1. Introduction







plagues  overfishing  sediments/siltation  development of coastal areas Direct human pressure  deforestation  pollution  tourism . Degradation or habitat loss (mangroves and coral reefs)  coral bleaching Global change treat  rising levels of CO2  diseases. overexploitation:  indiscriminate harvesting  increased catching effort 2.FACTORS that caused the instability or collapsed of fisheries resources both in marine and freshwater environments: 1.









. there is no assurance that affected populations will rebound. Mass mortality  Management efforts to limit stock collapses have been implemented in many fisheries resources but even when harvesting pressure is removed or when habitat loss is reversed.FACTORS that caused the instability or collapsed of fisheries resources both in marine and freshwater environments: 3. Recruitment failure 4.

recruitment may fail and population recovery may be constrained by depensatory effects. .  As a result. natural recovery of the population may be delayed. and active intervention may e necessary to restore stocks to reproductive viability. When population density decreases below threshold level. rendering the population effectively sterile (Ray-Culp 2000).

or for conservation purposes. 2. substantial yields. Restocking – the release of cultured juveniles into wild populations(s) to restore severely depleted spawning biomass to a level where it can once again provide regular..Definitions: There are three basic types of fisheries enhancement (Bell et al. This may involve re-establishment of a species where it is locally extinct to rebuild a fishery. Stock enhancement – the release of cultured juveniles into wild population(s) to augment the natural supply of juveniles and optimize harvest by overcoming recruitment limitation . 008) 1.

3. Provide additional catch for commercial and recreational fisherman 2. Note: that the released animals are not expected to contribute to spawning biomass although this can occur when harvest exceeds size at first maturity or when not all the released animals are harvested. typically they seek to: 1. and take‘ operations. Sea ranching – the release of cultured juveniles into unenclosed marine and estuarine environments for harvest at a larger size in ‘put. grow. Although the goals of any given stocking program vary. Rebuild spawning stock biomass for the promotion of acceleration of recovery .

almost all the scallop harvest. In the 1870s started stock enhancement using hatchery-reared juveniles of salmonids. Ensure the survival of stock threatened by extinction 4.. the Japanese programs involves 80 species of marine fish. Mitigate losses due to anthropogenic effects Stock Enhancement History  Japan pioneering marine enhancement. mollusks. and up to 40% of the flounders (Kitada et al. 1992) . red sea bream. and flounders. The principal enhanced marine fisheries are yesso scallop. From then on. The practice benefits from the country’s extensive continental shelf but it is estimated that stocking for 90% of the chum salmon fishery. 50% of the Kuruma shrimp catch. Kuruma shrimp.3. up to 75% of red sea bream. and crustaceans.

For over 60 years many of million of cods. fisheries scientists in Iran raise and release about 2 million juveniles of indigenous sturgeon species. The first marine programs in the United States stated in the late 19th century. pollock.  Iran stock enhancement. and even lobster were released. all of which support fisheries harvested by licensed coastal cooperatives (Bartley and Leber. It is notable that the Japanese stock enhancement program co-evolved alongside large artificial reef and seaweed bed restoration programs. In addition. pike-perch. and Caspian trout. winter flounder. state hatcheries release juvenile bream. which support almost the entire nationally-controlled fishery and therefore the valuable caviar industry. 2004). kutum. haddock. Within its zone. and coastal hatcheries were built and operated successfully. .  US stock enhancement.

. France. Norway. and many island nations of Ocenia have active programs for restocking their indigenous populations of mollusks such as giant clams. Thailand. China Denmark. Iceland. Other countries active in marine stock enhancement include Australia. pearl oysters. Korea. trochus and green snails. UK. Spain.




1996).. Different approaches to transplanting are: (a) relocation of seed or juveniles from dense beds to depleted areas. Summerson and Luettich Jr. Transplantation is intended to maintain or improve depleted or overexploited populations.g. after which they are transplanted in a habitat suitable for species development (see e. in the hope of developing new self-sustaining populations (Peterson. most culture operations in the world obtain their seed by collecting natural sets. reliable and inexpensive supply of juveniles (seed). 1991).g. or in the case of “empty” habitats. (b) collection and culture of local and imported seeds from e. and (c) transplanting subadults or adults to supplement reproduction of natural populations. At present. . long-lines or seed collectors. Kristensen and Hoffmann. or even to extend distribution areas to new grounds in order to establish new fisheries.(SEEDING AND CULTIVATION) A primary requisite in any culture or farming operation is an abundant.

