Search the SPREP Catalogue

Ensuring that harvest strategies are robust to climate change is a top priority for many fisheries jurisdictions globally. This is because climate change is altering ecosystem structure and the productivity of marine species. We outline a range of approaches for incorporating climate change impacts within harvest strategies, including how a harvest strategy is specified and changes to monitoring requirements. Approaches evaluated include the use of extended stock assessments, multi-species and ecosystem models, revised management reference points, implementing regime shifts in model parameters, the provision of climate-sensitive catch advice, projections under alternative climate change scenarios and expanded use of management strategy evaluation. We evaluate the utility of these approaches against cost, data needs and uncertainty criteria; highlight key learnings from a range of global jurisdictions and demonstrate the broad array of options available outside of direct incorporation of climate variables within stock assessments. We identify approaches that have been successfully implemented and show that the most complex responses are not always the most successful. While there is no one-size-fits-all way to incorporate climate change within harvest strategies, we outline the need for flexible management arrangements. We also provide examples of approaches that have been successfully implemented, demonstrating that many of the most data-intensive responses will only be applicable in a few cases, necessitating the application of cheaper, less data-intensive approaches that are associated with greater uncertainty.

Mobile organisms like seabirds can provide important nutrient flows between ecosystems but this connectivity has been interrupted by the degradation of island ecosystems. Island restoration (via invasive species eradication and the restoration of native vegetation) can reestablish seabird populations and their nutrients transfer between their foraging areas, breeding colonies and adjacent nearshore habitats.

1. Sea turtles are harvested in many small-scale fisheries (SSFs), but few nations have quantified the impacts that SSFs are having on their sea turtle stocks. This study provides the first assessment on the catch composition, national harvest rates,and long-term trends in sea turtle catches in the Solomon Islands SSFs. 2. Between October 2016 and May 2018, 10 community monitors located in eight of the nine provinces of the Solomon Islands were trained and employed to work alongside fishers in their respective communities to document, photograph, and geo-reference the reefs where sea turtles were harvested. Local ecological knowledge (LEK) surveys were then conducted with 32 experienced fishers to infer whether the harvest rates of sea turtles had changed in recent decades. 3. Community monitors recorded information on 1,132 sea turtles that were harvested on 529 fishing trips:1,119 sea turtles were identified to species level, with harvests consisting of 73.3% (n=818) green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas), 25.7% hawksbill sea turtles (n=291) (Eretmochelys imbricata), and 0.9% (n=10) olive ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea). 4. The great majority (92.6%) of sea turtles were captured by night-time and daytime freedivers who use masks, snorkels, fins, hooks, spears, and underwater flashlights to target a wide range of fauna that inhabit coral reefs.

Seabird eggs, chicks and adults have significant value for many cultures, but delayed maturation, low reproductive rates and ease of exploitation at breeding colonies make these species especially vulnerable to over harvest.

Coastal mineral resources are promoted as a sustainable option to meet increasing metal demands. However, shallow-water mining contradicts international conservation and sustainability goals and its regulative legislation is still being developed.

Conservation science is having a reckoning with parachute science. In the parachute science models, scientists drop into a foreign country with preconceived notions, seeking to validate their assumptions without genuine engagement with local people, ideas, epistemologies, methodologies, and knowledges, and leave without giving back to the place from which they extracted.

Estimating population abundance is central to many ecological studies and important in conservation planning. Yet the elusive nature of many species makes estimating their abundance challenging.

The vulnerability of marine biodiversity to accelerated rates of climatic change is poorly understood.

Overexploitation is a key driver of biodiversity loss but the relationship between the use and trade of species and conservation outcomes is not always straight forward.

The dual mandate for many protected areas (PAs) to simultaneously promote recreation and conserve biodiversity may be hampered by negative effects of recreation on wildlife.