Høydal Harvest Control Rules

Harvest Control Rules in different fishery contexts : 

Harvest Control Rules in different fishery contexts Workshop on Harvest Control Rules for Sustainable Fisheries Management Bergen 13-15 September 2004 Kjartan Hoydal

Personal profile: 

Personal profile In former lives I have worked as scientist in Denmark and Faroe Islands, as a fisheries manager and negotiator and as officer in international organisations like ICES, Nordic Council of Ministers and NEAFC. I have recently evaluated the strategy for Nordic Fisheries Cooperation. At present Secretary, NEAFC in London However, this presentation is in a personal capacity and does not reflect NEAFC positions

Main suggestions of the presentation: 

Main suggestions of the presentation Harvest control rules make sense, but they are generally, to a too large extent, weighed towards ecological criteria in the North-East Atlantic The focus on fish stocks in the scientific advice in recent years makes it difficult or impossible to establish sensible rules for many complex fisheries and to bring social, economic and ethical dimensions into play There are in many cases problems with determining where we are with respect to reference points or indicators.

The search for sustainable development: 

The search for sustainable development Sustainable development is “development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (WCED, 1987).

Definition Sustainability: 

Definition Sustainability is to plan, develop and manage fisheries in a way that addresses the multiple needs and desires of society; without jeopardising the options for future benefits from the full range of goods and services provided by marine ecosystems FAO 1999

Optimal use of natural resources The Economist’s point of view : 

Optimal use of natural resources The Economist’s point of view Social importance implies the need for optimal use Optimal use = maximization of flow of benefits from the resources over time (Nota bene: market and non-market benefits) Optimality is crucial Anything else implies social waste

Optimal use and Sustainability: 

Optimal use and Sustainability Optimal use may or may not imply sustainability Renewable resources only Optimality sometimes implies depletion However….. Maximum present value of benefits usually implies sustainability Communities’ desire to last implies sustainability International pressure for sustainable resource use Fishing communities become the custodians of their natural resources on behalf of the global community  Sustainability! Ragnar Árnason 2001

Several Nordic Fisheries are highly rated with respect to management: 

Several Nordic Fisheries are highly rated with respect to management A recent book “The end of the line” by Charles Clover gives the Icelandic ITQ system 8 out of 10 points, the Faroese ITQE system 6 and Norway’s management of Barents sea cod 3 In a recent survey by the SAUP North Atlantic fisheries managements also gets high marks

SAUP sustainability ranking: 

SAUP sustainability ranking

The purpose of regulating the exploitation of fishery resources: 

The purpose of regulating the exploitation of fishery resources To establish long term sustainable frameworks which keep the impact of fisheries inside certain levels Reduce the risk of avoidable and irreversible changes to the ecosystems Create a basis for profitable fisheries the essential part being to “calibrate” the fishing fleets to the resource

Harvest control rules. What for ?: 

Harvest control rules. What for ? A cynic would say they are an attempt to move decisions on catch/effort levels out of annual political horse trading A more favourable interpretation is that they are an attempt to agree on a medium or long term target for fisheries in advance For shared and straddling stock the allocation problem is a prerequisite for establishing robust harvest control rules Without proper implementation and enforcement – forget about it

NEAFC Medium and Long Term Management Plans : 

NEAFC Medium and Long Term Management Plans Management plans have been agreed by the relevant coastal states for Norwegian spring spawning (Atlanto-Scandian) herring Mackerel Blue whiting For the pelagic fishery for S. mentella there are no agreed common objectives and the same is the case for deep sea fisheries

Herring : 

Herring 1. Every effort shall be made to maintain a level of Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) greater than the critical level(Blim) of 2 500 000 t. 2. For the year 2001 and subsequent years, the Parties agreed to restrict their fishing on the basis of a TAC consistent with a fishing mortality rate of less than 0.125 for appropriate age groups as defined by ICES, unless future scientific advice requires modification of this fishing mortality rate.

Herring : 

Herring 3. Should the SSB fall below a reference point of 5 000 000 t (Bpa), the fishing mortality rate referred to under paragraph 2, shall be adapted in the light of scientific estimates of the conditions to ensure a safe and rapid recovery of the SSB to a level in excess of 5 000 000 t. The basis for such an adaptation should be at least a linear reduction in the fishing mortality rate from 0.125 at Bpa (5 000 000 t) to 0.05 at Blim (2 500 000 t). 4. The Parties shall, as appropriate, review and revise these management measures and strategies on the basis of any new advice provided by ICES.

Mackerel : 

Mackerel “For 2000 and subsequent years, the Parties agreed to restrict their fishing on the basis of a TAC consistent with a fishing mortality in the range of 0.15 - 0.20 for appropriate age groups as defined by ICES, unless future scientific advice requires modification of the fishing mortality rate.”  

Mackerel : 

Mackerel  “Should the SSB fall below a reference point of 2 300 000 tonnes (Bpa), the fishing mortality rate, referred to under paragraph 1, shall be adapted in the light of scientific estimates of the conditions prevailing. Such adaptation shall ensure a safe and rapid recovery of the SSB to a level in excess of 2 300 000 tonnes.”  “The Parties shall, as appropriate, review and revise these management measures and strategies on the basis of any new advice provided by ICES.”

Blue Whiting : 

Blue Whiting  1. Every effort shall be made to prevent the stock from falling below the minimum level of Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) of 1 500 000 tonnes. 2. For 2003 and subsequent years, the Parties agreed to restrict their fishing on the basis of a TAC consistent with a fishing mortality less than 0.32 for appropriate age groups as defined by ICES, unless future scientific advice requires modification of the fishing mortality rate.