1989 and references therein for examples on sea-urchins). 1991). .  Alternatively. or adverse hydrographic conditions (see Tegner. Brand et al. juveniles of the New Zealand scallop Pecten novaezelandiae which settled on the outside of collector bags were redistributed to areas where natural settlement had been unsuccessful (Bull. mussels. There are many examples of the gathering of juveniles (oysters. clams) from one area and their transfer for on-growing to another (Quayle and Newkirk.  Kristensen and Hoffman (1991) transplanted seed of Mytilus edulis dredged from natural beds to 3000 m2 culture plots. 1994). 1989. juveniles can be transplanted on grounds that may be unsuitable for releasing very small spat because of predators.  For example.. in order to evaluate individual growth rates and production within the period of transplantation.

 The alternative to collection of natural sets of bivalves is to produce seed in a hatchery. bivalve hatcheries will undoubtedly become more important to culture operations as shellfish farming becomes more specialized and the need for seed increases.  Bivalve hatcheries have existed for over half a century and are wellestablished in several countries.  They are an integral part of many culture operations and the major or sole source of seed. In the future. .






AC: algal culture. JC: juvenile culture. ET: effluent tank. LC: larval culture. BR: bathroom. DL: dry laboratory. P: preparation area. GPA: general purpose area. QT: quarantine room. MR: machinery room . O: office.


Guidelines for Release Strategies (IUCN) 1.  An investigation of historical information about the loss and fate of of individuals from the release site. They should preferably be the same subspecies as those were extirpated. as well as molecular genetic studies  Detailed studies should be made of the status and biology of wild populations (if they exist) to determine the species’critical needs. This will include: . Feasibility study and background research  An assessment should e made of the taxonomic status of individuals to be released.

potential migatory areas . Description of habitat preferences  Intraspecific variation and adaptations to local ecological  Social behavior  Group composition  Home range size  Shelter and food requirements  Foraging and feeding behavior  Predators and diseases  If migratory.

 The build-up of the released population should be modeled under various sets of conditions. which would guide long term population management. . if any. in order to specify the optimal number and composition of individuals to be released per year and the numbers of years necessary to promote establishment of a viable population. that has filled the void created by the loss of the species concerned. should be determined. The species. an understanding of the effect of released species will have on the ecosystem is important for ascertaining the success of the released population.  A population and Habitat Viability Analysis will aid in identifying significant environmental and population variables and assessing their potential interactions.

 A conservation/benign introduction should e undertaken only as a last resort when no opportunities for re-introduction into the original site or range exist and only when a significant contribution to the conservation of the species will result. Previous Re-introductions  Thorough research into previous re-introductions of the same or similar species and wide-ranging contacts with persons having relevant expertise should be conducted prior to and while developing re-introduction protocol. long term protection (formal or otherwise) .2.  The release area should have assured. 3. Choice of release site and type  Site should be within the historic range of the species.

Evaluation of Release Site  Availability of suitable habitat: re-introductions should only take place where the habitat and landscape requirements of the species are satisfied.  Identification and elimination.  The area should have sufficient carrying capacity to sustain growth of the released population in the long run. of previous causes of decline:  disease  over-hunting and over-collection  pollution  poisoning  competition with or predation by introduced species  habitat loss  adverse effects of earlier research or management progammes . or reduction to a sufficient level.4. and likely to e sustained for the for-seeable future.

 If there is a choice of wild populations to supply founder stock for translocation. habitat preference) to the original sub-population. 5. Where the release site has undergone substantial degradation caused by human activity. a habitat restoration programme should be initiated before restocking is carried out. . the source population should ideally be closely related genetically to the original native stock and show similar ecological characteristics (morphology. Availability of Suitable Release Stock  It is desirable that source animals come from wild populations. physiology. behavior.

it must be from a population which has been soundly managed both demographically and genetically. and after it is guaranteed that these effects will not be negative. . Removal of individuals for restocking must not endanger the captive stock population or the wild source population.  Stock must be guaranteed available on a regular and predictable basis.  If captive or artificially propagated stock is to be used.  Individuals should only be removed from a wild population after the effects of translocation on the donor population have been assessed. meeting specifications of the project protocol.

