A summary of recommendations on practical steps to implement an ecosystem approach in the area of fishery management.
Ensure that fish stocking rates are determined after consideration of all trophic level interactions
State, Tribal, and Provincial resource management agencies, through Strategic Great Lakes Fishery Management Plan (SGLFMP) and Great Lakes Fishery Commission's (GLFC's) Lake Committees
Insufficient information on lower trophic level linkages to forage/top predator production; lack of communication about details and objectives of State and Provincial mandates to reduce nutrient loadings
Conduct research in cooperation with academic institutions on trophic level interactions; communicate with water quality management agencies on fishery management needs relative to nutrients and lower trophic levels
Fisheries managers should identify a quantitative range of fish community objectives or targets with supporting ecological rationale
State, Tribal, and Provincial natural resource management agencies, through SGLFMP and GLFC's Lake Committees
Lack of human resources; values disagreements; lack of information on limits and tradeoffs; lack of time for public consultation; perceived stakeholder base is too narrow
Provide more people or more efficient use of current staff; provide more information and better dialogue, better options for trade-offs; make commitments to manpower and funds; ensure interaction with corresponding lakewide management plan (LAMP)
Identify and protect critical spawning and nursery areas to achieve self-sustaining populations when such areas have been determined to be limiting those populations
Federal, State, Tribal, Provincial, and municipal agencies with authority to limit damage to those areas
Lack of species-specific information on limiting factors; potential stakeholder concerns and objections; the need for standardization of methods for identification of spawning and nursery areas for consistent application of protection measures; development community does not value areas beyond their market values
Perform research and monitoring to fill species-specific data gaps; ensure public involvement and education for stakeholder buy-in; reach agreement on standard methods and protocols for identification of spawning and nursery areas; assess values of ecological functions of these habitats to have a more solid standing in negotiation with developers and communities conducting development
Foster volunteer programs that utilize local expertise and interest, along with governmental technical assistance, in undertaking local fishery management projects
Federal, Tribal, State, and Provincial natural resource management agencies; municipalities; International Joint Commission (IJC); Remedial Action Plan (RAP) groups
Limited governmental resources; insufficient volunteers; low priority of initiative
Establish or expand challenge grant programs; seek out service clubs, schools groups, and nongovernmental organizations as partners; learn from successful experiences such as Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources' (MNR) Community Fisheries Improvement Program that has established partnerships to undertake hands-on fisheries management projects (Ontario MNR provides technical assistance and equipment for eligible projects, while volunteers provide the labor)
Incorporate cumulative (spatial and temporal) land-use effects into the analysis and decision-making for fish and wildlife population goals and targets
Land-use planning agencies; State and Provincial natural resource management agencies
Lack of and access to information on trends; lack of efficient predictive interactive modelling tools; the need for an inventory of watershed land-use; lack of understanding of cumulative effects (e.g. synergistic, non-linear activities)
Foster communication and understanding of basic ecological principles related to fish and wildlife populations for entering into negotiations with other sectors (make information available through networks such as Great Lakes Information Network, Internet, etc.); develop user- and manager-friendly modelling tools that are well tested and validated; develop geographical information system-based watershed inventories and make available on networks; address cumulative effects on fish and wildlife management in research programs
Utilize existing institutional structures (LAMPs, RAPs, SGLFMP) to implement ecosystem approach; consult other sectors when a planned action has potential to influence significantly management objectives (and vice versa); conduct State-of-the-Lake meetings annually on each Great Lake with follow-up on joint management actions
Federal, Tribal, State, and Provincial agencies and other stakeholders
Limited recognition of each other's authority/influence; lack of defined procedure for consultation between planning groups; lack of a sufficient communication strategy; lack of sufficient time to support process; lack of rules of engagement and recognition of each other's authority and influence (currently no basin-wide commitment to the process)
Establish a defined procedure for consultation and an effective communication strategy; allow staff adequate time for committee involvement; establish a science-based binational forum, neutrally facilitated
Develop funding commitments for long-term management (i.e. support for cross-border travel; commitments in individual workplans for interagency management; development of comprehensive interagency monitoring programs)
Federal, Tribal, State, and Provincial agencies
Lack of cross-border involvement and commitments to management plans
Maintain commitment to interagency programs; develop and maintain fish community objectives; obtain and maintain political support for cross-border involvement
Improve communication among scientists, resource managers/policy makers, and elected officials (e.g. Adopt-a-Politician) in order to instill a sound understanding of ecosystem concepts with those passing legislation
International Association for Great Lakes Research, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Environment Canada, States, Tribes, Provinces, legislators
Low priority; limited interest; scientists oblivious to policy information needs and policy makers oblivious to science's capabilities to support decision-making
Establish a special session at the annual conference of the International Association for Great Lakes Research to encourage communication among scientists, resource mangers/policy makers, and elected officials; sponsor annual state-of-the-ecosystem event for elected officials; encourage greater participation by local officials in local projects
Improve programs to impede the introduction or spread of non- indigenous species
Federal, Tribal, State, and Provincial agencies; Coast Guards
Lack of funds to implement existing non-indigenous species plans; lack of international cooperation/integration; lack of focus and priority-setting
Shift resource priorities in the short-term to support implementation of existing non-indigenous species plans; develop enforcement capabilities and support for them
Develop and update fish and wildlife management plans within the limits of current and potential conditions, recognizing trends (habitat, economics, land-use, ecology)
Tribal, State, and Provincial fish and wildlife agencies
Lack of current habitat inventories and lack of knowledge on interactions with economy, land-use, etc.
Update inventories; ensure current assessments of other sectoral interactions impacting fish and wildlife communities; exchange information on trends
In communicating the fish and wildlife management needs to other sectors, put fish and wildlife in the context of system function and requirements
Senior managers in Federal, Tribal, State, and Provincial resource management agencies; GLFC; IJC
Need for a clear message; low priority because of resource limitations
Foster dialogue among Great Lakes Fishery Commission, International Joint Commission, and the binational State-of-the- Lakes Ecosystem Conferences
Solicit and consider knowledge and information from local stakeholders and interest groups (e.g. angler diaries, bird census, commercial harvest, etc.)
Tribal, State, and Provincial fish and wildlife agencies
Low priority; limited resources; concern for precision and accuracy of data and information
Identify watersheds where programs have been successful and encourage application elsewhere; sponsor training sessions to transfer knowledge and information from successful programs
Develop uniform fish and wildlife consumption advisories on a basin-wide scale
U.S. EPA and Health Canada in cooperation with State and Provincial health agencies and basin-wide interest groups; Council of Great Lakes Governors
Differences in State and Provincial regulations and methodologies; differences in U.S. Food and Drug Administration (commercial catch) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (sport catch) consumption advisories
Sponsor binational forum with follow-up actions to consider uniform methodologies in developing advisories
In the development of management plans for edible fish, relate size of fish harvested to contaminant body burdens by species to reduce human exposure (this should be done in context of fish population and community dynamics)
Tribal, State, and Provincial natural resource and health agencies
This practical step may be incompatible with where the available surplus harvest yield currently is in the foodweb; it would not be feasible if contaminant levels in fish are high at all size classes
Use foodweb models to help target optimum harvest with minimum exposure to contaminants; maintain negotiations and programs to reduce toxic inputs by incorporating the significance of fish contamination into environmental agency's rationale