Fish Stock Propagation

doi:10.1017/9781108186148.016

Chapter 13 - Fish Stock Propagation

from Assessment of the Cross-cutting Issues: Food Security and Food Safety

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 May 2017

Edited by

United Nations

Show author details

United Nations: Affiliation:
Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Office of Legal Affairs

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Definition

Fish stock propagation, more commonly known as fisheries enhancement, is a set of management approaches involving the use of aquaculture technologies to enhance or restore fisheries in natural ecosystems (Lorenzen, 2008). “Aquaculture technologies” include culture under controlled conditions and subsequent release of aquatic organisms, provision of artificial habitat, feeding, fertilization, and predator control. ”Fisheries” refers to the harvesting of aquatic organisms as a common pool resource, and “natural ecosystems” are ecosystems not primarily controlled by humans, whether truly natural or modified by human activity. This places enhancements in an intermediate position between capture fisheries and aquaculture in terms of technical and management control (Anderson, 2002).

The present chapter focuses primarily on enhancements involving releases of cultured organisms, the most common form of enhancements often described by terms such as ‘propagation’, ‘stock enhancement’, ‘sea ranching’ or ‘aquaculture-based enhancement’.

Enhancements in marine resource management

Enhancements are developed when fisheries management stakeholders or agencies take a proactive, interventionist approach towards achieving management objectives by employing aquaculture technologies instead of relying solely on the protection of natural resources and processes. Enhancement approaches may be used effectively or ineffectively in resource management. To understand how enhancement initiatives can give rise to such different outcomes, it is important to consider not only the technical intervention but the management context in which the initiative has arisen, including ecological and socioeconomic factors as well as the governance arrangements (Lorenzen, 2008).

Effective enhancements

Enhancement approaches may be employed towards different ends commonly referred to as sea ranching, stock enhancement and restocking (Bell et al. 2008). Sea ranching entails releasing cultured organisms to maintain stocks that do not recruit naturally in the focal ecosystem. This may involve stocks that once recruited naturally but no longer do so due to loss of critical habitat, or it may involve creation of fisheries for desired “new” species for which the focal system provides a habitat suitable for adult stages but not for spawning or for juveniles.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The First Global Integrated Marine Assessment
World Ocean Assessment I
, pp. 213 - 222
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108186148.016 [Opens in a new window]
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, J.L. (2002). Aquaculture and the future: why fisheries economists should care. Marine Resource Economics 17: 133-151.

Arnason, R. (2001). The economics of ocean ranching: experiences, outlook and theory. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 413. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Araki, H., Berejikian, B.A., Ford, M.J., and Blouin, M.S. (2008). Fitness of hatcheryreared salmonids in the wild. Evolutionary Applications 1: 342-355.Google Scholar

Bartley, D.M., Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., and Subasinghe, R.P. (2006). A risk analysis framework for aquatic animal health management in marine stock enhancement programmes. Fisheries Research 80: 28-36.Google Scholar

Baskett, M.L., and Waples, R.S. (2013). Evaluating alternative strategies for minimizing unintended fitness consequences of cultured individuals on wild populations. Conservation Biology 27: 83-94.Google Scholar

Bell, J.D., Leber, K.M., Blankenship, H.L., Loneragan, N.R., and Masuda, R. (2008). A new era for restocking, stock enhancement and sea ranching of coastal fisheries resources. Reviews in Fisheries Science 16: 1-9.Google Scholar

Blankenship, H.L. and Leber, K.M. (1995). A responsible approach to marine stock enhancement. American Fisheries Society Symposium 15: 67-175.Google Scholar

Born, A.F., Immink, A.J., and Bartley, D.M. (2004). Marine and coastal stocking: global status and information needs. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 429. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. pp. 1-18.

Brown, C., and Day, R.L. (2002). The future of enhancements: lessons for hatchery practice from conservation biology. Fish & Fisheries 3: 79-94.Google Scholar

Caddy, J.F., and Defeo, O. (2003). Enhancing or restoring the productivity of natural populations of shellfish and other marine invertebrate resources. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 448. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. pp. 159.