negative remainder must be placed in strict quarantine for a suitable period before retest. Restocking should not be carried out merely because captive stocks exist. must be subjected to a thorough veterinary screening process before shipment from original source. . including stock that is a gift between governments. nor solely as a means of disposing of surplus stock.  Any animals found to be infected or which test positive for non-endemic or contagious pathogens with a potential impact on population levels. must be removed from the consignment.  Prospective release stock. and the uninfected.

especially if this is intercontinental. Since infection with serious disease can be acquired during shipment. great care must be taken to minimize this risk.  Stock must meet all health regulations prescribed by the veterinary authorities of the recipient country and adequate provisions must be made for quarantine if necessary. .

and demographics of wild fish stocks to address genetic hazards and to develop a preliminary genetic risk management strategy for the fish enhancement program. .GENETIC CONSIDERATION A responsible approach to marine stock enhancement requires that potential negative impacts upon the gene pools of wild populations be mitigated through the use of genetically sound breeding and release protocols (Blankenship and Leber 1995)  It is important to integrate population genetic principles and baseline information on genetic diversity. population structure.

Type I.Genetic Hazards Some level of genetic exchange must be anticipated between native and Hatchery stocks for marine stock enhancement programs. interbreed with conspecific or congeneric members of the recipient stocks. upon release. Genetic type I hazards are those that occur by way of hatcherymediated translocation of exogenous genes into native populations. The majority of genetic hazards may be grouped into three categories: 1. There are numerous ways in which cultured organisms can have a direct genetic impact on recipient stocks (Utter 1998). .  Hatchery progeny derived from breeders belonging to a genetically divergent stocks may.

Philipp et al 1993).. . The admixing of genetically discrete stocks can break down local adaptations through introgression of maladapted genes or by disruption of coadapted genomes. thereby affecting the fitness of the native stock NOTE:  Genetic hazards associated with intraspecies introgression may be minimized through judicious broodstock source selection (Hindar et al. 1991.

. and rearing.  When insufficient number of breeders are used. sampling error can cause large stochastic differences in allelic and genotypic frequencies (Taniguchi and Sugama. Genetic hazards in the second category may be broadly defined as those stemming from genetic changes in a hatchery population irrespective of the source of broodstock. that directly result from the processes of broodstock sampling.2.1990) or reduced levels of genetic variation in hatchery broods compared to the wild stock. Type II. breeding.  The number of breeders selected to found the hatchery stock represents a small percentage of the available breeders in the source population.

 Hatchery populations can also be genetically compromised if the initial broodstock sampling fails to capture a sufficient range of phenotypic variability available in the source population.

 Other types of genetic changes to hatchery populations include artificial selection and domestication and inbreeding depression. - artificial selection, domestication, stochastic allele frequency changes, and reduced levels of variation can occur in the F1 generation

3. Type III. The third category of genetic hazard is represented by a singular mechanism --- the possible genetic swamping of natural populations through successful enhancement efforts. This mechanism can lead to post-stocking alterations in the native gene pool even when hatchery population lack Type I and Type II generic risk factors.  Because of disproportionate contribution of hatchery-derived progeny to the gene pool of supplemented stock, an inevitable reduction occurs in the genetically “effective” population size of the admixed (enhanced) stock in the following generation (Ryman and Laikre 1991) - effective population size (Ne) represents the hypothetical abundance (number of individuals) in an ideal population (i.e. randomly mating, demographically constant, devoid of selection, migration and mutation)  Reductions in Ne if severe, can result in substantial allelic and genotypic frequency changes over time and, depending upon future population abundance, excessive loss of genetic diversity.

Addressing Genetic Consequences of Stock Enhancement Programs
Because there are potential genetic consequences when using stock enhancement as a strategy to restore populations, there are several fundamental guidelines for reducing potential risks (Allen and Hilish 2000): 1. Transplant wild broodstock animals collected from local sources.

 Animals that are collected in the immediate vicinity or purchased from fishermen working nearby can be transplanted at higher densities to improve the likelihood of reproductive (fertilization) success.

