Evaluation of a US west coast groundfish habitat conservation regulation via analysis of spatial and temporal patterns of trawl fishing effort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the extent to which the 2000 Pacific Fishery Management Council footrope restriction shifted and reduced trawl fishing effort on Oregon fishing grounds, related these changes to the seafloor habitat type over which they occurred, and developed methods for enhancing spatial review of fishing effort. Density analysis of trawl start locations demonstrated how fishing efforts increased and decreased in relation to habitat distribution and fishery management actions between 1995 and 2002. Trawl effort patterns exhibited significant interannual variability and were patchy in distribution. Tow end-point locations from 1998 to 2001 were retrieved from manual logbooks for five reference sites located in proximity to rocky habitat. Trawl towlines were mapped and demonstrated a marked enhancement of fine-scale fishing effort resolution. Spatial shifts in fishing intensity (measured as kilometres towed) away from rock habitat were evident at all reference sites after the footrope restriction, with an average reduction of 86%. Some slight shifts into surrounding unconsolidated sediments also occurred. Our results indicate that the footrope restriction, in conjunction with associated landing limits, was effective in protecting rocky habitats from trawl fishing impacts. Continued spatial monitoring of trawl data would assist in fishery management assessment of conservation objectives for depleted groundfish and essential fish habitat protection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".