Use technology to communicate near real-time catch information to fishers to enable avoidance of unwanted catchicate near real-time catch information to fishers to enable avoidance of unwanted catch

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

Fleet communication systems in commercial fisheries report near real-time observations of hotspots of unwanted species to enable a fishery to operate in a coordinated way to reduce the capture of those species across the fleet (Gilman et al. 2006). They utilise various forms of technology for effective communication; from email via satellite-based vessel monitoring systems and other satellite-based systems, to radio and phone. A combination of these technologies may also be used for communication between vessels and to transmit information to a designated hub. Using technology to communicate near real-time catch information may reduce the catches of protected species and other unwanted fish by facilitating avoidance across cooperating vessels.

Gilman E.L., Dalzell P. & Martin S. (2006) Fleet communication to abate fisheries bycatch. Marine Policy, 30, 360–366.

Study locations

Key messages

One study examined the effects of using technology to communicate near real-time catch information to fishers to enable avoidance of unwanted catch on marine fish populations. The study was in the North Pacific and North Atlantic Oceans.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (1 STUDY)

Reduction of unwanted catch (1 study): A review in the North Pacific and North Atlantic Oceans reported that where technology was used to provide near real-time catch information to fishers there were reductions of unwanted catch or discards in two of three cases.

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 review in 2013 of three areas (bottom and midwater) in the North Pacific and North Atlantic Oceans (O'Keefe et al. 2014) reported that programmes that used technology to provide near real-time catch information to fishers resulted in reduced unwanted catch or discards in two of three cases compared to no use of real-time technology. For fish, fleet communication programmes were evaluated as having reduced unwanted catch in two of three cases: of shads Alosinae in the USA Northwest Atlantic herring Clupea harengus and mackerel Scomber scombrus trawl fisheries; of halibut (up to 30%) in the Alaska pelagic longline fishery; but not of mixed species in the yellowfin sole Limanda aspera fishery in USA northwest Pacific region (data not reported, see paper for references to original studies). In addition, in all three cases it was assessed that there were no or minimal negative effects of fleet communication of catches on the catch of non- and commercially targeted species and no or minimal spatial or temporal displacement of unwanted catch, however, only one case was deemed as economically viable for the fishery. The review summarized peer-reviewed evaluations (see paper for details of original studies) of unwanted catch mitigation techniques, including using technology (e.g. satellite and transmitted observer data) to communicate fishing catches among participating vessels.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
O'Keefe C.E., Cadrin S.X. & Stokesbury K.D.E. (2014) Evaluating effectiveness of time/area closures, quotas/caps, and fleet communications to reduce fisheries bycatch. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 71, 1286-1297.

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
Limit the number of fishing permits/licences to limit vessel or fisher numbers Action Link	Awaiting assessment	0	Synopsis Link
Introduce catch shares Action Link	Awaiting assessment	2	Synopsis Link
Limit the number or length of static fishing nets in an area Action Link	Awaiting assessment	0	Synopsis Link