.  It may be necessary to collect wild fish & shellfish for artificial propagation if little natural settlement is occurring in local waters. Use locally collected broodstock for spawning in hatchery-based stock enhancement.2. would diminish the fishery stock in a given location).  Collecting broodstock from an area close to your project can reduce the loss of local genetic characteristics (Peter-Contesse and Peabody 2005).g. and when importing large numbers of animals from another locations would produce undesirable results (e.

.e getting close to Ne) and using pair-wise crosses can maximize the chances of maintaining genetic diversity in a broodstock enhancement program. 4.  Maximizing the number of animals spawned in the hatchery (i. Characterize the genetics of broodstock (for wild and hatchery-origin stocks) to aid in the tracking of progeny in the field.3. Use pair-wise crossings of animals in the hatchery to maximize ‘effective population size’ (Ne) and to minimize ‘genetic bottlenecking. but allows for ‘proof of restoration impact’ and also for monitoring of genetic change over time.  This is an expensive and time consuming process (both the genetic characterization and the identification of offspring in field samples).

.NOTE:  Beamount (2000) highlighted that potential risks and consequences of hybridization should be experimentally assessed before introductions of animals are carried out. and we should recognize that hatchery strains selected for fast growth in culture may not be adapted genetically or behaviorally for life in the wild. because hybridization is unpredictable and can lead to loss of genetic diversity or breakdown of co-adapted gene complexes. has been referred to as “genetic contamination”.  It is now widely recognized that hatchery introductions of genotypes differing from the local population through cross-breeding with the locally adapted stock can negatively affect adaptation of the local race to its particular environment.  The possible effects of restocking in diluting. a relatively small but locally well-adapted genotype. through mixing.

to maintain adequate effective population size.  the baseline can be used as a basis to determine an effective population or broodstock size to minimize the undesirable genetic effects of inbreeding.  this baseline evaluation should at least include geographical range of the particular stock targeted for enhancement. during. a comprehensive genetic baseline evaluation of the wild population should be developed to describe the level and distribution of genetic diversity. as well as proper use of sufficiently large and representative broodstock population and spawning protocols. A genetic resource management plan should encompass genetic monitoring prior to. and after enhancement. changes allele frequencies. .  the monitoring should take place over a long enough period to observe possible short term fluctuation or long-term change. and loss of alleles.  Prior to enhancement.

 Maximum acceptable levels of infection and parasites in the hatchery population are established based on the results of screening healthy wild populations.  All groups of fish pass a certified inspection for bacterial and viral infections and parasites prior to release.HEALTH MANAGEMENT: Disease and health guidelines are important to both the survival of the fish being released and the wild populations of the same species or other species which they interact. .

3. 4. 2.g. Examination of subsample of sandfish for external parasites prior to release.copepods) associated with sandfish harvested from quarantine tanks to avoid of other organisms to the wild. the following quarantine procedures prior to release of juveniles: 1. Removal of any algae or invertebrates (e. Placement of sandfish in tanks with hard surfaces. . flow-through seawater and aeration for 48h prior to release to evacuate intestines of sand.In sandfish in Solomon Islands. Removal of damaged or sick animals during the culture period.

losses of animals added for broodstock enhancement is a reasonable objective.  Minimizing rather than eliminating. Losses to predators can significantly reduce the effectiveness of stock enhancement programs and should be factored into restoration planning. from larvae to adult. Predation is part of the natural functioning of ecosystems. since even the largest shellfish are vulnerable to some level of predation.Coping with Predation (particularly on clams) All life stages of bivalve shellfish are susceptible to some degree of predation. Nonetheless it is often desirable to reduce these levels as naturally as possible initially in order to Successfully establish new shellfish reefs and beds:  Broodstock size. a minimum size of 40 mm is recommended as field and laboratory studies have shown that blue crabs can readily consume smaller oysters (Krantz and Chamberlain 1978). For oysters. Predation mortality tends to decrease with increasing shellfish size. .

. It may be possible to minimize predation by sitting the project away from sources of predators. it may be most advantageous to transplant broodstock immediately prior to spawning season as it is desirable to have individuals spawn successfully prior to significant predation. Generally.  Factors such as (1) predator abundance and activity (Bishop et al.. 2005). For example. (2) recruitment of other competing species (Osman etal. 1989).  Consider spatial arrangement. and they are abundant in marshes and sea grass beds. Time of Year. blue crabs are significant predator on juvenile oysters. . and (3) physiological stress of temperature extremes (high or low) are factors that may determine how far in advance of spawning season you might want to transplant broodstock.

