recreational fishers and mpas

Dimensions of Support and Opposition Among Recreational Fishers for

Establishing and Managing Marine Protected Areas:

A Literature Review and Directions for Research

R.J. PayneLakehead University

Recreational Fishers and MPAs

Background

The success or failure of a marine protected area often rests on socioeconomic considerations.

Humans affect, and are affected by, the natural environment, and society must bear the benefits

and costs of marine resource management. Without consideration of social and economic

impacts, effective planning and management may be compromised (MPA News, July, 2002).


Recreational fishing is popularIn 2000, 3.6 million adult anglers participated in a variety of recreational fishing activities in Canada;47.9 million fishing days and 233 million fish of all species;Only 84.6 million, or 36.4% of fish caught, were kept. (Survey of Recreational Fishing in Canada 2000 )

a significant stakeholder group


Approach

What do we know about recreational fishers?

What do we know about the impacts of recreational fishing?

What do we know about recreational fishers’ views on establishing MPAs?

What do we know about recreational fishers’ views on managing MPAs?


Recreational FishersSurvey data (Gray et al., 2003; DFO, 2007)Socio-demographic factors insignificant in determining support/opposition to MPAs (Robertson and Caporossi, 2003)Specialization (Bohnsack, 2002; Salz and Loomis, 2007)Differences by motivations (Yeung, 2006)“place attachment”? (Backlund, 2005; Kyle et al., 2005; Hammitt et al., 2006; Harmon, 2005)Displacement effects in relation to costs and benefits? (Sanchirico et al., 2002)


Impacts of Recreational FishingRecreational fishers do not feel they impact stocks negativelyRecreational fishing poorly managed (Arlinghaus, 2006)Technology use (Agardy, 2000)Angling -> “selective exploitation” (Lewin et al., 2006)California rockfish (Schroeder and Love, 2000)Snapper in New Zealand (Denny and Babcock, 2004)Some differences in species between NTZs and open areas in MPAs (Westera et al., 2003)Recreational fishing impacts similar to those of commercial fishing (Cooke and Cowx, 2004; 2006)“predatory behaviour” (Post et al., 2002)


Views on EstablishmentActive stakeholder involvement; “best” information; decision-making fairness; and efficient administration are important (Dalton, 2006; Guenette et al., 2000; Sutton, 2006)Support MPAs, but … (Kerns, 2003)Supporters: MPAs will lead to more fish and bigger fish, but some dispute on more types of fish (Kerns, 2003)No attachment to the area -> little support for MPA establishment (Robertson and Caporossi, 2003)Non-supporters felt MPAs would interfere with fishing success; supporters felt MPAs would produce more fish (Robertson and Caporossi, 2003)


Views on ManagementActive stakeholder involvement; “best” information; decision-making fairness; and efficient administration are important (Dalton, 2006)Fishers resist NTZs as fisheries benefits are unproven (Jones, 2006)Voluntary vs. statutory codes of conduct preferred in Britain (Jones, 1999)California fishers NOT in favour of NTZs: over-regulated (Scholz et al., 2004)Catch and release fishing MAY be compatible with NTZs (Cooke et al., 2006)Support for idea of closures for part of year (Kerns, 2003)“Visitors” to the Broken Islands group, PRNPR support NTZs in this part of the park (Randall and Rollins, 2004)


Research Needs

Secondary analyses of survey data: segmentation, specialization, trends“place attachment”: cognitive and affective aspects of recreational fishingDisplacement/substitution effects

Means of involvement in establishment decision makingMeans of involvement in management decision making

Capacities of MPA agencies to offer meaningful involvement


Literature CitedAgardy, T., (2000). Information needs for marine protected areas: scientific and societal. Bulletin of Marine Science, 66, (3),

pp. 875-888.Arlinghaus, R., (2006). Overcoming human obstacles to conservation of recreational fishery resources, with emphasis on

central Europe. Environmental Conservation, 33, (1), pp. 46–59.Backlund, E., (2005). The Importance of Place and the Substitutability of River Recreation Resources: Empirical Evidence

from the Chattanooga Scenic and Wild River. In: Peden, J., Schuster, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2005 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium; Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-341. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, pp. 380-386.

Bohnsack, B., (2002). Gender and Longitudinal Perspectives on Recreation Specialization Levels of Saltwater Anglers in Texas. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University.

Cooke, S. and Cowx, I., (2006). Contrasting recreational and commercial fishing: Searching for common issues to promote unified conservation of fisheries resources and aquatic environments. Biological Conservation, 128, (1), pp. 93-108.

