Resilience Management for Conservation of Inland Recreational Fisheries

Abstract

readily divisible, such as rivers or great lakes, and in which spatial separation of competing objectives will be difficult. We end with our vision of how we believe these types of operationalized resilience approaches could improve or transform inland recreational fisheries management.

Frontiers in modelling social–ecological dynamics of recreational fisheries: A review and synthesis

“…Several ideas about complex adaptive systems that have been influential in the broader literature on resilience of social–ecological systems—including slow variables, destabilizing feedbacks, surprises and diversity—have not yet been explored extensively in the models of recreational fisheries SES that we reviewed (Arlinghaus et al., 2017; Biggs et al., 2015; Camp et al., 2020; Daedlow, Beckmann, et al., 2011; Daedlow et al., 2013).…”

Proposed approaches to systematic planning of research and monitoring to support a South African inland fisheries policy

“…Since 2016 the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries of South Africa has been developing the National Freshwater (Inland) Wild Capture Fisheries Policy following national and international sustainable development guidelines and the ecosystem approach to fisheries (Beard et al, 2011;Weyl et al, 2021). Policy development is supported by comprehensive social-ecological data collated in two Water Research Commission scoping studies (Britz et al, 2015;Tapela et al, 2015). Subsequently, in June 2018, the Southern African Society of Aquatic Scientists convened a workshop to identify priority research questions and knowledge requirements for the policy (Weyl et al, 2021).…”

“…Sustainable management in a national policy framework is dependent on data that can be readily supplied with simple methods at a reasonable cost (Bonar and Hubert, 2002;Walmsley, 2002). Currently the immediate knowledge requirements for policy development and implementation are impeded by a lack of recent or long-term data on fishery stocks and socioeconomic characteristics covering inland waterbodies across South Africa (McCafferty et al, 2012;Britz et al, 2015;Tapela et al, 2015;Weyl et al, 2021). Like inland fisheries worldwide, South African dams' ecological and socioeconomic characteristics vary spatiotemporally, which precludes blanket management and Fisheries-independent surveys (FIS) are widely regarded as a valuable element of fisheries management, given that the sampling method can be standardised for comparison across regions (Bonar and Hubert, 2002;McCafferty, 2012;Lorenzen et al, 2016).…”

“…Given the current unavailability of a fishery monitoring programme, a large-scale spatial analysis linking dams to environmental variation and human activity indicators could identify dams with common social-ecological characteristics to prioritise for intensive multidisciplinary assessments (Beard et al, 2011;Camp et al, 2020). This approach is reminiscent of a conservation planning assessment, where high-biodiversity areas that are threatened by human activities are revealed for priority conservation actions under various cost and budget scenarios (e.g.…”

“…Rivers-Moore et al, 2011 used GIS climate data and expert scores to identify river basins suitable for stocking with fishery species. However, there is a further need to quantify variation in human land use and climate, which may vary in their relative importance or have synergistic effects on fish populations (Dallas and Rivers-Moore, 2014;Camp et al, 2020;Jackson et al, 2020;Kao et al, 2020). An assessment of the characteristics of a large number of dams covering a large geographic area complements both random stratified and model-based survey design by evaluating the full range of variation in climatic and human-related covariates that need to be represented by selected sampling sites (Peel et al, 2012;Baker et al, 2019).…”