 Exclusion devices require maintenance and likely require additional permits. time consuming and may not be consistent with restoration goals in the long term.  A more ecosystem based approach may be to sustain or increase the abundance of other associated species such as toadfish that prey on crabs and other bivalve predators. these methods involve exclusion devices (cages or nets) or predator removal regimens. Typically. Numerous studies have been undertaken to evaluate methods for controlling predators affecting aquaculture production. Predator Control. .  Direct predator control in the field is expensive.

 Increase the number of Animals Stocked.  Increasing the number of shellfish added to a sanctuary site may compensate for losses to predators assuming that the increased number of shellfish does not attract additional predators or cause density-dependent problems such as competition between shellfish for food and spaces. It may be possible to adjust the stocking density to compensate for the anticipated levels of predation. Placing a thin layer of shell or other material on the bottom. may reduce the ability of predators to find and consume shellfish added to a restoration site.  Use Substrate as a Predator Deterant. or even on top of the shellfish themselves. .

partially successful. . Without some form of assessment. one has no idea to what degree the enhancement was effective or.  Maximization of benefits cannot be realized without the proper monitoring and evaluation system. or a downright failure. which approaches were totally successful.MONITORING AND EVALUATION  One of the most critical components of any enhancement effort is the ability to quantify success or failure. more critically.

Identify Released Hatchery Fish and Assess Stocking Effects  For the performance of stocked and wild fish to be comparable, tags must not affect behavior, biological functions or survival. Three cheap, simple and effective methods of tagging used for marine species (Australia) are coded –wire tags, scale pattern analysis and chemical marling of otoliths:

a. Coded-wire tags (CWT) implanted in snout cartilage (Jefferts et al., (1963), the gut-cavity or various muscles (Ingram, 1989; Russell et al., 1991) using automatic injectors, are detected by portable or stationary X-ray or electronic metal detectors.

 Coded-wire tags were successfully used in the evaluation of coastal enhancement efforts of barramundi, Lates calcalifer. This project allowed insertion of up to 270 tags per hour, 93% retention after 2 months, with no decrease in tag retention after 394 days (Russell and Hales, 1992). b. Pattern on scales have many applications and stock discriminations. Several studies have shown that intercirculi distances on scales are dependent on growth rates which in turn can be manipulated in hatcheries through environmental factors that influence metabolic processes (feeding rates, water temperature, stress).  Scale pattern analysis was applied to the sand whiting Sillago cilliata and dusky flathead P. fuscus during the pilot stocking program in Quuensland. The technique allowed 75-89% correct classification of fish as stocked or wild.

c. Captive fish populations can be marked en-masse by immersions in chemicals that produce fluorescent marks on otoliths, including tetracycline, calcein, alizarin compounds, and strontium. Immersion in fluorescent chemicals can produce marks in fin-spines (Fig.2) which are ideal for sampling fisheries as marks can e detected without mutilation of the fish.  Oxytetracycline (OTC) is an antibiotic regularly used in hatchery practice, and has been successfully used to mark cod G.morhua in enhancement experiments in Norway, and hatchery-produced larval and juvenile striped bass Morone saxatilis with minimal mortality.

japonicus.50 g-1). Alizarin red S is a cheap alternative to alizarin complexone (AU$0. Alizarin complexone was successfully used to batch mark A. and marks have been retained for over two years. but it is comparatively expensive (AU$12 g-1). marking using alizarin complexone has no detectable effect on growth and mortality. Generally. Alizarin compounds have been used to mark otoliths in concentrations from 3 to 1000 mg L-1 . and marks were retained in stocked fish up to 120 days after marking. but has been shown to cause mortality in eggs and larvae at concentrations 100-400 mg L-1 . .

2. Scale bar represents 100 mm. Chemical marks such as alizarin complexone that are incorporated and maintained in the fin spine allow non-invasive detection of stocked fish.FIG. A ¼ ALC mark). Transverse anal fin spine section from a mulloway (Argyrosomus japonicus) 120 days after release (100 mm TL) showing an alizarin complexone mark when the fingerling was 100 mm (OE ¼ outer edge of fin spine. .

 A target density should ideally be estimated for seeding. Use control. unseeded sites for comparative purposes. Determine the initial number and size structure of seeded organisms.  In order to evaluate the success of seeding experiment. . together with the sites of placement. seeded animals should be microtagged. If possible mark or differentiate them from wild animals. thus permitting the identification of hatchery-reared animals during subsequent sampling and monitoring of commercial landings.The following steps considered when assessing success of any enhancement plan: 1. It should be based on the carrying capacity of the systems.

Estimate abundance variations through successive and periodic sampling. 3. Estimate survival and individual growth rates and compare them with those of the wild stock. Estimate the number of microtagged organisms that survived to the harvestable size (biological samplings) and the relative contribution of the enhancement operation to the global landings from the whole area (by sampling landings and markets). Overall growth and mortality patterns must be compared to those unseeded sites and also among seeded sites.2. . ANOVA procedures should be useful for this purpose.  Length-frequency analysis should be clearly the best way to provide estimates of growth and survival rates.

Tag recoveries are intuitively attractive because of low cost of acquiring information. if effective. Kitada et al. Estimation of total recoveries from fishers’ reports. can be detected from the concomitant increase in fishery yields reported by fishers’ logbooks. the proportion of recaptured animals tends to underestimate survival rate of seeds and the subsequent measure of effectiveness of the enhancement programs. However.(1992) reviewed 4 groups of methods for estimating the effectiveness of enhancement programs on the basis of tag recoveries. as follows: a. The success of stock enhancement programmes should be evaluated by field sampling (target fishing close to the release sites and by monitoring fishery landings. Stock enhancement. for several reasons: . Concerning this important issue.

 A substantial part of the catch escapes monitoring.  Landings away from the release site.  Estimates of abundance from are based on some marked to unmarked ratio. tend not to be monitored. and thus with low probability of recapture. usually lead to underestimates of abundance. . Low percentage of marked animals.

Prediction of recoveries by calculating yield per release based on the catch equation and simulation models. . Sampling surveys of commercial landings and fish markets.b. c. Proposed a two-stage sampling survey of markets of cooperative associations of fishers (primary sampling unit) and landing days (secondary sampling unit) to estimate the success of enhancement programs. This method could be an option for shellfish with short life spans and relatively stable recruitment rates. Correlation between annual number of fingerlings and the corresponding landing weight. d.  recruitment tends to be highly variable and not related to the amount of the parental stock but to show environmentally driven fluctuations in early life stages. Proper estimate of recovery could not always be obtained by these three groups of methods.

Employ for this purpose alternative hypotheses for parameter values to predict outcomes from alternative enhancement (e. i. from growth and survival rates to unit price and costs. Identify some possible bottlenecks that might have to be mitigated in order to reduce costs. Perform an economic analysis of the activity through the estimation of the net percent value of the intertemporal flow of benefits and costs. Use different discount rates to reflect dissimilar intertemporal preferences of society in resource use. Estimate uncertainty in the main inputs of the enhancement model.  The economic success of any restocking program must be assessed to evaluate its commercial viability. 5.g. . stocking densities) strategies in a decision analysis. Costs (variable and fixed) and economic revenues must be carefully estimated in order to have indicators as to the feasibility of the operation.4.e.

Try to reduce uncertainty in input variables by achieving as accurate biological and economic data as possible as a result of a rigorous experimental design. Develop methods for optimizing the monitoring system. . prices. but the 95% confidence interval ranged between unprofitable and profitable (-US$4000 to US$151000). mortality. (1992) was US$63000. For example. the profit from a stock enhancement program for a flatfish as estimated by Kitada et al. An enhancement program requires explicit specification of the information needed to achieve enhancement objectives. 6. and market demand) required to ensure that these needs aremet. growth.g. taking into account all the processes (e. Focus research on improving the performance of different enhancement strategies.  Post-stocking evaluation has been largely neglected in enhancement program.



The catch and the number of released juveniles of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) in Japan.Figure 2. . Redrawn from Kaeriyama (1996b).

Redrawn from Sakai (1992a.Figure 4. Note that the effect appears 3 yrs after the release. The catch and the number of released seedlings of scallop in Sarufutsu.b) and Sarufutsu Fisheries Cooperative (1996). Hokkaido. .

