Fisheries stakeholders frequently question fisheries management, express doubts about the applicability of regulations at different spatial and temporal scales; and dispute the role of agencies in the management of fish stocks at stakeholder meetings. However, fisheries stakeholders also often demonstrate considerable scientific knowledge and interest in the process of stock assessment and in the derivation of fisheries management regulations. They also frequently contribute valuable data and information during stakeholder meetings, symposia, and in the form of fishing logbooks or as participants in research projects. Fisheries management is based on stock assessments that contain considerable technical and statistical detail that may be of limited interest to stakeholders and require expertise and scientific training that may not be prevalent within stakeholder communities. Stakeholders often express interest in the way data are used stock assessments, and point out apparent discrepancies between their own personal observations and the apparent dynamics of a stock and any regulation derived from its assessment. However, there do not appear to be tools available that address such issues.
Results/Conclusions
Many of the concerns expressed by stakeholders may be synthesized into technical questions that can be discussed using a combination of fisheries data and models., and a better understanding of the stakeholder community and its concerns. Using the recreational Common Snook fishery in Florida as an example we develop a set of stakeholder questions about the status of the fishery and its management, and use a recently developed spatially explicit population simulation model in combination with the most recent stock assessment and a variety of fisheries monitoring data to provide approximate answers. We examine the reasons for different management regulations and biological reference points for different geographical areas, potential reasons for discrepancies between local observations and large-scale management decisions, the contribution of volunteer data to the processes of fisheries management, and the time scales over which management decisions influence the observed status of the fishery. We synthesize our results into a workshop focused on reciprocal education of scientists and stakeholders and develop a structured survey among the participants to measure the potential success of this approach. We conclude that there is a continuous need for information exchange between fisheries scientists and stakeholders. Considerable effort is required to prepare community education events that illustrate the mechanics of fisheries management. Focused nformation exchange between scientists and stakeholders may eventually contribute to a better understanding of the fisheries management process.