probing the depths

Probing the depthsProbing the depths reverse engineering fisheries landings statisticsreverse engineering fisheries landings statistics

Reg Watson Jackie Alder Villy Christensen Daniel Pauly

‘Sea Around Us’ ProjectFisheries CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver, Canadawww.seaaroundus.org

A presentation made at:Place Matters: Geospatial Tools for Marine Science, Conservation and Management, AAAS 2004 Seattle, February 10-13, 2004

IntroductionIntroduction

Why did we do it?Why did we do it? What did we doWhat did we do Main findingsMain findings

global reporting distortions global reporting distortions global trend towards smaller, lower global trend towards smaller, lower

trophic level landingstrophic level landings future scenarios differ by placefuture scenarios differ by place

MethodologyMethodology

Problems to overcomeProblems to overcome what (aggregated groups)what (aggregated groups) who (reflagging)who (reflagging) how much (illegal, discards etc) how much (illegal, discards etc) where (huge areas!)where (huge areas!)

Reporting AreasReporting Areas

48 x 106 km2

AreaArea

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

DistributionDistribution

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

Area + DistributionArea + Distribution

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

Access (EEZ)Access (EEZ)

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

Distribution + AccessDistribution + Access

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

Area + Distribution + Area + Distribution + AccessAccess

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

Landing Allocated (zoom)Landing Allocated (zoom)

USA - 1985 - Pacific Jack Mackerel – FAO 77

½° x ½°

spatial cells

Results Results

reductions in landingsreductions in landings

Decade

1950s

1960s

1970s

1980s

1990s

Decade with Maximum Decade with Maximum LandingsLandings

Prepared by Adrian KitchingmanConservation in Practice

Results Results

reductions in landingsreductions in landings reductions in mean sizereductions in mean size

Length Change Length Change ((1950-2000)1950-2000)

Prepared by Adrian Kitchingman

Standard Length Change (cm)

> 100

> 5

no change

> 5

> 50

> 100

no data

> 50

Increase

Decrease

50

70

90

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

len

gth

(cm

)

Global coastal

North Atlantic

Results Results

reductions in landingsreductions in landings reductions in mean sizereductions in mean size reductions in trophic levelreductions in trophic level

Results Results

reductions in landingsreductions in landings reductions in mean sizereductions in mean size reductions in trophic levelreductions in trophic level fuel needed for fishing fleetsfuel needed for fishing fleets

Global Fuel Use 2000Global Fuel Use 2000

Collaboration with Peter Tyedmers, Dalhousie University

/ 47 M t fuel85 M t landings

Fuel uselitre km-2

< 10

< 50

< 100

< 200

< 300

< 400

< 500

< 1,000

< 1,500

> 1,500

Results Results

reductions in landingsreductions in landings reductions in mean sizereductions in mean size reductions in trophic levelreductions in trophic level fuel needed for fishing fleetsfuel needed for fishing fleets fishing vs marine mammalsfishing vs marine mammals

Results Results

reductions in landingsreductions in landings reductions in mean sizereductions in mean size reductions in trophic levelreductions in trophic level fuel needed for fishing fleetsfuel needed for fishing fleets fishing vs marine mammalsfishing vs marine mammals data for ecosystem models ->data for ecosystem models ->

ScenariosScenarios

Plausible, challenging and relevant Plausible, challenging and relevant stories about how the future might stories about how the future might evolveevolve

NOTNOT

forecasts, projections or predictionsforecasts, projections or predictions

Fisheries & ScenariosFisheries & Scenarios

Previous StudiesPrevious Studies Pope 1989Pope 1989 Cury & Cayré (2001)Cury & Cayré (2001) Pauly (2000)Pauly (2000)

CurrentCurrent Pauly et al. (2003)Pauly et al. (2003) Millennium Assessment (2004)Millennium Assessment (2004)

FocusFocus Millennium Assessment Millennium Assessment Scenarios (2004) Scenarios (2004)

EcologyEcology Adapting MosaicAdapting Mosaic

EconomicsEconomics Techno GardenTechno Garden

PolicyPolicy Global OrchestrationGlobal Orchestration

Current ProjectionsCurrent Projections Order from StrengthOrder from Strength

‘‘Order from Strength’Order from Strength’

Rich protect their borders and Rich protect their borders and minimal investment in poorer minimal investment in poorer countriescountries

Rich try to maintain ecosystem Rich try to maintain ecosystem services by local and national actions services by local and national actions but global impacts are experiencedbut global impacts are experienced

Overall ecosystems and services Overall ecosystems and services declining, some areas OK but declining, some areas OK but vulnerable, others are in perilvulnerable, others are in peril

‘‘Adapting Mosaics’Adapting Mosaics’

Management disaggregated;Management disaggregated; Increased awareness of the Increased awareness of the

importance of resilience;importance of resilience; Local management and learning;Local management and learning; Sharing of lessons learned.Sharing of lessons learned.

‘‘Technogarden’Technogarden’

Improved efficiencies in food Improved efficiencies in food production and other selected production and other selected services;services;

Potential to efficiently use and Potential to efficiently use and sustain ecosystem services;sustain ecosystem services;

Risk of surprises!Risk of surprises!

‘‘Global Orchestration’Global Orchestration’

Economic and environmental Economic and environmental policiespolicies

Trade barriers and subsidies Trade barriers and subsidies phased outphased out

Global initiatives are implementedGlobal initiatives are implemented Human well being improved, Human well being improved,

environment???environment???

Three ModelsThree Models

2050

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040Year

Lan

din

gs

(to

nn

es)

TechnoGlobalMosaicStrength

Landings - Benguela Landings - Benguela CurrentCurrent

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050Year

Lan

din

gs

valu

e (U

SD

/km

2 )

TechnoGlobalMosaicStrength

Value - Central North Value - Central North PacificPacific

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050Year

Lan

din

g d

ivers

ity in

dex

GlobalMosaicStrengthTechno

Diversity - Gulf of ThailandDiversity - Gulf of Thailand

ConclusionsConclusions

Reverse engineering worksReverse engineering works Place mattersPlace matters Policy mattersPolicy matters It is It is notnot too late too late

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

Collaborators:

Peter Tyedmers, Dalhousie University

Adrian Kitchingman, Fred Valdez

and other Sea Around Us Project and Fisheries Centre colleagues

VISIT OUR WEB SITE: WWW.SEAAROUNDUS.ORG

THANK YOU

The Sea Around Us project is a UBC Fisheries Centre partnership with the Pew Charitable Trusts of Philadelphia, USA

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

Collaborators:

Peter Tyedmers, Dalhousie University

Adrian Kitchingman, Fred Valdez

and other Sea Around Us Project and Fisheries Centre colleagues

VISIT OUR WEB SITE: WWW.SEAAROUNDUS.ORG

THANK YOU

The Sea Around Us project is a UBC Fisheries Centre partnership with the Pew Charitable Trusts of Philadelphia, USA

More Results…More Results…

Trophic Level Change Trophic Level Change (1950-(1950-2000)2000)

Prepared by Adrian KitchingmanScientific American July 2003

Trophic Level Change

>1

>.1

no change

>.1

>.5

>1

no data

>.5

Increase

Decrease