The catch and the number of released seedlings of scallop (Patinopecten yessoensis) in Japan. Catch data from MAFF (1996) and release data from JASFA (1995a).Figure 3. .

MANAGEMENT OF ENHANCEMENT: SOCIAL CONTEXT OF ENHANCEMENT:  The implementation of stock enhancement as a management strategy requires a review of who has access to the resource. it is not clear how the biological and economic benefits of enhancement can be properly realized. . and if this has not yet been done.  stock enhancement initiatives are a waste of time if not complemented by additional management strategies directed to sustaining the activity over time.  if the fishery is under an open access system. an allocation of right.

raft culture. if inshore fishery management programmes are to succeed.  this evolved from relaying native oysters. a land-based upweller system. tidal upweller and floating trays. to the use of hatchery-raised seed and several approaches to nursery culture: bottom culture. Local municipal control of of shellfisheries is a common phenomenon in the USA.  . The social context is the key to success for local fishery restoration. and has given rise to diversity of shellfish cultivation techniques. a municipal hatchery. and the most successful approach was found to be a landbased upweller system which provided1 million seed/year with 95 percent survival. the management priority was primarily on the high survival of spat rather fast growth.

 A further example.  the issues that adversely affected shellfish quality were nutrient runoff. with terms of reference to recommend changes in land-use practices. . and contamination associated with proliferation of private docks in the public tidelands. flushing rate of bays.deterioration of water quality and habitat forced the local town council to address the causes of environmental degradation through instituting a water-quality task force. of a locally driven socially driven programme which arose from concern about declining stocks of municipally managed species: . groundwater. as well as the effects of beach dynamics and the erosion control mechanisms installed.

 this can become an essential basis for consideration by the local and regional authorities of suitable areas where exclusive user rights can permit cost-effective stock restoration. . is to ensure the user rights are specified for specific subareas of the coastal area within a realistic map. One conclusion that leads to a more specific and appropriate use of coastal areas with minimal negative interaction. preferably within a GIS (Geographical Information System).

methods of restricting access to the enhanced stock must be introduced.  thus. together with some legislation to protect rights of fishing of those persons or organizations that invested in the enhancement program.OWNERSIP AND EXPLOITATION RIGHTS:  Fundamental to the form and viability of any manipulation program is the legal framework on which the ownership rights to the resource and its exploitation are based. .  enhancement of high value stocks under specified ownership regime will discourage unproductive investment (in time or money) by group of fishers which will tend to absorb an important share of the enhancement benefits.

or increase in. Size limits. It is recommended the establishment of a maximum legal size and retention of. Many towns issue permits for recreational and commercial harvests.  The maximum size restriction would protect larger. based on an adequate legislation that must recognize the concept of ownership and adequate use rights to protect investments.LEGISLATION AND REGULATORY TOOLS  Institutional changes are needed in support of enhancement schemes. which can provide a source of funding for fish and shellfish management. less economically valuable clams that produce eggs than smaller clams. Licensing/permits. . and attain objectives of the enhancement programs. the present minimum legal size in order to protect the spawning stock.

Seasonal restrictions. Management areas: harvest prohibited. The technique employed generally depends on the species Targeted. Limiting harvest will spread out the harvest and allow stocks to recover. Harvest method and gear restrictions.Harvest limit. Three closure strategies can be used based on animal population: . Harvest seasons are established by specifying the calendar days that shellfishing is allowed or not allowed. Shellfish and fish can be taken by a variety of methods and gear. These are restrictions placed on how many shellfish may be harvested daily. rotated closed areas.

. NOTE: To be optimally effective. Areas can be closed until small clams reach legal size. or both.1. limited catch. Areas can be closed until some prescribed optimum yield has been reached. 3. Closure can be based on some minimum population threshold level. 2. harvest must e limited during open period. selective closures should be combined with a program of limited entry. To maintain a minimum stock size in an area for successful recruitment.

 the higher the price that smaller clams bring is also a temptation to keep undersized clams.Enforcement.  Jamieson (1986) explained the rationale behind fishery regulations on invertebrates. it is agreed that poaching is a problem. theoretical. classifying them by management concern (Table 8). and administrative issues that require attention from fisheries scientists in a varied invetebrate fishery: . In enhancement programs. and by intensifying the prosecution of major offenders. which illustrates the many and varied practical.  Enforcement of hard clam management laws should be enhanced by increasing patrol capability and efficiency.


