Sharks, rays, and cartilaginous relatives, hereafter referred to as sharks, are critical to the function and health of marine ecosystems and provide many ecosystem services boosting human well-being. But increased fishing pressures have resulted in a 70% decline in oceanic shark populations in the past 50 years, with 1 in 4 sharks now in danger of extinction with clear impacts on marine ecosystems and the services they provide.
If many solutions already exist to reduce overfishing, economic and social barriers often limit their adoption. These barriers are more complex in small-scale mixed-species fisheries, where dependence on sharks for subsistence and conservation priorities may clash and bring particular trade-offs. And local communities are usually left to bear the costs of those trade-offs (e.g. loss of income if fishing is banned) when larger actors such as tourism companies may reap the benefits of protected sharks (e.g. more sharks equates to more tourism) without bearing the costs.
So how do you meet the needs of coastal communities while protecting sharks?
As the second largest fish producer and the world’s largest shark-fishing nation, with 99% of fisheries considered small-scale, Indonesia is a more than appropriate setting to explore this question and was the focus of Dr Hollie Booth's PhD at the University of Oxford. Using an interdisciplinary multi-step process from research to action, Hollie investigated trade-offs between conservation outcomes and local livelihoods in Western Indonesian fisheries.
Research is ongoing beyond Hollie's PhD, and the project has provided a wide range of insights so far.
Bycatch complexities: sharks can be a ‘cheeky bonus catch’
Bycatch is a leading cause of overfishing and usually refers to catching other marine creatures than fish while fishing, but definitions and perceptions of bycatch vary across contexts. So Hollie and team started considering bycatch as a spectrum, from undesirable to valuable catch.
Considering this spectrum, the research team used the social psychology theory of planned behaviour to understand fishers’ beliefs around bycatch, from their thoughts on different shark species to their feelings around their release.
Whale sharks were seen as key to bringing small fishes to nets and fishers were happy to release them. For wedgefish and hammerheads the story was different: fishers liked catching them as they constituted an extra income, and their release was unlikely. Further, wedgefish and hammerheads were often described as a gift from God, showing the influence of local customary beliefs in their overfishing. A technical fix (e.g. use of different gear) would then not suffice to reduce the overfishing of this 'cheeky bonus catch', leading Hollie and team to investigate social and economic solutions.
Proposing a menu of options rather than imposing one solution
Using scenario interviews with contingent valuation (which helps give a value to non-market resources) the research team worked with fishers to see if and how they would adapt their behaviours when catching wedgefish and hammerheads under different hypothetical scenarios.
From this menu of options, results showed that most fishers would be willing to release wedgefish and hammerheads if compensated for lost income.
The research team then shared results with the fishers to see if they were willing to give their preferred scenario a try. After a calculation of the price per shark species, the research team started testing this option using Randomised Control Trials.
Cute shark release videos and long-term implications
Armed with video cameras, selected fishers were asked to submit videos of wedgefish and hammerheads being released, which upon submission would lead to a repayment. The trial is still ongoing, but data collected throughout seems to indicate that bycatch has reduced in tested versus control trials, with no impact on fishers' livelihoods and well-being, making it a potentially viable alternative.
To work beyond the trial this pay-to-release scheme needs long-term funding, which is why Hollie and team investigated funding options such as using tourism levies (beneficiary pays) or bycatch levies in commercial fisheries (polluter pays). Results indicated a willingness to pay from marine tourists and the potential for bycatch levies to raise millions.
If this pay-to-release scheme can be a suitable alternative to overfishing in some cases, it does not necessarily work in all places and for all species, and further research is still needed and ongoing by Hollie and her many collaborators.
Key lessons learned for conservation and resilience of ecosystems
● Trade-offs are everywhere and conservation always carries a cost for someone, somewhere
● Conservation resolves around people - they should have a seat at the table
● The real world is complex and dynamic - robust impact assessments and adaptive management are key
● There are no silver-bullet solutions - conservation problems need menus of options
Engaging with Dr Hollie Booth
Dr Hollie Booth obtained a DPhil in Zoology at the University of Oxford on ‘Interdisciplinary Approaches to Sharks & Ray Conservation’, and now splits her time between continuing her research at Oxford and providing specialist advice at The Biodiversity Consultancy, which informs the private and public sectors on biodiversity management.
To follow Hollie’s ongoing work and for cute shark videos, head to Twitter:
https://twitter.com/hollieboothie/status/1647945745696161792
This blog article was written as part of a series of webinars organised by the CoESE Research theme on the Conservation and Restoration of Resilient Ecosystems, which seeks to showcase the interdisciplinary research being done at Bangor and beyond on the conservation and restoration of ecosystems. If your research is aligned with our theme, come present it at Bangor by contacting us here.