Cease or prohibit line fishing

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Commercial line fishing is catching fish using the relatively simple equipment of a cord (fishing line) attached to a hook. Commercial lines vary in construction material and thickness and range in configuration from a single line with several hooks to hundreds or even thousands of hooks attached to one main line (longline) in groups via shorter lines. Hooks are baited with animal or synthetic substances to attract the fish and can be deployed anywhere in the water column or on the seabed depending on the habit of the species being targeted. Although a less destructive fishing technique compared to some others, line fishing can lead to over-fishing, particularly in shallow coastal waters where intensity can be high. In addition, longlines can be responsible for high levels of unwanted fish catch as well as incidentally capturing other marine animals and birds. The control or elimination of line fishing in an area may help reduce fishing pressure and unwanted catch and mitigates the effects of removal of target species and sizes.

Study locations

Key messages

One study examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting line fishing in an area on marine fish populations. The study was in the Indian Ocean (South Africa).

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in the Indian Ocean found that prohibiting offshore line fishing and all other boat-based fishing in a zone of a marine protected area resulted in higher abundances of four of four fish species over-exploited by line fishing, compared to two zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted.
Condition (1 study): One site comparison study in the Indian Ocean found that in a zone of a marine protected area closed to offshore line fishing and all other boat-based fishing for two to seven years, four of four fish species over-exploited by line fishing were larger, compared to two zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A site comparison study in 2006–2011 of four coral reef sites in a marine protected area in the Indian Ocean, South Africa (Maggs et al. 2013) found that two to seven years after closing a zone to offshore line fishing and all other vessel-based fishing (including spearfishing), there was a higher abundance and larger size of four coral reef fish species, compared to two adjacent zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted. For all years, individual catch rates of four of four species were higher inside the zone closed to line fishing and other vessel-based fishing than in the zone permitting offshore line and spear fishing: slinger Chrysoblephus puniceus (3.1 vs 0.8 fish/angler/h), Scotsman Polysteganus praeorbitalis (1.2 vs 0.3 fish/angler/h), poenskop Cymatoceps nasutus (0.4 vs 0.2 fish/angler/h) and yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus (0.6 vs 0.1 fish/angler/h); and average lengths were higher (slinger: 293 vs 240, Scotsman: 415 vs 359, poenskop: 417 vs 380, rockcod: 495 vs 435 mm). The Pondoland Marine Protected Area (800 km²) was designated in 2004 and has a central ‘no-take area’ (400 km²) closed to all offshore (vessel based) exploitation and two adjacent controlled fishing areas where offshore line fishing and spearfishing are permitted. No commercial fishing, such as trawling or long-lining, is permitted anywhere in the protected area. From April 2006 to June 2011, quarterly research angling was conducted at two sites in the no-take zone and two in the nearby exploited zone (6 h angling in each zone) at 10–30 m depth. Data were analysed for four species depleted by line fishing.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Maggs J.Q., Mann B.Q. & Cowley P.D. (2013) Contribution of a large no-take zone to the management of vulnerable reef fishes in the south-west Indian Ocean. Fisheries Research, 144, 38-47.

Please cite as:

Taylor, N., Clarke, L.J., Alliji, K., Barrett, C., McIntyre, R., Smith, R.K., and Sutherland, W.J. (2021) Marine Fish Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marine Fish Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Control human activity in a marine protected area with a zonation system of restrictions Action Link	Awaiting assessment	8	Synopsis Link
Cease or prohibit mobile midwater (pelagic) fishing gears Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Establish territorial fishing use rights Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link