Cooke, S. and Cowx, I., (2004). The role of recreational fishing in global fish crises. Bio-Science, 54, (9), pp. 857-859.Cooke, S., Danylchuk, A., Sascha, E., Danylchuk, S., Suski, C. and Goldberg, T., (2006). Is catch-and-release recreational

angling compatible with no-take marine protected areas? Ocean & Coastal Management 49, (4), pp. 342–354.Dalton, T.M., (2006). Exploring participants' views of participatory coastal and marine resource management processes.

Coastal Management, 34, (4), pp. 351 – 367.Denny, C. and Babcock, R., (2004). Do partial marine reserves protect reef fish assemblages? Biological Conservation, 116,

pp. 119–129.


Literature CitedDFO, (2002). Survey of Recreational Fishing in Canada 2000. OttawaDFO, (2007). Survey of Recreational Fishing in Canada 2005. Ottawa.Gray, P., Duwors, E., Villeneuve, M., Boyd, S. and Legg, D. (2003). The socioeconomic significance of nature-based

recreation in Canada. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 86, pp. 129–147.Guénette, S., Chuenpagdee, R. and Jones, R., (2000). Marine Protected Areas with an Emphasis on Local Communities

and Indigenous Peoples: A Review. Fisheries Centre Research Reports, Vol. 8, No. 1, Vancouver, UBC Fisheries Centre, 55 p.

Hammitt, W., Backlund, E. and Bixler, R., (2006). Place bonding for recreation places: conceptual and empirical development. Leisure Studies, 25, (1), pp. 17 – 41.

Harmon, L. (2005). The Person-Place Relationship in the Context of Isle Royale National Park: a Study of Place Attachment and Place-Based Affect. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University.

Jones, P., (1999). Marine nature reserves in Britain: past lessons, current status and future issues. Marine Policy, 23, (4-5), pp. 375-396.

Jones, P. (2006). Collective action problems posed by no take zones. Marine Policy, 30, (2), pp. 143-156.Kerns, T., (2003). Recreational Fishermen’s Perceptions of Marine Protected Areas. Unpublished Master of Environmental

Management, Duke University.Kyle, G., Bricker, K., Graefe, A. and Wickham, T., (2005). An examination of recreationists’ relationships with activities

and settings. Leisure Sciences, 26, pp. 123–142.


Literature CitedLewin, W., Arlinghaus, R. and Mehner, T., (2006). Documented and potential biological impacts of recreational fishing:

insights for management and conservation. Reviews in Fisheries Science, 14, (4), pp. 305 – 367. Post, J., Sullivan, M., Cox, S., Lester, N., Walters, C., et al. (2002) Canada's recreational fisheries: the invisible collapse?

Fisheries, 27, (1), pp. 6–17.Randall, C. and Rollins, R., (2004). Voluntary policies as a way to manage for ecological integrity: an examination of

visitor attitudes towards a voluntary no fishing policy in the Broken group islands, Pacific Rim National Park Reserve. In N. Munro, P. Dearden, T. Herman, K. Beazley and S. Bondrup-Neilson (eds.), Making Ecosystem-Based Management Work: Connecting Managers and Researchers, Proceeding of the 5th International Conference on Science and the Management of Protected Areas Victoria, BC, Wolfville, N.S: SAMPAA, pp 15.1-15-8.

Robertson, R. and Caporossi, G., (2003). New England recreational fishers’ attitudes toward marine protected areas: a preliminary investigation. IN: Murdy, James, (ed.) 2004. Proceedings of the 2003 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-317. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, pp. 121-127.

Salz, R. and Loomis, D., (2005). Recreation specialization and anglers’ attitudes towards restricted fishing areas. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 10, pp. 187–199.

Sanchirico, J., Cochran, K. and Emerson, P., (2002). Marine Protected Areas: Economic andSocial Implications. Discussion Paper 02–26, Resources for the Future, Washington, 24 p.Scholz, A., Bonzon, K., Fujita, R., Benjamin, N., Woodling, N., Black, P. and Steinback, C., (2004). Participatory

socioeconomic analysis: drawing on fishermen’s knowledge for marine protected area planning in California. Marine Policy, 28, (4), pp. 335–349.


Literature CitedSchroeder, D. and Love, M., (2000). Recreational fishing and marine fish populations in California. California Cooperative

Oceanic Fisheries Investigation Reports (CalCOFI), 43, pp. 182-190Sutton, S., (2006). Understanding recreational fishers’ participation in public consultation programs. Human Dimensions of

Wildlife, 11, pp. 329–341.Westera, M., Lavery, P. and Hyndes, G., (2003). Differences in recreationally targeted fishes between protected and fished

areas of a coral reef marine park. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 294, pp. 145– 168.Yeung, N., (2006). Segmenting fishing markets using motivations. e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), 4, (3), pp. 64-73.

recreational fishers and mpas

Documents