Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative
Fisheries Uses and Values Project
Frequently Asked Questions
Why participate?
This project is designed to utilize the expert knowledge of commercial and recreational fishermen to influence the decision-making process for designating marine protected areas (MPAs) off coastal California in accordance with the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA), and to consider the socioeconomic impacts of marine reserves on fishing communities as part of the MPA selection process.
Information from commercial fishermen improves the baseline data, particularly in important fisheries for which catch location data is coarsely generalized to landing receipt records. Information from recreational fishermen allows us to create a baseline where none previously existed. Using spatially refined information gathered from our interviews, we can more easily overcome the "garbage in, garbage out" problem that has plagued other marine planning processes, where results are only as good as the data.
Why tell the truth?
Fishermen have every incentive to tell the truth. This project presents a unique opportunity to bring fishermen's knowledge directly to bear on MPA planning in California. Any reporting that misrepresents the actual fishing grounds has the potential to do more harm than good, recreating the "garbage in, garbage out" problem. We have designed our methods to minimize this problem, and will work closely with fishermen and a group of regional stakeholders to validate and verify the information collected.
Your willingness to participate is vital to the success of this project. We appreciate your participation, as well as your referring us to other fishermen to contact.
Is there a report that describes this project?
Yes. A final report was submitted to the MLPA Initiative staff that included descriptions of our work on the Central Coast, as well as peer-review reports by project reviewers with experience publishing similar work. A similar report for the North Central Coast will be forthcoming. (Links to peer-reviews can be found in the sidebar of this page.)
In the North Central Coast process, did you ask commercial fishermen to describe the types of gear they were using?
Yes. We differentiated in terms of practices (target strategy) and/or gear configurations.
Does the number of fishermen include only those surveyed, or is it an extrapolated assessment?
The number includes only those surveyed. Survey responses can be used to extrapolate if appropriate.
How are commercial fishermen identified?
Once we stratify our sample by how the commercial fisheries are managed, we use landing receipts to identify commercial fishermen based on where they land their catch.
How are recreational fishermen identified?
Recreational fishermen (other than CPFVs) can sign up to participate at the link below.
http://www.ecotrust.org/mlpa/interview_signup
CPFV fishermen will be identified using CDF&G information.
How do you identify the "right" commercial fishermen and distinguish local fleets from traveling fleets?
Initially, we consult the landing receipts to obtain landing port versus home port information. We also confirm this information during the interview.
What direction did Ecotrust take from the Science Advisory Team (SAT) during the North Central Coast process?
The SAT guided Ecotrust to use the same statistics in our reporting as it would use to evaluate each of packages.
What is the incentive for fishermen to reveal their favorite fishing grounds? Does Ecotrust cross-reference information from other stories to ensure accuracy?
If someone provides false data, they risk losing their fishing grounds by rendering them invisible to decision makers.
MPA packages affect some fisheries and fishermen more than others — in some cases, comprising 100 percent of their fishing grounds. Despite the full coverage, many of these commercial fishermen don't produce high revenues. But yet, how does the process accommodate disproportionately affected commercial fishermen?
The Blue Ribbon Task Force and the Department of Fish and Game Commissioners have expressed great interest in wanting these disproportionately affected commercial fisheries and\or commercial fishermen brought to their attention. Ecotrust pointed out particular instances of this issue in the central coast process, and fully incorporated these factors into the north central coast process. An evaluation of individual commercial fishermen who would be disproportionately affected will also be a component of the South Coast process.
How is Ecotrust handling confidentiality issues?
In terms of data collection, we plan to more thoroughly train our field staff in handling confidential information and making use of data-securing technologies, such as password protected files that limit access to Ecotrust staff person only. The data remains the property of the fisherman who provided it. In the South Coast process, as was the case in the North Central Coast process, final products will be reviewed and verified by the fishing community before released to the public.
Will the geographic groups take into account "traveling" commercial fishermen?
Ecotrust will compare landing port and residence location information for each commercial fisherman interviewed to identify and categorize the traveling fleets.
How can you capture information for fisheries that no longer exist?
This information can be collected as non-spatial data. For example, we ask additional questions about the fisheries in which fishermen used to, but no longer, participate.
How do you take into account the potential for federal regulation to change the location of fishing grounds now or in the future?
Fishermen are asked to describe their fishing grounds based on their cumulative experience and to identify all fishing areas/locations of economic importance, disregarding any political boundary (state waters) and current restricted areas, such as the Rockfish Conservation Area. This data can then be used to evaluate changes to area-based regulations during the monitoring and adaptation phases of the MLPA process.
Who decides on the fisheries?
Ecotrust works with the study region fishing community and the Department of Fish and Game to identify the fisheries. A lot of the fisheries will be obvious from the landing data, but we will supplement that with other information. Suggestions are welcome and will be considered.
Can this data be used in monitoring the MPAs after the initial development of the network?
Updates and annual interviews are possible if authorized and incorporated into the Department of Fish and Game monitoring plan.
Has Ecotrust collected data from recreational fishermen prior to the South Coast study region?
Yes, we collected recreational fishing data for the North Central Coast study region; however, we were asked to do the recreational fishing analysis late and because of that we were unable to interview the number of recreational fishermen required to have statistically significant sample size. In the South Coast our intention is to get started early enough so that we can provide information that accurately represents the recreational fishing community along the South Coast. We also intend to make the information available to the Regional Stakeholder Group by their first or second meeting.
Why should we provide information about ALL of our fishing sites as opposed to looking at use patterns for only those areas that have been identified as requiring protection? Will the data we provide be used against us?
Providing information for all areas you fish allows us to calculate the cumulative impact of all closures (i.e. existing and proposed). We also provide analyses in our evaluation that consider just the fishing grounds inside state waters as compared to total fishing grounds. The data will be displayed publicly to the RSG as they begin to design their MPA proposals. The data will be presented to the RSG in aggregated form only, reviewed and verified by the fishing community. Individual information will never used in a public setting. Also, we have strict protocols in place to prevent the data from being used by third parties, including the State.
What is Ecotrust's motivation for collecting this information? Is Ecotrust neutral?
Ecotrust is a non-profit organization working to find innovative solutions to environmental challenges that balance ecological, economic and social outcomes. We believe that you cannot achieve robust conservation outcomes without paying attention to the livelihoods of people affected. We pursue both grant funded and contract work where we can help balance this equation. Our motivation is to provide sound economic, environmental, and socially equitable analyses to the projects on which we work.
Some fishermen in the Central Coast region summarized their experience with the MLPA process by saying, "negotiating openly, and revealing our prime fishing spots resulted in them being targeted for closure." – What was Ecotrust's role in the Central Coast process?
Ecotrust was contracted to do work late in the Central Coast process and the information we provided was not used effectively — because of time pressures we were not able to bring the information to stakeholders until after they had drafted closures, and it ended up only being used to evaluate the proposals. The North Central Coast is a better example of the analyses we provide — there, stakeholders used the information in the design phase, and our iterative evaluations of proposals were used by them to lower socioeconomic impacts to commercial and recreational fishing communities while still meeting other requirements (e.g. size, spacing, and habitat type).
What criteria will Ecotrust use to design the survey sample for recreational fishermen?
At present, the Ecotrust staff is working with individuals from the MLPAI and CDFG, as well as experts from the recreational fishing community, to first understand and accurately describe the various user groups within the South Coast study region. We will then use that information to help us stratify our sample in such a way so as to be broadly representative of all the major user groups.
I have heard that people are getting frustrated with the online survey. Why is this happening?
As you know, we were tasked with attempting to survey an adequate number of recreational fishermen so as to be representative of the larger recreational fishing population in Southern California and we were asked to do that in a very restricted time frame. Given both the large overall population of recreational fishermen in Southern California and the time and resources available, we decided to try and administer our survey through the web. In the last region (North Central Coast) we administered the survey in-person, but received criticism from the MLPA process and the recreational fishing community around the representativeness of the survey because we weren't able to interview the number of fishermen needed in the short time frame we were given. That is one of the main reasons we chose to do it on-line for this region.
We realize that while the web survey allows us to reach and interview more fishermen, there are also cons to this method and the difficulties some individuals have experienced definitely fall into the con category. That said, over 300 recreational fishermen have been able to access and complete the survey on-line and we still feel this is the best way to get the most representative data into the process in the time frame we have.
After all of the data is collected/analyzed, we will generate aggregated maps, ensuring that each individual’s information remains confidential. These maps will then be reviewed by the recreational fishing community to ensure that the information is accurate and correctly reflects areas of importance. When we get to this stage in the review process, all fishermen who signed up for the interview (even if they didn't complete the interview) will be able to participate in the review of the aggregated maps and provide feedback on their representativeness and accuracy.
If you are someone who is experiencing difficulties with the online survey, please contact us immediately at fish@ecotrust.org. We cannot fix a problem we are not aware of, and we are relying on you to let us know.
