Transcript Sustainable Harvests or Empty Vessels? An Exploration of

Dr. Alida Bundy
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Bedford Institute of Oceanography
HRM, Nova Scotia, Canada
Dr. Anthony Davis
Department of Sociology and Social
Anthropology
Mount Saint Vincent University
HRM, Nova Scotia, Canada
Introduction
 Resource management failures
 Alternative approaches
 Among these, ecosystem based management (EBM)
 EBM initiatives to identify ecologically and biologically
significant areas (EBSAs)

In Canada, 3 step process, science led*
 Three main criteria designated as defining EBSAs* – (1)
uniqueness, (2) aggregation, (3) fitness consequences,
 And two secondary criteria - (4) resilience, and (5) naturalness
*DFO, 2004. Identification of Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas. DFO Can.
Sci. Advis. Sec. Ecosystem Status Rep. 2004/006.
Introduction
 Resource user and aboriginal ‘experential knowledge’
specified as potentially important contributor to
identifying EBSAs, particularly in settings where sciencebased research is insufficient
 Here we explore the potentials for marine harvester local
ecological knowledge (LEK) to contribute to defining
EBSAs
 Focus here on potential LEK contributions to
understanding EBSA criteria uniqueness, aggregation,
fitness consequences
EBSA Criteria (DFO 2004)
 Each of these is a continuum and can refer to species,




communities of physical features of an area.
Uniqueness - areas whose characteristics are “unique, rare,
distinct, and for which alternatives do not exist”
Aggregation - areas where species collect for part of the year,
for a specific life-history function (eg spawning)
Fitness consequences -features that are important to the
survival of one or more species. Related to life history – eg., an
area which is the only feeding area for a species has important
fitness consequences for that species.
In practice, potential EBSAs are scored on all 3 criteria, then
ranked, based on a prioritisation process (DFO 2007/010).
DFO 2007. Guidance Document on Identifying Conservation Priorities and Phrasing
Conservation Objectives for Large Ocean Management Areas. DFO Can. Sci. Advis.
Sec. Ecosystem Status Rep. 2007/010.
What is Local Ecological Knowledge?
While inconsistent and debated within the research
literature (cf. Davis and Ruddle 2010), for our purposes...
 (1) LEK is a shared system of knowledge about the
environment and ecosystem relationships that is
 (2) developed through direct experience within a specific
physical setting and
 (3) is transmitted inter-generationally
 As a system of knowledge LEK must be demonstrably
shared among a community or group of marine
harvesters
Research Design
 Two independent studies employing a similar
methodology – Chedebucto Bay and Scotia-Fundy on
Atlantic coast Nova Scotia
 Two step design
 Ist step – representative survey of marine harvesters to
solicit peer recommendations of harvesters most
knowledgeable about the local fishing grounds
 2nd step – interview those receiving the most peer
recommendations, i.e., each site’s ‘local ecological
knowledge experts’
The Study Site – Atlantic Nova Scotia
CANADA
A = Chedebucto Bay
1 = Cape North
2 = Mira Bay/
Gabarus Bay
3 = St Peters Bay
4 = Country Island
5 = Ship Harbour/
Chezzetcook Bay
6 = St. Margarets
Bay
7 = La Have
8 = Port Mouton
9 = Port La Tour
Social Context – Step 1
Key Social and Marine Harvesting Attributes
Background
Attributes
Fulltime
Licenses
Cape Breton –
Eastern Shore
(2006)
(N=153)
%
82.4
South Shore
Chedebucto Bay
(2006)
(2001)
(N=160)
%
81.9
(N=158)
%
90.6
69.3
65.4
72.5
61.4
73.1
64.4
67.5
61.3
93.1
78.6
91.2
68.6
Std. D
11.8
11.9
Mean Std. D
44
10.9
27.8 12.9
Mean Std. D
50
12.2
27.2 13.4
10.2
22.9 11.5
19.4
Lobster
Herring
Mackerel
Groundfish
Mean
43
Age
Years Fishing 26.6
Weeks Fishing
(Previous Year)
16.9
11.0
Likelihood of re-entering fishing if they had
their life to live over
Response
Category
Cape Breton –
Eastern Shore (2006)
South
Shore
Chedebucto
Bay
Atlantic Coast
Captains
(1990)
(2006)
(2001)
(N=153)
(N=160)
(N=158)
(N=126)
%
%
%
%
Definitely
49.7
39.4
46.8
58.4
Probably
34.1
24.4
34.8
31.2
Probably Not
11.1
20.0
10.1
7.2
Definitely Not
5.2
16.3
8.2
3.2
Data affirms similarities among marine harvesters
Research Design – Step 2
 LEK experts were interviewed until information saturation
was achieved
 11 interviews completed around Chedebucto Bay
 54 interviews completed throughout Scotia-Fundy
This Study:
Controlled comparison of two sites
 Chedebutco Bay (11 interviews)
 La Have (6 interviews)
Chedebucto Bay
Petit-de-Gras
Queensport
- spawning
- seasonality
- migration
Canso
lobster
mackerel
+ herring
cod
La Have
lobster
crabs
seabirds
seals
herring
mackerel
shellfish
mix of less than
halibut
tuna
small fish
Mix of more
La Havre/Ironbound
Off Medway
Harbour
Observations
Criteria
Area
Chedebucto
La Have
Uniqueness
Aggregation
Life History
Consequences
Queensport
X
X
Petit de
Gras
X
Y
Y
Canso
X
X
La Have
Islands
Y
Y
Y
Ironbound
Y
Y
Y
Y
X
Y
Y
X
Site
Medway
Harbour
Off
Medway
X
X
X
Observations – Chedebucto
Site
Uniqueness
Aggregation
Species
Reason
Queensport
Herring
Mackerel
Lobster
Lobster
Cod
Associated species
Capelin
Spawning
Migration
Spawning
Migration
Spawning
Petit de Gras
Lobster
Spawning
Migration
Spawning
Spawning
Migration
Spawning
Migration
Cod
Mackerel
Herring
Associated species
Haddock, Dogfish,
“bait”
Life History
Consequences
 “The fish come in there to spawn at that time of the year
and that’s what we were concentrating on. They were
staying on the mud bottom, sand bottom and stuff like
that”
 "[Lobster spawn] floats on top of the water…Certain time
of day before it sinks again…our spawn doesn’t stay on
our ground because…the tide…"
Observations – La Have
Site
Ironbound
Uniqueness
“Ironbound
bank is a
pretty
unique one
for the
inshore”
“Lobster, all
type of
groundfish,
herring,
mackerel,
tuna also
this area
here......”
Aggregation
Species
Reason
Tuna
Mackerel
Lobster
Feeding
Spawning, nursery
Spawning, nursery,
migration
Spawning, nursery
Spawning, nursery
Spawning, nursery,
migration
Cod
Pollock
Herring
Associated species
Ducks, seagulls,
comorants, guillemots,
seals
Life History
Consequences
Observations – La Have
Site
Medway
Harbour
Uniqueness
High
diversity:
“All of it
because I
make my
living off of it
so, the whole
area. There is
parts in all of
it that unique
to what I do,
need to do or
like to see....”
Aggregation
Species
Reason
Lobster
Cod
Mackerel
Sand crab
Green crab
Rock crab
Soft shell clam
Comorants
Seagulls
Spawning, nursery
Nursery
Nursery
Spawning
Additional species
Eider ducks, sea ducks,
Life History
Consequences
Discussion re: LEK and EBSA
 Observations derived from livelihood needs
 Limitation and strength (focussed attention)
 Spatially based and local
 LEK observations intersect with EBSA criteria to some degree:
 Most readily applicable to aggregation criteria as seen across all
sites
 Some observations may address uniqueness

Reasons not usually specific or ecological
 No observations specifically related to life history consequences
 Controlled comparison demonstrates high degree of similarity
across sites
Implications
 There are no areas which appear to be particularly
significant on the 3 EBSA criteria
 Scale issues
 Information received is particular to the site
 Creates gaps in spatial coverage
 Do they matter?
 Useful for identifying sites for more systematic research
 Useful for identifying representative areas
 Are the EBSA criteria, as defined by DFO, the appropriate
tool for accessing, analysing and incorporating LEK in EBM
approaches?
Lobster High Abundance
Implications
 There are no areas which appear to be particularly
significant on the 3 EBSA criteria
 Scale issues
 Information received is particular to the site
 Creates gaps in spatial coverage
 Do they matter?
 Useful for identifying sites for more systematic research
 Useful for identifying representative areas
 Are the EBSA criteria, as defined by DFO, the appropriate
tool for accessing, analysing and incorporating LEK in EBM
approaches?
Next Steps
 Extend analysis to other sites
 Explore analysis at Atlantic coast scale
 Uniqueness
 Life history consequences
 Identify potential EBSAs based on LEK observations
related to aggregation criterion
 Return for further LEK/science collaborative research into
these areas
 Address question of how harvester knowledge can be
engaged with fisheries management and policy
Acknowledgements
 Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada (award #s 410-2009-0234, 833-99-1012 and 8332002-2000),
 Fishermen’s and Fisheries Scientists’ Research Society,
and Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
 Ms. Lora O’Halloran, project research assistant, and Ms.
Andrea Kmetty, GIS consultant
 All the experts who participated in the LEK surveys
Social Context – Step 1
 Derived from Step 1 - telephone surveys
 In general, respondents fish for a similar length of time
each year, hold a similar array of licenses, and are of
similar ages
 As a clear demonstration of attachment to their
livelihood, vast majorities claim they would choose to fish
for their living if they had their lives to live over.
 Remarkable attachment levels given uncertainties faced
since the late 1980s
 Data affirms similarities among marine harvesters