April 17, 2020 — Climate change is warping the West Coast marine ecosystem. Warm waters are driving species north. Acidification and deoxygenation are threatening coastal species.
Fishermen are intimately familiar with these impacts. When the marine heat wave of 2014 and 2015 – dubbed “the Blob” – raised water temperatures for months on end, fishermen saw landing revenues of salmon and hake drop. That heat wave foreshadowed the increased and more severe heat waves that are likely to come.
April 9, 2020 — If you find it hard to imagine a college professor (of a subject other than epidemiology) drawing a crowd nowadays, I’m with you. Yet that is exactly what fisheries scientist Ray Hilborn did April 2.
To a sit-in-your-office, stare-at-your-monitor webinar, no less!
It’s conceivable that the size of the audience reflected a degree of covid-19-inspired restlessness. But ennui alone cannot explain the more than 450 people who signed up for Hilborn’s presentation on the status of fish stocks and the role of management. And rather than dwindle, as webinar audiences tend to do, by the time the session ended Hilborn’s audience had swollen to “an easy 600,” according to NOAA’s Tracy Gill, who coordinated the event.
To be fair, Hilborn was no stranger to his audience. A professor of aquatic and fishery science at the University of Washington, he’s written several books, including, most recently, “Ocean Recovery: A Sustainable Future for Global Fisheries” (co-authored by his wife, Ulrike Hilborn) as well as scores of peer-reviewed papers, and is respected by industry, academics, and NGOs.
His message Thursday was reassuring – more or less. Listen to scientists long enough, and you realize that you can get yourself into trouble reading between the lines.
Many of you, for example, will recall how in 2006, mainstream journalists leveraged a study led by the Canadian ecologist Boris Worm on the loss of biodiversity in ocean ecosystems services into the disappearance of fish by 2048. “One very small part of the paper,” Hilborn recalled, extrapolated from catch trends and came up with a downward curve that “hit the y axis,” in the professor’s words, at 100 percent collapsed in 2048.
February 19, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:
The first continuous multiyear acoustic monitoring effort across Cook Inlet provides the most comprehensive description of beluga whale seasonal distribution and feeding behavior to date.
This knowledge is critical for understanding and managing potential threats impeding recovery of this endangered population.
“Cook Inlet belugas were listed as endangered in 2008. Despite protective measures, the population continued to decline,” said Manuel Castellote, NOAA Fisheries affiliate/University of Washington/Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean biologist who led the study. “We undertook this study to provide information that managers needed to develop an effective recovery strategy.”
Castellote worked in partnership with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to develop a passive acoustic monitoring program. It recorded beluga movements and foraging behavior within their critical habitat year-round over five years.
“Summer beluga distribution has been well studied, especially in the upper inlet. But information on foraging behavior during the rest of the year was basically nonexistent,” Castellote said. “That knowledge is essential to identify threats impeding the whales’ recovery.”
January 31, 2020 — People care about the impact of their diet. According to Nielson1, consumers are more likely than ever to acknowledge the environmental impact of global food production and make choices to reduce their individual footprint – usually willing to pay more for lower-impact foods. So why is seafood not flying off the shelves? It is, by far, the lowest impact animal protein2 and, according to a recent global analysis3, fish populations around the world are healthy in places that manage their fisheries well.
The problem is that people’s perception of ocean conservation and subsequent seafood sustainability is often misinformed. For example, when people are asked4 to rank ocean threats, pollution (like plastic) and overfishing are consistently listed as the top two despite expert consensus that climate change is the most pressing threat. The seafood industry has a largely negative5 reputation among everyday consumers and are increasingly blamed6 for plastic pollution.
Why does the negative perception of seafood persist?
Overfishing throughout the 1980s and 1990s earned the seafood industry its infamous label. High-profile media stories about overfishing coupled with the formation of several international ocean advocacy groups vilified the industry – a reputation the industry cannot seem to shake, despite important policy reforms and strong data that many global fisheries are firmly on a path to sustainability.
January 30, 2020 — Understanding how many fish are in the sea is crucial to creating effective policy and management strategies. One study out of the University of Washington in Seattle took a close look at how fishing pressures and stock abundance are correlated. How will management initiatives in countries with high fishing pressure affect the number of fish that are available to catch? Ray Hilborn and 23 contributing authors on the paper took a data-driven approach to this question with optimistic results that they hope will convince policymakers and the public that fish stocks are actually on the rise.
Hilborn has been labeled an “overfishing denier” for his divisive views on the status of overfishing and his pushback against marine protected areas (MPAs), but Hilborn argues that closing areas to fishing is not necessarily the answer; “fisheries are not well managed in many parts of the world (the ones primarily where we did not have data for our paper)…our paper shows that fisheries management does work when implemented”. The researchers assessed fish catch data from six continents (which comprised about 50% of total global catch) up until the year 2016 and found that where fish stocks were being managed properly, increased number of fish was the result. “Our hope for the use of the results is that the thousands of scientists, managers and technicians that have helped stop overfishing will be recognized for their contribution”, Hilborn says.
Fish stock assessments use data gathered from a number of sources including fisheries landings (the fish that are caught by fishers and reported), biological studies and scientific surveys. While there are uncertainties in the data due to environmental, financial and technological limitations, stock assessments provide the backbone of fisheries management and drive regulatory decisions.
January 16, 2020 — The following was released by Sustainable Fisheries UW:
Let’s enjoy some unequivocal, inarguable good news: a paper published today in PNAS, Hilborn et al. 2020, shows that on average, scientifically-assessed fish populations around the world are healthy or improving. And, for fish populations that are not doing well, there is a clear roadmap to sustainability. With Australia on fire and scares of World War III, the start of 2020 and the new decade has been awful; hopefully Hilborn et al. 2020 can kickstart a decade of ocean optimism.
Hilborn et al. 2020 counters the perception that fish populations around the world are declining and the only solution is closing vast swaths of ocean to fishing. Instead, Hilborn et al. 2020 argues that increasing scientific, management, and enforcement capacity will lead to more abundant and sustainable oceans. The major takeaway of the paper is that fishery management works—when fisheries are managed, they are sustained. The key is following the science-to-management blueprint. Scientific data collection and fishery assessment comes first, then fishing regulation and enforcement of fishing policies. With the blueprint in place, most fisheries around the world are sustainable or improving.
The paper uses updates to the RAM Legacy Stock Assessment Database, a decades-long project to assemble data on fish populations that are scientifically assessed. As of 2019, the database contains data on 882 marine fish populations, representing about half of reported wild-caught seafood. In 2009, the database contained data on only 166, representing a much smaller proportion of global seafood. Researchers have spent the last 10 years adding to the database, and with today’s publication, update the global status of fish stocks. They found that, on average, fish populations are above target levels. Not every stock is doing well, but on average, things are much better than they were 2 decades ago. How nice: an environmental story where things are better now than they were in the past!
The paper describes the global status of fish stocks, but it also tells the story of fishery sustainability from the past 50 years.
January 16, 2020 — Studies on global fisheries rarely make national news, but University of Washington professor of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Ray Hilborn says that the public perception of fisheries is still recovering from one eye-catching study in 2006.
“A paper come out that said if current trends continue, all fish stocks will be collapsed by 2048, and that got front page New York Times, front page Washington Post, and it was totally wrong,” Hilborn said. “It was so contrary to my experience and lots of people, you can imagine almost everyone working on fisheries in Alaska. Ultimately I got together with the first author of the paper and we figured we could actually try to understand why we had such different perspectives.”
The result of the collaboration was a paper published in 2009 which showed that on average, stock abundance appeared to be stable.
“What they had assumed is that if that catch goes down, the catch is declining, and that simply wasn’t true. Most of the stocks they called collapsed, the catch had declined for other reason. Many times regulation, some times international 200 mile zones,” Hilborn said.
Hilborn worked to build a data set on the abundance of fish stocks, rather than just the reported catch.
More than a decade later, Hilborn’s research shows how intensely managing fisheries has resulted in increased abundance of fish stocks.
January 14, 2020 — A new study has shown that fishery management, when done well, works, and is the solution for keeping fisheries sustainable.
By looking at data from about 30 countries around the world, a group of researchers have concluded that intense fisheries management has led to healthy or improving fish populations, while a dearth of management has led to overfishing. The researchers published their results in a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on 13 January.
January 14, 2020 — Nearly half of the fish caught worldwide are from stocks that are scientifically monitored and, on average, are increasing in abundance. Effective management appears to be the main reason these stocks are at sustainable levels or successfully rebuilding.
That is the main finding of an international project led by the University of Washington to compile and analyze data from fisheries around the world. The results were published Jan. 13 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“There is a narrative that fish stocks are declining around the world, that fisheries management is failing and we need new solutions — and it’s totally wrong,” said lead author Ray Hilborn, a professor in the UW School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences. “Fish stocks are not all declining around the world. They are increasing in many places, and we already know how to solve problems through effective fisheries management.”
The project builds on a decade-long international collaboration to assemble estimates of the status of fish stocks — or distinct populations of fish — around the world. This information helps scientists and managers know where overfishing is occurring, or where some areas could support even more fishing. Now the team’s database includes information on nearly half of the world’s fish catch, up from about 20% represented in the last compilation in 2009.
“The key is, we want to know how well we are doing, where we need to improve, and what the problems are,” Hilborn said. “Given that most countries are trying to provide long-term sustainable yield of their fisheries, we want to know where we are overfishing, and where there is potential for more yield in places we’re not fully exploiting.”
Over the past decade, the research team built a network of collaborators in countries and regions throughout the world, inputting their data on valuable fish populations in places such as the Mediterranean, Peru, Chile, Russia, Japan and northwest Africa. Now about 880 fish stocks are included in the database, giving a much more comprehensive picture worldwide of the health and status of fish populations.
Still, most of the fish stocks in South Asia and Southeast Asia do not have scientific estimates of health and status available. Fisheries in India, Indonesia and China alone represent 30% to 40% of the world’s fish catch that is essentially unassessed.
“There are still big gaps in the data and these gaps are more difficult to fill,” said co-author Ana Parma, a principal scientist at Argentina’s National Scientific and Technical Research Council and a member of The Nature Conservancy global board. “This is because the available information on smaller fisheries is more scattered, has not been standardized and is harder to collate, or because fisheries in many regions are not regularly monitored.”
The researchers paired information about fish stocks with recently published data on fisheries management activities in about 30 countries. This analysis found that more intense management led to healthy or improving fish stocks, while little to no management led to overfishing and poor stock status.
These results show that fisheries management works when applied, and the solution for sustaining fisheries around the world is implementing effective fisheries management, the authors explained.
“With the data we were able to assemble, we could test whether fisheries management allows stocks to recover. We found that, emphatically, the answer is yes,” said co-author Christopher Costello, a professor of environmental and resource economics at University of California, Santa Barbara, and a board member with Environmental Defense Fund. “This really gives credibility to the fishery managers and governments around the world that are willing to take strong actions.”
Fisheries management should be tailored to fit the characteristics of the different fisheries and the needs of specific countries and regions for it to be successful. Approaches that have been effective in many large-scale industrial fisheries in developed countries cannot be expected to work for small-scale fisheries, especially in regions with limited economic and technical resources and weak governance systems, Parma said.
The main goal should be to reduce the total fishing pressure when it is too high, and find ways to incentivize fishing fleets to value healthy fish stocks.
“There isn’t really a one-size-fits-all management approach,” Costello said. “We need to design the way we manage fisheries so that fishermen around the world have a long-term stake in the health of the ocean.”
Other co-authors are from University of Victoria, University of Cape Town, National Institute of Fisheries Research (Morocco), Rutgers University, Seikai National Fisheries Research Institute Japan, CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Fisheries New Zealand, Wildlife Conservation Society, Marine and Freshwater Research Center (Argentina), European Commission, Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology, Center for the Study of Marine Systems, Sustainable Fisheries Partnership, The Nature Conservancy, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Hilborn and collaborators recently presented this work at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ International Symposium on Fisheries Sustainability in Rome.
The research was funded by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis Science for Nature and People Partnership. Individual authors received funding from The Nature Conservancy, The Wildlife Conservation Society, the Walton Family Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, the Richard C. and Lois M. Worthington Endowed Professorship in Fisheries Management and donations from 12 fishing companies.
December 31, 2019 — Chinook salmon, also known as king salmon, are getting smaller, and a team of scientists at the University of Washington think they know why. A new study says killer whales might be behind Chinook’s declining size.
Chinook salmon are an important part of life in Southeast Alaska. Part of the prized fish’s value is its size. Chinook are the largest Pacific salmon.
But in the last two years, returns have been low. Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg all saw their king salmon derbies cancelled in 2018 and 2019. And forecasts for 2020 don’t look much better.
But it’s not just their numbers that are declining.
University of Washington researcher Jan Ohlberger published a paper last year that shows Chinook are getting smaller, too. Up to 10 percent smaller.
That discovery intrigued the researcher.
“The question is, what is the cause of that?” said Ohlberger in a recent phone interview.
A causal claim is difficult to make. Correlation, of course, doesn’t always imply causation.