Action

Cease or prohibit line fishing

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • One study examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting line fishing in an area on marine fish populations. The study was in the Indian Ocean (South Africa).

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) 

  • Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in the Indian Ocean found that prohibiting offshore line fishing and all other boat-based fishing in a zone of a marine protected area resulted in higher abundances of four of four fish species over-exploited by line fishing, compared to two zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted.
  • Condition (1 study): One site comparison study in the Indian Ocean found that in a zone of a marine protected area closed to offshore line fishing and all other boat-based fishing for two to seven years, four of four fish species over-exploited by line fishing were larger, compared to two zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A site comparison study in 2006–2011 of four coral reef sites in a marine protected area in the Indian Ocean, South Africa (Maggs et al. 2013) found that two to seven years after closing a zone to offshore line fishing and all other vessel-based fishing (including spearfishing), there was a higher abundance and larger size of four coral reef fish species, compared to two adjacent zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted. For all years, individual catch rates of four of four species were higher inside the zone closed to line fishing and other vessel-based fishing than in the zone permitting offshore line and spear fishing: slinger Chrysoblephus puniceus (3.1 vs 0.8 fish/angler/h), Scotsman Polysteganus praeorbitalis (1.2 vs 0.3 fish/angler/h), poenskop Cymatoceps nasutus (0.4 vs 0.2 fish/angler/h) and yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus (0.6 vs 0.1 fish/angler/h); and average lengths were higher (slinger: 293 vs 240, Scotsman: 415 vs 359, poenskop: 417 vs 380, rockcod: 495 vs 435 mm). The Pondoland Marine Protected Area (800 km2) was designated in 2004 and has a central ‘no-take area’ (400 km2) closed to all offshore (vessel based) exploitation and two adjacent controlled fishing areas where offshore line fishing and spearfishing are permitted. No commercial fishing, such as trawling or long-lining, is permitted anywhere in the protected area. From April 2006 to June 2011, quarterly research angling was conducted at two sites in the no-take zone and two in the nearby exploited zone (6 h angling in each zone) at 10–30 m depth. Data were analysed for four species depleted by line fishing.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Taylor, N., Clarke, L.J., Alliji, K., Barrett, C., McIntyre, R., Smith, R.K., and Sutherland, W.J. (2021) Marine Fish Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Marine Fish Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marine Fish Conservation
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust