Establish move-on rules for temporary, targeted fishing restrictions or closures when a catch or unwanted catch threshold is reached

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 2
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Move-on rules require fishing activity to reduce or cease in an area. They may be triggered by catch thresholds being reached, or by a single sighting or capture for some protected species. The rules may involve temporary fishing restrictions including total closure of an area and/or moving to an alternative area with lower fish abundance of the species concerned located a minimum distance away. Establishing move-on rules may immediately limit fishing effort and reduce fish mortality.

Study locations

Key messages

Two studies examined the effects of establishing move-on rules for temporary, targeted fishing restrictions or closures when a catch or unwanted catch threshold is reached on marine fish populations. One study was in the North Atlantic Ocean and North Sea (Scotland) and one was in the North Atlantic Ocean (Scotland).

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (2 STUDIES)

Reduction of unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in in the North Atlantic Ocean/North Sea found that after move-on rules were established when a catch threshold limit triggered temporary fishing closures there were lower overall cod discards.
Reduction of fishing effort (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the North Atlantic Ocean and North Sea found that after move-on rules were established for vessels when a catch threshold limit was reached fishing effort for cod and blue ling was reduced.
Commercial catch abundance (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the North Atlantic Ocean and North Sea found that after move-on rules were established for vessels when a catch threshold limit was reached commercial landings of cod and blue ling were reduced.

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

A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 2008–2009 of four large, fished areas of seabed in the North Sea and North Atlantic off Scotland, UK (Holmes et al. 2011) found that establishing move-on rules for temporary, targeted fishing restrictions or closures when a catch or unwanted catch threshold is reached, resulted in reduced fishing effort and overall discards and landings of Atlantic cod Gadus morhua. Data were not tested statistically. Of 144 temporary real-time closures implemented in 2009 there was a reduction in fishing activity (measured as change in number of fishing data points or pings recorded by the Vessel Monitoring System 14 d pre-closure to 14 d closure period) for 130, by 10–20 pings for the majority (105), estimated as a reduction of 10–40 h trawling. Fishing activity similarly increased when areas reopened. The reductions gave an estimated overall annual decrease in cod catch (landings and discards) of 707 t. Real-time area closures (equivalent to 7.5 square nautical miles; 21 days duration; maximum of 12 at any one time) were implemented in 2008/09 for Scottish vessels fishing in the seas around Scotland, divided into four zones, to control fishing effort and reduce cod mortality and discarding. Closures were triggered when cod catches exceeded 40 cod/hr and from monitoring analyses of landings and vessel monitoring data in each zone. Data were collected in 2008–2009 from landings, observer trips and Vessel Monitoring Systems that record activity of vessels fishing in and around the closure areas. Activity by non-Scottish vessels not required to adhere to closures was also recorded.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Holmes S.J., Bailey N., Campbell N., Catarino R., Barratt K., Gibb A. & Fernandes P.G. (2011) Using fishery-dependent data to inform the development and operation of a co-management initiative to reduce cod mortality and cut discards. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68, 1679-1688.
A before-and-after study in 2002–2013 of two fished areas of seabed in the northeast Atlantic Ocean off the coasts of Scotland, UK (Posen et al. 2014) reported that after move-on rules were established for vessels when a catch threshold limit was reached fishing effort and landings of blue ling Molva dypterygia decreased, compared to before. Data were not tested statistically. Across both areas and during the spawning season of blue ling, in 2009–2013 after move-on rules were established fishing effort (744–1,901 h) and average blue ling landings (137 t) were lower compared to 2002–2008 before rules were set (fishing effort: 1,060–2,995 h; landings: 304 t). In January 2009, rules were established for vessels fishing within two defined areas (edge of Rosemary Bank and along the Scottish continental shelf) identified as blue ling spawning grounds. The rules prohibited the retention of >6 t of blue ling/trip; at which limit the vessel must cease fishing immediately and leave the area, not returning (to either area) until the catch is landed and with no discarding of blue ling permitted. Fishing effort data from 2002–2013 were taken from Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data of all UK vessels ≥15 m. Landings data of ling were taken from vessel logbooks and sales information.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Posen P.E., Lee J., Large P.A. & Kenny A.J. (2014) Using vessel monitoring system (VMS) data to assess the impact of marine protection boundaries on blue ling fishing northwest of the British Isles. Aquatic Living Resources, 27, 17-26.

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

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marine Fish Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Eliminate fisheries subsidies that encourage overfishing Action Link	Awaiting assessment	0	Synopsis Link
Limit the number or length of static fishing nets in an area Action Link	Awaiting assessment	0	Synopsis Link
Prohibit high grading in which only the most profitable individuals or species are landed Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link