5. Lobster fisheries management in Bonavista Bay, Newfoundland, CanadaThe Newfoundland lobster fishery has greatly increased in importance in recent years due to collapse ofgroundfish stocks and closure of the cod fishery. The fishery targets American lobster (Homarus americanus)and is conducted from small open boats close to shore. There was concern over the future of lobster landings inCanada because of high exploitation rates and the high proportion of immature lobsters being harvested, and inresponse to this the Canadian Fisheries Resources Conservation Council (FRCC) developed a conservationframework for the species (FRCC 1995, in Rowe 2002). On a local level, responding to FRCCrecommendations, the Eastport Lobster Protection Committee was established in 1995 to work on managementtechniques to promote a sustainable fishery. The committee was formed by local fishers and supported by themajority of lobster fishers in the area. One of their main roles was to reinforce the importance of complyingwith regulations on capture sizes, gear regulations and releasing egg-bearing females. In 1996 a voluntaryprogramme of marking and releasing egg-bearing females was introduced. Females with eggs were marked witha v-notch in their tail and when caught again, even if not bearing eggs, they would be released, so improving theopportunities for spawning individuals to continue to produce. There was good compliance with size and gearregulations amongst Eastport fishers and there were increases in landings.In 1997 the Committee initiated protection of two areas of good lobster habitat within their fishing grounds,2.1km 2 in total and supporting an estimated 1.5% of the lobsters in local fishing grounds. They also restrictedlobster fishing to traditional users (about 50 licensed lobster fishers). In return, traditional users gave up the rightto trap outside their area. There was also a buffer zone where fishers from Eastport and elsewhere could fish.Users were thus limited to fishing in their local area, assisting in the management of the resource. These twomanagement decisions were the main impetus behind the establishment of the Eastport Peninsula Lobster<strong>Management</strong> Area which incorporated the two closed areas (Rowe and Feltham 2000).The whole process of establishing the closed areas was internally motivated. The committee became aware ofthe possibility of using area closures to manage their lobster resources through the FRCC report. Themanagement plan, including selection of the protected sites, was crafted using local knowledge integrated withscientific advice. The committee also recognized the need to monitor the effectiveness of their managementinitiatives and applied for funding to monitor populations with the assistance of graduate students from theMemorial University of Newfoundland. Fishers carried out experimental fishing and participated in taggingstudies and much of the data was analysed at the University and results fed back to the committee and the fishingcommunity. Members of the community (fishers and their families) and a local school have also participated indata analyses. This helped increase awareness of the importance of conserving stocks and included the widercommunity in the management effort. The closed areas are policed by the lobster fishers themselves in a systemof peer enforcement which has been very effective (Rowe and Feltham 2000).Biological evidence for the effectiveness of closed areas is growing. In a study of lobster populations between1997 and 1999, Rowe (2001, 2002) found a low frequency of lobster emigration from closed areas, offeringincreased survival to protected lobsters. Over 90% of tagged lobsters were recaptured in the same area they hadbeen tagged in. In a study of lobster populations inside and outside closed areas, in one of the two areas (RoundIsland) lobster density, sizes of individuals, and proportion of egg-bearing females were significantly greaterthan that in adjacent fished areas. Lobsters were significantly larger inside the other closed area (Duck Island),but there was no significant difference from fishing grounds in density or proportion of egg-bearing females.These studies were undertaken only three fishing seasons after the reserves were established. Fishing pressureoutside closed areas was intense with mortality estimated at nearly 72% of lobsters of harvestable size andcondition (Rowe 2001). Rowe concluded that closures were already demonstrating the potential to benefit localfisheries, even after just 2-4 years of protection. Larger lobsters and more egg-bearing females in the closedareas will increase egg production. Only a very small proportion of lobsters within the wider management areaare currently protected, but at present egg production is thought to be at such low levels that even this smallnumber of lobsters producing significantly more eggs could have a positive effect on future numbers of lobstersin the area. Egg production is estimated to have increased (Ennis 2000) and closed areas are thought to havecontributed 7.1% of total annual egg production.Eastport lobster fishers have reported improved landings over the management period, whereas in the rest ofNewfoundland fishers have seen a serious decline in their landings (Figure 1). In the Eastport Peninsula Lobster<strong>Management</strong> Area lobster populations appear to be recovering in response to the package of managementtechniques introduced, the most important being the two closed areas and the marking and returning of eggbearingfemales. The success of the programme has prompted other communities in Newfoundland to considersimilar initiatives. It has also prompted the Eastport community to consider totally closing the lobster closuresto fishing, establishing them as marine reserves to protect other species as well.52
