A, Mortensen L, Plet-Hansen K et al (2020) Electronic monitoring in fisheries: lessons from global experiences and future opportuntiies. Fish Fish 21:162–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace BP, DiMatteo AD, Bolten AB, Chaloupka MY et al (2011) Global conservation priorities for marine turtles. PLoS ONE 6:e24510

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace B, Kor C, Dimatteo A, Lee T, Crowder L, Lewison R (2013) Impacts of fisheries bycatch on marine turtle populations worldwide: toward conservation and research priorities. Ecosphere 4:1–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walmsley S, Pack K, Roberts C, Blyth-Skyrme R (2021) Vulnerable marine ecosystems and move-on-rules, best practice review. Marine Stewardship Council, London

    Google Scholar 

  • WCPFC (2009) Scientific committee fifth regular session, summary report. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission. Kolonia, Federated States of Micronesia

  • WCPFC (2018) Conservation and management of sea turtles. CMM 2018-04. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission. Kolonia, Federated States of Micronesia

  • World Bank (2022) Data bank. GDP per capita. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD , Accessed 5 Oct 2022. World Bank, Washington, D.C

  • Young H, McCauley D, Galetti M, Dirzo R (2016) Patterns, causes and consequences of anthropocene defaunation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 47:333–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Žydelis R, Bellebaum J, Österblom H et al (2009) Bycatch in gillnet fisheries—an overlooked threat to waterbird 850 populations. Biol Conserv 142:1269–1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are extremely grateful to David Agnew of the CCAMLR Secretariat, Jana Aker of the NAFO Secretariat, Alexandre Aires-da-Silva of the IATTC Secretariat, Darius Campbell of the NEAFC Secretariat, Barbara Hutniczak of the IPHC Secretariat, Craig Loveridge of the SPRFMO Secretariat, Lara Manarangi-Trott of the WCPFC Secretariat, Lauren Nelson and Emmanuel Chassot of the IOTC Secretariat, Pierre Peries and Marco Milardi of the SIOFA Secretariat, and Lizette Voges of the SEAFO Secretariat for addressing information requests on bycatch input control thresholds. We are also extremely grateful to Janelle Curtis of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and to Akeksandr Zavolokin of the NPFC Secretariat for addressing an information request on NPFC, and to Bjarte Bogstad and Daniel Howell of the Norway Institute of Marine Research and Sergey Sennikov of Norobo Overseas Holding Ltd. for addressing an information request on JNRFC.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fisheries Research Group, The Safina Center, Honolulu, USA

    Eric Gilman

  2. Marine Spatial Ecology Lab, Ecological Modelling Services Pty Ltd, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

    Milani Chaloupka

  3. California Oceans Program, The Nature Conservancy, San Diego, USA

    Lyall Bellquist

  4. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, San Diego, USA

    Lyall Bellquist

  5. Fisheries and Oceans, Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, Canada

    Heather Bowlby

  6. International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, Madrid, Spain

    Nathan Taylor

Authors
  1. Eric Gilman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Milani Chaloupka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lyall Bellquist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Heather Bowlby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nathan Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Gilman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they do not have any competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 398.6 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gilman, E., Chaloupka, M., Bellquist, L. et al. Individual and fleetwide bycatch thresholds in regional fisheries management frameworks. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 34, 253–270 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-023-09811-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-023-09811-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation