Advances in research of marine communities in the last twenty years, show that not only money (research projects) for sampling is achieved to obtain a substantial information for counseling. Perhaps managers are not convinced about the progress and have their backs to the technicians without facing the progressive deterioration of marine ecosystems.
The industry in the UK have realised the the 'money' has run out and that to collect better and more accurate information (evidence) they need to get involved. See our http://fisheries-conservation.bangor.ac.uk website to see this in practice
The fishing industry has a target = money. Oceanographic research is a discipline movements slow and costly. The changes in populations and habitats we see no return after a while. It is very difficult to convince an entire machine (which I am involved, of course) that must change course and course of philosophy.
In my oppinion, the best recommendation, strongly supported by scientific evidence, is the generalization of marine protected areas. This tool is possibly difficult to apply to all fisheries (pelagic and migratory fishes) but it is a powerful tool for nectobentonic species and coastal fisheries.
I agree in principle with the idea of involving fishermen in management. But we must learn from past experience, as for example, if I remember correctly, the case in the early ‘90s of the failure of the management of quotas for cod in the waters of the United Kingdom based on data collected from logbooks compiled by fishermen. On the other hand, it is absolutely unthinkable, dangerous and also harmful to pay fishermen to provide the data necessary for evaluations for management purposes. But I agree with the need to involve the fishermen using persuasion, even with the use of gadgets as proposed by Michel.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction