Contrasting Stocking and Length Limits as Tools to Improve Fisheries

Harvest restrictions and stock enhancement are commonly used management tools sustaining degraded fisheries, but comparisons of their relative effectiveness have seldom been considered prior to making policy choices. We built a population model that incorporated both size-dependent harvest restrictions and stock enhancement contributions to explore trade-offs between minimum length limits and stock enhancement for improving population sustainability and fishery metrics (e.g., catch).  We used a Murray cod Maccullochella peelii peelii population as a test case, and the model incorporated density-dependent recruitment processes for both hatchery and wild fish. We estimated the spawning potential ratio (SPR) and fishery metrics (e.g., angler catch) across a range of minimum length limits and stocking rates. Model estimates showed that increased minimum length limits were much more effective than stock enhancement for increasing SPR and angler catches in exploited populations, but length limits resulted in reduced harvest.  Stocking was predicted to significantly increase total recruitment, population sustainability, and fishery metrics only in systems where wild reproduction had been greatly reduced via habitat loss, fishing mortality was high, or both. If angler fishing effort increased with increased fish abundance from stocking efforts, fishing mortality was predicted to increase and reduce the benefits realized from stocking. The model also indicated that benefits from stock enhancement would be reduced if reproductive efficiency of hatchery-origin fish was compromised. The simulations indicated that stock enhancement was a less effective method to improve fishery sustainability than measures designed to reduce fishing mortality (e.g., length limits).