Costello, M.J. (2014). Long live Marine Reserves: A review of experiences and benefits. Biological Conservation,176: 289-296.Google Scholar

Crawford, S.S. (2001). Salmonine introductions to the Laurentain Great Lakes: an historical review and evaluation of ecological effects. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 132: 205 pp.Google Scholar

Drummond, K. (2004). The role of stock enhancement in the management framework for New Zealand's southern scallop fishery. In: Leber, K.M, Kitada, S., Blankenship, H.L., and Svåsand, T., editors. Stock Enhancement and Sea Ranching: Developments, Pitfalls and Opportunities. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. pp. 397-411.

FAO (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome: FAO. 41 p.

FAO (2008). Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries, No. 6, Inland fisheries, Suppl. 1 (Rehabilitation of inland waters for fisheries). Rome: FAO.

FAO (2010). Report of the Expert Consultation on the Development of Guidelines for the Ecolabelling of Fish and Fishery Products from Inland Capture Fisheries. Rome, 25–27 May 2010. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 943. Rome, FAO. 37p.

FAO (2011). Guidelines for the Ecolabelling of Fish and Fishery Products from Inland Capture Fisheries. Rome: FAO.

Hilborn, R. (1998). The economic performance of marine stock enhancement projects. Bulletin of Marine Science 62: 661–674.Google Scholar

Hilborn, R., and Eggers, D. (2000). A review of the hatchery programmes for pink salmon in Prince William Sound and Kodiak Island, Alaska. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 129: 333-350.Google Scholar

ICES (2005). ICES Code of Practice on the Introductions and Transfers of Marine Or- ganisms 2005. Copenhagen: International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. 30 pp.

Johnson, T. H., Lincoln, R., Graves, G. R. and Gibbons, R. G. (1997). Status of wild salmon and steelhead stocks in Washington State. In Stouder, D.J., Bisson, P.A. and Naiman, R. (editors). Pacific Salmon & their Ecosystems. New York: Springer. pp. 127-144.

Jonasson, J., Gjedre, B., and Gjedrem, T. (1997). Genetic parameters for return rate and body weight in sea-ranched Atlantic salmon. Aquaculture 154: 219-231.Google Scholar

Kline, P. A., & Flagg, T. A. (2014). Putting the red back in Redfish Lake, 20 years of progress toward saving the Pacific Northwest's most endangered salmon population. Fisheries 39: 488-500.Google Scholar

Klinger, D.H., Turnipseed, M., Anderson, J.L., Asche, F., Crowder, L.B., Guttormsen, A.G., Halpern, B.S., O'Connor, M.I., Sagarin, R., Selkoe, K.A., Shester, G.G., Smith, M.D., and Tyedmers, P. (2012). Moving beyond the fished or farmed dichotomy. Marine Policy 38: 369-374.Google Scholar

Knapp, G., Roheim, C. & Anderson, J. (2007). The Great Salmon Run: Competition Between Wild and Farmed Salmon. TRAFFIC North America. Washington D.C.: World Wildlife Fund

Leber, K.M. (2013). Marine fisheries enhancement: Coming of age in the new millennium. In: Christou, P., Savin, R., Costa-Pierce, B.A., Misztal, I., and Whitelaw, C.B.A., editors. Sustainable Food Production. New York, NY: Springer Science. pp. 1139-1157.

Leleu, K., Remy-Zephir, B., Grace, R., and Costello, M.J. (2012). Mapping habitat change after 30 years in a marine reserve shows how fishing can alter ecosystem structure. Biological Conservation 155: 193–201.Google Scholar

Le Vay, L., Carvalho, G.R., Quinitio, E.T., Lebata, J.H., Ut, V.N., and Fushimi, H. (2007). Quality of hatchery-reared juveniles for marine fisheries stock enhancement. Aquaculture 268: 169-180.Google Scholar

Lorenzen, K. (2005). Population dynamics and potential of fisheries stock enhancement: practical theory for assessment and policy analysis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 360: 171-189.Google Scholar

Lorenzen, K. (2008). Understanding and managing enhancement fisheries systems. Reviews in Fisheries Science 16: 10-23.Google Scholar

Lorenzen, K. (2014) Understanding and managing enhancements: why fisheries scientists should care. Journal of Fish Biology 85: 1807-1829.Google Scholar

Lorenzen, K., Leber, K.M., and Blankenship, H.L. (2010). Responsible approach to marine stock enhancement: an update. Reviews in Fisheries Science 18: 189-210.Google Scholar

Lorenzen, K., Beveridge, M.C.M., and Mangel, M. (2012). Cultured fish: integrative biology and management of domestication and interactions with wild fish. Biological Reviews 87: 639-660.Google Scholar

Lorenzen, K., Agnalt, A.L. Blankenship, H.L. Hines, A.H., Leber, L.M., Loneragan, N.R., and Taylor, M.D. (2013). Evolving context and maturing science: aquaculturebased enhancement and restoration enter the marine fisheries management toolbox. Reviews in Fisheries Science 21: 213-221.Google Scholar

Michael, J.H., Appleby, A., and Barr, J. (2009). Use of the AHA model in Pacific salmon recovery, hatchery, and fishery planning. American Fisheries Society Symposium 71: 455-464.Google Scholar

Miller, L.M., Kapuscinski, A.R. (2003). Genetic guidelines for hatchery supplementation programmes. In: Hallerman, E.M., editor. Population Genetics: Principles and Applications for Fisheries Scientists. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society. pp. 329-355.

Mobrand, L.E., Barr, J., Blankenship, L., Campton, D.E., Evelyn, T.T., Flagg, T.A., Mahnken, C.V.W, Seeb, L.W., Seidel, P.R., and Smoker, W.W. (2005). Hatchery reform in Washington State: principles and emerging issues. Fisheries 30: 11-23.Google Scholar

Naish, K.A., Taylor, J.E., Levin, P.S., Quinn, T.P., Winton, J.R., Huppert, D., and Hilborn, R. (2007). An evaluation of the effects of conservation and fishery enhancement hatcheries on wild populations of salmon. Advances in Marine Biology 53: 61- 194.Google Scholar

Nicholas, J.W. and Hankins, D.G. (1989) Chinook salmon populations in Oregon coastal river basins: description of life histories and assessment of recent trends in run strengths. Corvallis: Oregon State University Extension Service. 359 pp.

NMFS 2000. Viable Salmonid Populations and the Recovery of Evolutionarily Significant Units. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFSNWFSC- 42. Seattle: Northwest Fisheries Center.

ODFW (1998). Fish Propagation Annual Report for 1997. Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Olla, B.L., Davis, M.W., and Ryer, C.H. (1998). Understanding how the hatchery environment represses or promotes the development of behavioral survival skills. Bulletin of Marine Science 62: 531-550.Google Scholar

Paquet, P.J., Flagg, T., Appleby, A., Barr, J., Blankenship, L., Campton, D., Delarm, M., Evelyn, T., Fast, D., Gislason, J. Kline, P., Maynard, D., Mobrand, L., Nandor, G., Seidel, P., and Smith, S. (2011). Hatcheries, conservation, and sustainable fisheries— achieving multiple goals: results of the Hatchery Scientific Review Group's Columbia River basin review. Fisheries 36: 547-561.Google Scholar

Pinkerton, E. (1994). Economic and management benefits from the coordination of capture and culture fisheries: the case of Prince William Sound pink salmon. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 14: 262-277.Google Scholar

Smith, C. (2014). Hatcheries and harvest: meeting treaty obligations through artificial propagation. Fisheries 39: 541-542.Google Scholar

Tringali, M.D., Bert, T.M., Cross, F., Dodrill, J.W., Gregg, L.M., Halstead, W.G., Krause, R.A., Leber, K.M., Mesner, K., Porak, W., Roberts, D., Stout, R., and Yeager, D. (2007). Genetic Policy for the Release of Finfishes in Florida. Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute Publication Number IHR-2007-001. St. Petersburg: Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute.

Uki, N. (2006). Stock enhancement of the Japanese scallop Patinopecten yessoensis in Hokkaido. Fisheries Research 80: 62-66.Google Scholar

Utter, F., and Epifanio, J. (2002). Marine aquaculture: Genetic potentials and pitfalls. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 12: 59-77.Google Scholar

Walters, C.J., and Martell, S.J.D. (2004). Fisheries Ecology and Management. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 399 pp.

Williams, J.R., Hartill, B., Bian, R. and Williams, C.L. (2014). Review of the Southern scallop fishery (SCA 7). New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2014/07, 71 pp.Google Scholar

Zhang, C.I., Kim, S., Gunderson, D., Marasco, R., Lee, J.B., Park, H.W., and Lee, J.H. (2009). An ecosystem-based fisheries assessment approach for Korean fisheries. Fisheries Research 100: 26-41.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.