Sara Hornborg

Selective fishing induces density-dependent growth

Over the last decades, views on fisheries management have oscillated between alarm and trust in management progress. The predominant policy for remedying the world fishing crisis aims at maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by adjusting gear selectivity and fishing effort. Here we report a case study on how striving for higher yields from the Eastern Baltic cod stock by increasing selectivity has become exceedingly detrimental for its productivity. Although there is a successive increase in numbers of undersized fish, growth potential is severely reduced, and fishing mortality in fishable size has increased. Once density-dependent growth is introduced, the process is self-enforcing as long as the recruitment remains stable. Our findings suggest that policies focusing on maximum yield while targeting greater sizes are risky and should instead prioritize catch rates over yield. Disregarding the underlying population structure may jeopardize stock productivity, with dire consequences for the fishing industry and ecosystem structure and function.

Trophic indicators in fisheries: a call for re-evaluation.

Mean trophic level (MTL) of landings and primary production required (PPR) by fisheries are increasingly used in the assessment of sustainability in fisheries. However, in their present form, MTL and PPR are prone to misinterpretation. We show that it is important to account for actual catch data, define an appropriate historical and spatial domain, and carefully consider the effects of fisheries management, based on results from a case study of Swedish fisheries during the past century.

By-catch impacts in fisheries: utilizing the IUCN red list categories for enhanced product level assessment in seafood LCAs.

Overexploitation of fish stocks causes concern not only to fisheries managers and conservation biologists, but also engages seafood consumers; more integrated product perspectives would be useful. This could be provided by life cycle assessment (LCA); however, further complements of present LCA methodology are needed to assess seafood production, one being by-catch impacts. We studied the scientific rationale behind using the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ for assessment of impacts relating to fish species’ vulnerability. For this purpose, the current Red List status of marine fish in Sweden was compared to the advice given in fisheries as well as key life history traits known to indicate sensitivity to high fishing pressure. Further, we quantified the amount of threatened fish (vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered) that was discarded in demersal trawl fisheries on the Swedish west coast. The results showed that not only did the national Red List of marine fish have a high consistency with advice given in fisheries and indices of vulnerability, the different fishing practices studied were also found to have vastly different amounts of threatened fish discarded per kilo landing. The suggested approach is therefore promising as a carrier of aggregated information on the extent to which seafood production interferes with conservation priorities, in particular for species lacking adequate stock assessment. To enable extensive product comparisons, it is important to increase coverage of fish species by the global IUCN Red List, and to reconsider the appropriate assessment unit (species or stocks) in order to avoid false alarms.

Review and advancement of the marine biotic resource use metric in seafood LCAs: a case study of Norwegian salmon feed

PurposeSeafood life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have adopted the primary production required (PPR) indicator to account for the impact of these production systems (e.g., capture fisheries or aquaculture) on the ecosystems they harvest wild inputs from. However, there exists a large diversity in the application of methods to calculate PPR, and current practice often does not consider species- and ecosystem-specific factors. Here, we critically examine current practice and propose a refined method for applying the PPR metric in seafood LCAs.MethodsWe surveyed seafood LCAs that quantify PPR, or its derivatives, to examine the diversity of practice. We then defined and applied a refined method to a case study of the average Norwegian salmon feed in 2012. This refined method incorporates species-specific fishmeal and oil yields, source ecosystem-specific transfer efficiencies and expresses results as a percentage of total ecosystem production that PPR represents. Results were compared to those using previously applied methods based on the literature review, and the impact of uncertainty and natural variability of key input parameters was also assessed using Monte Carlo simulation.Results and discussionFrom the literature review, most studies do not incorporate species-specific fishmeal and oil yields or ecosystem-specific transfer efficiencies when calculating PPR. Our proposed method, which incorporated source species- and ecosystem-specific values for these parameters, provides far greater resolution of PPR than when employing global average values. When alternative methods to calculate PPR were applied to marine inputs to Norwegian salmon feeds, resulting PPR values were similar for some sources of fishmeal and oil. For other species, such as Atlantic herring from ecosystems with low transfer efficiencies, there was a large divergence in resulting PPR values. For combined inputs to Norwegian salmon feeds in 2012, the refined method resulted in a total PPR value that is three times higher than would result using the currently standard method signaling that previous LCA research may have substantially underestimated the marine biotic impacts of fishery products.ConclusionsWhile there exists a great diversity of practice in the application of the PPR indicator in seafood LCA, the refined method should be adopted for future LCA studies to be more specific to the context of the study.

Assessing broad life cycle impacts of daily onboard decision-making, annual strategic planning, and fisheries management in a northeast Atlantic trawl fishery

PurposeCapture fisheries are the only industrial-scale harvesting of a wild resource for food. Temporal variability in environmental performance of fisheries has only recently begun to be explored, but only between years, not within a year. Our aim was to better understand the causes of temporal variability within and between years and to identify improvement options through management at a company level and in fisheries management.MethodsWe analyzed the variability in broad environmental impacts of a demersal freeze trawler targeting cod, haddock, saithe, and shrimp, mainly in the Norwegian Sea and in the Barents Sea. The analysis was based on daily data for fishing activities between 2011 and 2014 and the functional unit was a kilo of landing from one fishing trip. We used biological indicators in a novel hierarchic approach, depending on data availability, to quantify biotic impacts. Landings were categorized as target (having defined target reference points) or bycatch species (classified as threatened or as data-limited). Indicators for target and bycatch impacts were quantified for each fishing trip, as was the seafloor area swept.Results and discussionNo significant difference in fuel use was found between years, but variability was considerable within a year, i.e., between fishing trips. Trips targeting shrimp were more fuel intensive than those targeting fish, due to a lower catch rate. Steaming to and from port was less important for fuel efficiency than steaming between fishing locations. A tradeoff was identified between biotic and abiotic impacts. Landings classified as main target species generally followed the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) framework, and proportions of threatened species were low, while proportions of data-limited bycatch were larger. This improved considerably when reference points were defined for saithe in 2014.ConclusionsThe variability between fishing trips shows that there is room for improvement through management. Fuel use per landing was strongly influenced by target species, fishing pattern, and fisheries management. Increased awareness about the importance of onboard decision-making can lead to improved performance. This approach could serve to document performance over time helping fishing companies to better understand the effect of their daily and more long-term decision-making on the environmental performance of their products.RecommendationsFishing companies should document their resource use and production on a detailed level. Fuel use should be monitored as part of the management system. Managing authorities should ensure that sufficient data is available to evaluate the sustainability of exploitation levels of all harvested species.