Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T02:46:06.354Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

22 - Setting management goals using information from predators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2009

C. J. Camphuysen
By
A. J. Constable
Edited by
I. L. Boyd  and
S. Wanless
C. J. Camphuysen
Affiliation:
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
A. J. Constable
Affiliation:
Australian Antarctic Division, Australian Department of Environment and Heritage, 203 Channel Highway, Kingston, Tasmania 7050, Australia
I. L. Boyd
Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
S. Wanless
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK
Get access

Summary

This chapter examines how goals and reference points might be set for higher trophic levels – such as marine mammals, birds and fish. It briefly explores the general characteristics of objectives for higher trophic levels within the context of ecosystem-based management, noting that the emphasis for managing the effects of human activities on higher trophic levels is biased towards fisheries-based approaches rather than approaches that take into account the maintenance of ecosystem structure and function. Following this, the precautionary approach developed in the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) for taking account of higher trophic levels in setting catch limits for target prey species is described. The last section considers indicators of the status of predators with respect to establishing target and limit/threshold reference points that can be used directly for making decisions. These indicators include univariate indices summarizing many multivariate parameters from predators, known as composite standardized indices, as well as an index of predator productivity directly related to lower trophic species affected by human activities.

Ecosystem-based management encapsulates notions of conservation and wise use of ecosystems (Mangel et al. 1996). Managers are now expected (a) to maintain ecosystem properties and, in some cases, (b) to restore ecosystems when they are judged to be impacted (caused to be altered), directly or indirectly, by human activities. With appropriate scientific support, they need to define how ecosystems might be judged to be impacted and to determine mechanisms for reducing or eliminating such impacts.