closed season/areas. co-management.  resource users must ideally be incorporated at various levels of management decision-making through active consultation within those bodies responsible for management.  the local community should be authorized to enforce and assure (through internal rules and self-policing strategies) that management tools (gear regulations. In this context.e.CO-MANAGEMENT:  High enforcement and policing costs attenuate efficient resource allocation over time. the organization of the participation of fishers in the management process is seen as the only way to promote compliance.  effective control could be achieved through the joint management by fishers and government. establish open and closed areas. establish the rules of access and enforce regulations. .  the local communities with approved shellfish conservation programmes are authorized to design and implement management plans which set harvest limits. harvest limits) are being respected. quotas. i.

 Castilla and Defeo (2001) concluded that co-management constitutes an effective institutional arrangement by which fishers and managers could interact to improve the quality of regulatory process and to sustain shellfish over time. . and were summarized by the authors as follows: 1. thus facilitating the application of co-management. The most important factors supporting this statement concern the development of enhancement programmes. A comparatively reduced scale of fishing operations and well-defined boundaries for each management sub-unit is required. the scale of the management unit should ideally be that corresponding to the range of activities of the local fishing community.  whenever if possible. The authors also highlighted the advantages of institutionalizing co-management procedures for stock-rebuilding purposes.

. Allocation of institutionalized co-ownership authority and responsibility to fishers in shellfish management decisions and actions concerning stock enhancement programmes needs to be explicit.  the assignment of fishing grounds to well-defined groups of fishers represents the recognition of the role of the local communities in conservation and management.  shellfish co-management needs to be institutionalized within a legal framework including well-defined fisher’s rights.2.  informal government recognition is not enough for allocation of TURFS or other fishing rights and ad hoc implementation of co-management systems.  participation of fishers will improve shellfish management: and the perception of ownership y fishes is the most important focal point determining co-management success. responsibilities and clear identification of the community role in the management process.

Communal ownership encourages cooperation among fishers and improves surveillance of regulations. operational and quota-based management measures are extremely difficult to enforce and are beyond the finances of management of agencies.3.  it has been widely documented that. . thus reducing the probability of occurrence of free-riders and illegal fishing. and the reductions of enforcement costs. at least in developing countries. and enforcement costs.  well-organized fisher communities take good care of their assigned fishing grounds by preventing illegal extractions. and educes information.  implementation of regulatory measures in co-management context provides and incentive to fishers to adhere to and get involved with enforcing regulations.  this has a major repercussions on yields. product quality (individual sizes far above the minimum legal size permitted) and economic returns  fishers play an outstanding role in the implementation and surveillance of regulations.

5.4. fishers and managers exponentially increases the quality and quantity of fishery information.  cooperation among scientists. .  ancient collective organizations often found in coastal fisheries include strong community rules and voluntary self-policing tools. Improvement of the quality and quantity of fishery information results from cooperation and improved information flow. with clear management connotations. Existence of community fishery traditions needs to be conserved. reducing the misreporting and uncertainties inherent to stock assessment.

fishers play an outstanding role in the implementation and surveillance of regulations. access rules and self-policing strategies among fishers. gear regulations).  the community may allocate extraction quotas.diminishing information and enforcement costs. improving the status of shellfisheries.6. allocation of TURFs ameliorates the weaknesses of enforcement regulations. individual sizes of the specimens and the economic benefits derived from the enhanced stocks.g. When accompanied by co-management. closures. . legal sizes. Allocation of TURFs has proved an effective tool where geographically restricted harvesting occurs.  in these cases. increasing abundance. whereas the government should retain the authority to modify the management plan by setting or modifying operational management measures (e.

rotation of grounds. natural restocking). as well as in enforcing regulations through their participation throughout the enhancement actiity. Co-management improves the results of enhancement experiments and the application of spatially explicit management tools (e.7.g.  participation of fishes is of critical importance in assuring unbiased reporting of results and implementation of an up to date information flow from fishers to scientists. scientists and managers promotes a better understanding of the biology of shellfish stocks and leads to adequate administration of wild resources ad/or habitats for conservation and management. reproductive refugia. .  the joint venture into enhancement experiments between fishers.


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful