Group ​4​.

Periodic harvesting closures ​have been suggested to produce

conservation benefits and be an effective artisanal fisheries management tools in
Melanesia.
For briefing the Minister of Environment - ​should seasonal closures be part of the
typical Marine Park zoning scheme?

'Pressure' (or threat) refers to human activities that affect the environment. 'State' (or
condition) refers to the quality of the environment and the functioning of important
environmental processes. 'Response' (or actions) refers to initiatives that have been made to
address pressures on the environment or to improve or maintain its condition.

From <​http://www.epa.wa.gov.au/state-environment-reporting​>

Can start off with a recommendation / briefing proposal, after which proceeding to why you
think that it should be done. Know your minister! Dawson enjoys fishing recreational fishing
in the Pilbara, could propose periodic harvesting closures in the Pilbara.

Spikes in catch rate through closures (melanesia example): Appease recreational fishers
through the high catch rates. No real conservation benefits (according to Tim), very
superficial benefits. Temporary increase in stock/biomass inside Closed areas but the stock
is quickly exploited once the fishery is opened again i.e. no conservation benefits.

So, as we support periodical harvesting closures, we recommend to the minister of

environment to conduct fishing festival at the end of farming season in Pilbara so that
farmers and their family can have fun with fishing activity. Another benefit of the event is it
Will entertain disabilities people including people with mental health issues

Objective advice:
Condition-Pressure-Response​​ -
Condition​​ = ​Abigail

Pressure​​ =
Response​​ = periodic harvesting closure
Conservation benefits​ -
Post-harvest protection benefits to targeted fish abundance, with a 14% greater abundance
when compared with open areas.
Periodic harvesting closures can be sustainable where total effort and catch is lower that if
the area is continuously fished.

Fisheries benefits​ - J​ essica

Approx. 45 seconds aloud.
.​Periodically harvested closures (PHCs) are one of the most common forms of
fisheries management strategy in Indo Pacific, demonstrating multiple objectives,
including sustaining fish stocks and increasing catch efficiency to support small-scale
fisheries, provide for socioeconomic and cultural needs and conserving biodiversity.
.Periodically closing a fishery is typically used to protect specific areas of importance for fish
such as spawning sites and nurseries
PHCs have opening regimes that can range from mostly closed to mostly open
.They may also simply prohibit certain fishing efforts, such as trawling whilst allowing other
types of fishing, such as longlining, to continue in an effort to protect these habitats

.In Melanesia, increased abundance by up to 48% and greater biomass of target species by
up to 92%.
.Additionally, by reducing the fishes’ exposure to humans and fishing, the fish become less
wary and are therefore easier to catch
.This in all, leads to increased catch rates for the artisanal and recreational fishers

Social/public opinion​​: ​Husen

Public believes that since short term/seasonal closures only benefit short-lived, faster
growing species, the net ‘conservation’ benefit from seasonal closures isn’t worth the cost of
foregone catch
Public won’t want a long closure so we recommend closure for a lesser time-frame, seasonal
closure ideal.

Economics​​: ​Sumer: Melanesia paper by Jordan, economic impacts of periodic harvest

enclosures. PHC’s false sense of security.
Economic benefits from increased landings outweigh the costs of catch foregone (Oliver, et.
al, 2015) ​https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471298/pdf/pone.0129075.pdf

Conclusion:
We should implement seasonal closures...

References

Smith, K., Brown, J., Lewis, P., Dowling, C., Howard, A., Lenanton, R., and Molony, B. 2013.
Status of nearshore finfish stocks in south-western Western Australia Part 1: Australian
herring. Fisheries Research Report No. 246. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia.
200pp.

E-Lectures divvied for the Quiz:

Husen: 1, 2, 3
Abigail: 4, 5, 6
Sumer: 7, 8, 9
Jessica: 10, 11
Notes from Jess’ part
Only about benefits to recreational fishers, no mention of fish population/catch. It’s not the
minister of Environment’s job to know/care …
Fishery closures, rather than no-take marine parks, are usually applied to protect special
areas for particular fish, such as spawning sites or nursery areas. They are also used to
protect habitats, such as in the case of trawl closures, which allow the use of other gear such
as longlines in the same location.
(​https://theconversation.com/marine-parks-and-fishery-management-whats-the-best-way-to-
protect-fish-66274​).
Interactions between habitat and management zonation were important when considering
total abundance of fish (Wilson et al, 2012)
In Melanesia, increased abundance by up to 48% and greater biomass of target species by
up to 92%.
Harvest benefits in targeted abundance increased by 6% per km2 of closure and 11% for
each year since the previous harvest. Leaving out
This, with decreased fish wariness (brought on by limited human/fishing exposure) leads to
increased catch efficiency.
Therefore, short term benefits supporting recreational or artisanal fishers.