Blue Whiting : 

Blue Whiting  3. Should the SSB fall below a reference point of 2 250 000 tonnes (Bpa) the fishing mortality rate, referred to under paragraph 1, shall be adapted in the light of scientific estimates of the conditions then prevailing. Such an adaptation shall ensure a safe and rapid recovery of the SSB to a level in excess of 2 250 000 tonnes. 4. In order to enhance the potential yield, the Parties shall implement appropriate measures, which will reduce catches of juvenile blue whiting. 5. The Parties shall, as appropriate, review and revise these management measures and strategies on the basis of any new advice provided by ICES.

Features of the three plans: 

Features of the three plans The mackerel plan starts with fishing mortality /fishing effort. The other start with Spawning Stock Biomass, but SSB status is the overriding concern All three plans establish a level of fishing mortality which is consistent with long term spawning stock levels above Bpa The Parties shall, as appropriate, review and revise these management measures and strategies on the basis of any new advice provided by ICES. This means under current annual regime checks every year of SSB levels and F levels.

Assessments AS Herring Fishing Mortality: 

Assessments AS Herring Fishing Mortality

Assessments AS Herring Spawning Stock Biomass: 

Assessments AS Herring Spawning Stock Biomass

Assessments Blue whiting Fishing Mortality: 

Assessments Blue whiting Fishing Mortality

Assessments Blue whiting Spawning stock Biomass: 

Assessments Blue whiting Spawning stock Biomass

The State of the three stocks: 

The State of the three stocks The three stocks are different with respect to the robustness of the assessments and the regulation of the fisheries. Especially blue whiting is a problem with respect to the assessments because of the lack of agreement on allocations and high varialbility in the scientific advice

Which targets should a harvest control rule aim at : 

Which targets should a harvest control rule aim at Fish stock targets? Economic targets? General targets like sustainability? What about the other users of the sea?

Which targets should a harvest control rule aim at : 

Which targets should a harvest control rule aim at Managing fisheries for sustainable development is a multi-dimensional and multi-level activity, which must deal with a wider range of considerations than survival of the fish stocks and the fisheries alone.. Changes to fisheries activity should be assessed with reference to the driving forces of economic and ecological change that bear on both the demand for and the supply of fish. These external forces will include competing claims on use and management of marine ecosystems. FAO

FAO approach : 

FAO approach

An example of economic targets from FAO : 

An example of economic targets from FAO Objective: Economic efficiency; Criteria: Capital productivity; Indicator: Financial net return/capitalized value; T-TOC-TS/CV; Scale: Fishery, by fleet segment, e.g. trawlers.

An example of economic targets from FAO II: 

An example of economic targets from FAO II Limit reference point: capital productivity at equilibrium as provided by a bio-economic model or raw estimates. It is thus assumed that total trawl fleet is calculated on the basis of a defined standard vessel, which implies that the fleet is equivalent to the sum of standard vessels. Total fleet is therefore equivalent to that of a single enterprise. Target reference point: is set on the basis of a regional development policy in accordance with the reference point.

Economic Data: 

Economic Data

Ecological and economic limits: 

Ecological and economic limits Economic limits Ecological limits

The present advisory hierarchy in the North Atlantic: 

The present advisory hierarchy in the North Atlantic Fish stocks Ecology Ecosystems Ecology Fishing fleets Technical interaction Economy, but not based on science advice

What does the scientific advice really imply?: 

What does the scientific advice really imply? Is a harvest control rule a promise of a certain result i.e. if you maintain your spawning stock biomass above a certain level you will be guaranteed healthy stocks or if you keep your fishing mortality inside certain limits you will be guaranteed stable and profitable fisheries? The doubt about what ecological based management plans and HCRs promise causes confidence problems.

The problem: How to measure compliance with the harvest control rule.: 

The problem: How to measure compliance with the harvest control rule. Statisticians and economists cannot yet make accurate forecasts. Their guesses occasionally turn out to be quite wrong. Nonetheless, people insist that they do their best. Why? Because lack of any forecast usually itself involves an implicit forecast, and non-economists have an even worse long-run average score at making a forecast than do trained statistical economists. P. Samuelson, Economics 1980

How to measure compliance with the harvest control rule II: 

How to measure compliance with the harvest control rule II With the dominant reliance on stock assessments it is at best possible to make a firm statement that 5-6 years ago we adhered to HCR That is not what we do. We use the notorious fickle predictions to establish where we are and determine corrective actions.

Would control of effort do better? : 

Would control of effort do better? It would probably be easier and less demanding job to monitor fishing effort directly  However, if fishing effort is calculated as a function of certain vessel characteristics, outcomes are probably even more uncertain that the predictions of stock If fishing effort is based on historical fishing power –or mortality power – of fleet segments the result may be different

Harvest control rules and integration of fisheries and environmental policies: 

Harvest control rules and integration of fisheries and environmental policies Fisheries and their environmental impact (OSPAR) Many commercial fish stocks are being exploited beyond their safe biological limit, or are being exploited within that limit to an extent that risks the limit being breached. By-catch of undersized or unwanted commercial species, mortality of non-target species, including benthic animals and marine mammals, and high levels of discards are continuing problems in many areas.

Some final remarks: 

Some final remarks Harvest control rules that secure moderate fishing pressures should ensure that ecosystems are not irreversible altered Different industry sectors make use of the Ocean. User rights are in one way or another allocated to different user groups. These uses may conflict with and ruin the possibilities of other sectors Healthy fisheries demand clean oceans and productive and resilient ecosystems If property rights or limited access is introduced for one user group, but not for others, what are the consequences?

The end : 

The end