35003000Lobster landings250020001500100050001990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000YearFigure 1: Lobster landings for Newfoundland (metric tonnes),excluding Bonavista Bay, and lobster landings for the EastportPeninsula, 1991-1998. Redrawn from Rowe and Feltham 2000.This study emphasises the success which can be achieved through an initiative that originated and developed inthe community. The closed areas of the Eastport Lobster <strong>Management</strong> Area are unusual because they wereestablished by fishers for fisheries management. The effectiveness of peer enforcement and the usefulness ofinvolving the wider community in designing, enforcing and monitoring the closed areas seem to be the basis forcontinuing success. The programme was initiated and developed into the success it is today by one lobster fisherin particular, Mr George Feltham. In 2000 he received the Canadian National Award for Sustainable Fishing inrecognition of his vision in establishing the management committee and the community based management andmonitoring programmes.Key points• <strong>Management</strong> measures, including closed areas, were initiated by lobster fishers themselves.• Loss of fishing grounds was divided evenly amongst the fishers so nobody was hit too badly.• Lobsters in closed areas are increasing in abundance, living longer, growing larger and producing more eggsthan those in fishing grounds, potentially helping contribute to improvement of local stocks and supportingfisheries through increased recruitment and spillover.• This pilot study shows that the reserves work, but as they are very small (in this case protecting an estimated1.5% of the population), more will be needed to fulfill their full potential to boost fisheries. Fishers are nowinterested in having a larger no-take area.With thanks to Sherrylynn Rowe.ReferencesEnnis, G.P. (2000) Relative contribution to total egg production of different conservation measures introduced ina local lobster management zone in eastern Newfoundland. International Lobster Conference, Key West,September 2000. Overheads from presentation.Rowe, S. (2001) Movement and harvesting mortality of American lobsters (Homarus americanus) tagged insideand outside no-take reserves in Bonavista Bay, Newfoundland. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and AquaticScience 58, 1336-1346.Rowe, S. (2002) Population parameters of American lobster inside and outside no-take reserves in BonavistaBay, Newfoundland. Fisheries Research 56, 167-175.53
- Page 1 and 2: The fishery effects ofmarine reserv
- Page 3 and 4: ContentsPart 1: Review1. Summary 62
- Page 5 and 6: Part 1: Review5
- Page 7 and 8: egan being published. Those studies
- Page 9 and 10: unprotected area (21.2cm vs 38.1cm)
- Page 11 and 12: species of snappers and grouper are
- Page 13 and 14: 6.1 What are the mechanisms involve
- Page 15: They concluded that reserves coveri
- Page 18 and 19: which there are decadal shifts in e
- Page 20 and 21: managed with reserves alone, while
- Page 22 and 23: However, in some areas fishers have
- Page 24 and 25: Literature citedAlder, J. (1996) Co
- Page 26 and 27: Fiske, S.J. (1992) Sociocultural as
- Page 28 and 29: Levine, A. (2002) Global partnershi
- Page 30 and 31: Roberts, C.M. and Hawkins, J.P. (20
- Page 32 and 33: Part 2: Case Studies32
- Page 34 and 35: Mean abundance of fish per count100
- Page 36 and 37: 2. Contrasting experiences from the
- Page 38 and 39: Russ and Alcala (1996) assessed cha
- Page 40 and 41: Key points• Very high reef fisher
- Page 42 and 43: 3. The effects of New Zealand marin
- Page 44 and 45: important species for recreational
- Page 46 and 47: Ballantine, W.J. (1991) Marine rese
- Page 48 and 49: experimental data obtained in the T
- Page 50 and 51: ReferencesAttwood, C.G. and Bennett
- Page 54 and 55: Rowe, S. and Feltham, G. (2000) Eas
- Page 56 and 57: fishers. At a meeting of fishers an
- Page 58 and 59: 7. Marine parks and other protected
- Page 60 and 61: 8. Community-based closed areas in
- Page 62 and 63: People are also seeing some species
- Page 64 and 65: 9. The Sambos Ecological Reserve, F
- Page 66 and 67: 10. The Nosy Atafana Marine Park, n
- Page 68 and 69: 11. Mombasa and Kisite Marine Parks
- Page 70 and 71: species that are mobile enough to d
- Page 72 and 73: Emerton and Tessema (2001) looked a
- Page 74 and 75: McClanahan, T.R. and Mangi, S. (200
- Page 76 and 77: Goodridge et al. (1997) collected b
- Page 78 and 79: offshore fishing with tourism, such
- Page 80 and 81: • The SMMA would have been improv
- Page 82 and 83: species decreased in the second fou
- Page 84 and 85: eserve in the form of increased cat
- Page 86 and 87: 15. Merritt Island National Wildlif
- Page 88 and 89: Thousand Islands, St Lucie canal an
- Page 90: is closed to scallop fishing. Ten y
Change language