Type
Chapter
Information
Top Predators in Marine Ecosystems
Their Role in Monitoring and Management
 , pp. 324 - 346
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnew, D. J. (1997). The CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program. Antarc. Sci., 9, 235–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrewartha, H. G. & Birch, L. C. (1984). The Ecological Web: More on the Distribution and Abundance of Animals. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Beddington, J. R. & Cooke, J. G. (1983). The Potential Yield of Fish Stocks. Fisheries Technical Paper 242. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Beddington, J. R. & de la Mare, W. K. (1985). Marine mammal–fishery interactions: modelling and the Southern Ocean. In Marine Mammals and Fisheries, eds. Beddington, J. R., Beverton, R. J. H. & Lavigne, D. M.. London: George Allen & Unwin, pp. 94 –105.Google Scholar
Beddington, J. R. & May, R. M. (1982). The harvesting of interacting species in a natural ecosystem. Sci. Am., 247, 42–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beverton, R. H. J. & Holt, S. J. (1957). On the Dynamics of Exploited Fish Populations. London:HMSO.Google Scholar
Boyd, I. L. (2002). Integrated environment–prey interactions off South Georgia: implications for management of fisheries. Aquat. Conserv., 12, 119–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, I. L. & Murray, A. W. A. (2001). Monitoring a marine ecosystem using responses of upper trophic level predators. J. Anim. Ecol., 70, 747–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterworth, D. S., Gluckman, G. R., Thomson, R. B. & Chalis, S. (1994). Further computations of the consequences of setting the annual krill catch limit to a fixed fraction of the estimate of krill biomass from a survey. CCAMLR Sci., 1, 81–106.Google Scholar
Chesson, P. L. & Case, T. J. (1986). Overview. Nonequilibrium community theories: chance, variability, history, and coexistence. In Community Ecology, eds. Diamond, J. & Case, T. J.. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 229–39.Google Scholar
Constable, A. J. (2001). The ecosystem approach to managing fisheries: achieving conservation objectives for predators of fished species. CCAMLR Sci., 8, 37–64.Google Scholar
Constable, A. J. (2002). CCAMLR ecosystem monitoring and management: future work. CCAMLR Sci., 9, 233–53.Google Scholar
Constable, A. J. (2004). Managing fisheries effects on marine food webs in Antarctica: trade-offs among harvest strategies, monitoring, and assessment in achieving conservation objectives. Bull. Mar. Sci., 74, 583–605.Google Scholar
Constable, A. J. & Murphy, E. (2003). Annex 4, Attachment 3: using predator response curves to decide on the status of krill availability: updating the definition of anomalies in predator condition – preliminary analyses. In SC-CAMLR, Report of the Twenty-second Meeting of the Scientific Committee for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. Hobart, Australia: CCAMLR, pp. 277–82.Google Scholar
Constable, A. J., de la Mare, W. K., Agnew, D. J., Everson, I. & Miller, D. (2000). Managing fisheries to conserve the Antarctic marine ecosystem: practical implementation of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57, 778–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, J. G. (1999). Improvement of fishery-management advice through simulation testing of harvest algorithms. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 56, 797–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mare, W. K. (1986). Simulation Studies on Management Procedures. IWC SC/37/O 14. Cambridge, UK: International Whaling Commission.Google Scholar
de la Mare, W. K. (1996). Some recent developments in the management of marine living resources. In Frontiers of Population Ecology, eds. Floyd, R. B., Sheppard, A. W. & De, P. J. Barro. Melbourne, Australia: CSIRO Publishing, pp. 599–616.Google Scholar
Mare, W. K. (1998). Tidier fisheries management requires a new MOP (management- oriented paradigm). Rev. Fish Biol. Fish., 8, 349–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mare, W. K. & Constable, A. J. (2000). Utilising data from ecosystem monitoring for managing fisheries: development of statistical summaries of indices arising from the CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Program. CCAMLR Sci., 7, 101–17.Google Scholar
Downes, B. J., Barmuta, L. A., Fairweather, P. G.et al. (2002). Monitoring Ecological Impacts: Concepts and Practice in Flowing Waters. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everson, I. (1984). Marine interactions. In Antarctic Ecology, ed. Laws, R. M.. London: Academic Press, pp. 491–532.Google Scholar
Fairweather, P. G. (1990). Is predation capable of interacting with other community processes on rocky reefs?Aust. J. Ecol., 15, 453–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (1996). Precautionary Approach to Fisheries. Part 1: Report of the Technical Consultation. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 350. Rome, Italy: FAO.
Holt, S. J. & Talbot, L. M. (1978). New principles for the conservation of wild living resources. Wildl. Mon., 59, 1–33.Google Scholar
Larkin, P. A. (1996). Concepts and issues in marine ecosystem management. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish., 6, 139–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludwig, D., Hilborn, R. & Walters, C. (1993). Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and conservation: lessons from history. Science, 260, 17–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mangel, M., Talbot, L. M., Meffe, G. K.et al. (1996). Principles for the conservation of wild living resources. Ecol. Applic., 6, 338–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, R. M., Beddington, J. R., Clark, C. W., Holt, S. J. & Laws, R. M. (1979). Management of multispecies fisheries. Science, 205, 267–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, E. J., Morris, D. J., Watkins, J. L. & Priddle, J. (1988). Scales of interaction between Antarctic krill and the environment. In Antarctic Ocean and Resources Variability, ed. Sahrhage, D.. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 120–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, R. T. (1980). Food webs: linkage, interaction strength and community infrastructure. J. Anim. Ecol., 49, 667–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R. & Torres, T. Jr (1998). Fishing down marine food webs. Science, 279, 860–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petraitis, P. S., Latham, R. E. & Niesenbaum, R. A. (1989). The maintenance of species diversity by disturbance. Q. Rev. Biol., 64, 393–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimm, S. L. & Gilpin, M. E. (1984). Theoretical issues in conservation biology. In Perspectives in Ecological Theory, eds. Roughgarden, J., May, R. M. & Levin, S. A.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 287–305.Google Scholar
Quinn, T.-I. & Deriso, R. (1999). Quantitative Fish Dynamics. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sainsbury, K. J., Punt, A. E. & Smith, A. D. M. (2000). Design of operational management strategies for achieving fishery ecosystem objectives. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57, 731–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. D. M. (1993). Risks of over- and under-fishing new resources. In Risk Evaluation and Biological Reference Points for Fisheries Management, eds. Smith, S. J., Hunt, J. J. & Rivard, D.. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: National Research Council for Canada, pp. 261–7.Google Scholar
Steele, J. H. (1998). Regime shifts in marine ecosystems. Ecol. Applic., 8, S33–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart-Oaten, A., Bence, J. R. & Osenberg, C. W. (1992). Assessing effects of unreplicated perturbations: no simple solutions. Ecology, 73, 1396–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, R. B., Butterworth, D. S., Boyd, I. L. & Croxall, J. P. (2000). Modeling the consequences of Antarctic krill harvesting on Antarctic fur seals. Ecol. Applic., 10, 1806–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilman, D. (1999). The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: a search for general principles. Ecology, 80, 1455–74.Google Scholar
Trites, A. W., Livingston, P., Vasconcellos, M. C.et al. (1999). Ecosystem Change and the Decline of Marine Mammals in the Eastern Bering Sea: Testing the Ecosystem Shift and Commercial Whaling Hypotheses. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 7. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Fisheries Centre.Google Scholar
Underwood, A. J. (1989). The analysis of stress in natural populations. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 37, 51–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underwood, A. J. (1990). Experiments in ecology and management: their logics, functions and interpretations. Aust. J. Ecol., 15, 365–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, C. (1986). Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. & Peter, F. M. (1988). Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Yodzis, P. (1994). Predator–prey theory and management of multispecies fisheries. Ecol. Applic., 4, 51–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yodzis, P. (1996). Food webs and perturbation experiments: theory and practice. In Food Webs Integration of Patterns and Dynamics, eds. G. A. Polis & K. O. Winemiller. New York: Chapman and Hall, pp. 192–200.Google Scholar
Yodzis, P. (2000). Diffuse effects in food webs. Ecology, 81, 261–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×