2009 - An interdisciplinary evaluation of fishery production systems off the state of Para´ in...

8/11/2019 2009 - An interdisciplinary evaluation of fishery production systems off the state of Para in North Brazil

1/14

An interdisciplinary evaluation of fishery production systems off the state of Para in

North BrazilBy V. J. Isaac1, R. V. E. Santo1, B. Bentes1, F. L. Fre dou2, K. R. M. Mourao2 and T. Fre dou2

1Laboratory of Fisheries Biology and Management of Aquatic Resources; 2Oceanography Department, Federal University of Para,Belem-Para, Brazil

Summary

The performance of 20 fishery production systems off the state

of Para in the northern region of Brazil was compared using

the RAPFISH methodology, with 57 identified attributes

distributed among five evaluation fields: economics, sociology,

ecology, technology and politics. The results indicated theexistence of three large groups of fishery sectors: (i) industrial

(red snapper with traps, the Laulao catfish, shrimp trawl) and

semi-industrial (lobster) fisheries; (ii) large-scale artisanal

fisheries (acoupa weakfish, red snapper with lines, king

mackerel, Spanish mackerel, coco sea catfish); and (iii) small-

scale artisanal fisheries (shellfish, crab, estuarine longline, fish

traps, etc.). While the industrial and large-scale artisanal

systems demonstrated greater sustainability from an economic

and social standpoint, small-scale fisheries appeared to be

more ecologically sustainable. Based on the results, a reduction

in industrial fishing efforts is recommended, along with the

establishment of licensing quotas for fishing vessels, as well as

an increased investment in research on proper guidance and

management of the semi-industrial and large-scale artisanalfisheries sectors. For small-scale artisanal fisheries, economic

incentives are suggested for the aggregate value of the products

and to assist fishers in the development of an appropriate

social organization. Finally, it is believed that a greater

stakeholder involvement in the decision-making process would

improve management actions for all modalities.

Introduction

The coast of the state of Para (Brazil) offers a high potential

for fishery activities due to the numerous rivers and estuaries

that empty into the Atlantic Ocean, forming a complex aquatic

environment with high biological productivity. The substantialbiomass of fish species in this region is exploited by both

artisanal and industrial fleets (Barthem and Fabre , 2004).

A total of 123 fishing communities are distributed among 17

coastal municipalities. Landings occur at approximately 90

ports (CEPNOR, 2003). Para is in first place in Brazil with

regard to catch volumes and is also responsible for nearly 10%

of all fish export in the country (IBAMA, 2007). Catch

activities occur in an extensive area that encompasses the shelf

of the states of Amapa , Para and part of Maranhao; larger

boats reach the outer limits of the northern region of Brazil

(Barthem, 2004).

Artisanal fishery modalities are responsible for 93% of the

total marine production of the state and have relevant

economic and social importance, directly employing over40 000 individuals. Fisheries on an industrial or semi-indus-

trial scale produce a much smaller volume of fish and employ

fewer fishermen but have a considerable economic effect, as

they are predominantly directed at the exportation of high

market value products (Isaac et al., 2006).

There are as yet few scientific investigations dedicated to the

characterization of the diverse fishery modalities along the

northern coast of Brazil, some appearing in publications with

difficult access. The following stand out: reviews by Motta-

Maue s (1984), SUDEPE (1988) and Isaac and Barthem (1995);

a description of the principal fisheries (Pinheiro and Fre dou,

2004); descriptions of fishing gear by Nery (1995) and Pinheiro

(2005); anthropology and sociology studies by Furtado (1981,

1991), Furtado and Nascimento (1982), Loureiro (1985),

Mello (1985), Maldonado (1986) and Senna (2003); and a

study on public policies by Leita o (1995). More recently,

Bentes (2004) classified fishery modalities along the coast of

Para , describing 20 different fishery production systems.

The study emerged from the need to describe and compare

the different fishery scenarios along the coast in an effort to

determine performance and sustainability indicators to be ableto assist in directing specific future management actions and

recommend suitable public policies for this important produc-

tive sector that utilizes coastal resources.

Materials and methods

Data collection

The classification of the diverse fishery modalities into

reasonable categories, denoted as fishery production systems

(FPS), was obtained through interview surveys at nine landing

sites in the state of Para (Fig. 1). A classification methodology

was applied that subdivides the FPS systems according to their

particular characteristics, following the categorization criteria:1 Fleet; 2 Fishing practices and gear; 3 Live resource

exploited; 4 Target environment where exploitation occurs;

5 Fishermens place of residence; 6 Fishermens working

relations; 7 Fishermens income; and 8 Degree of isolation

from the community or location in which the fishermen live. It

was also determined whether the defined systems were

homogenous enough to be subject to management measures.

A total of 20 fishery production systems emerged from this

process and were identified throughout the coastal region of

Para (Bentes, 2004).

To characterize the fishery systems, a set of 57 attributes

(Table 1) was determined in the form of categorical variables

with three to six classes each. The attributes were chosen in a

participative discussion among researchers of the entireBrazilian coast. Attributes were classified according to five

J. Appl. Ichthyol. 25 (2009), 244255

2009 The Authors

Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Verlag, Berlin

ISSN 01758659

Received: May 1, 2008

Accepted: January 15, 2009

doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01274.x


2/14

evaluation fields: technology, economics, ecology, sociology

and politics. Three attributes from each evaluation field (15 in

all) were considered as indicators of sustainability due to their

significance in preservation of the fishery systems. Thus, higher

values were attributed to systems considered more sustainable

(Bentes, 2004). The dichotomy good and bad were used to

describe the best and worst attributes of each of the 15

sustainability variables, respectively, with the aim of estab-

lishing comparative reference points.

Basedon thebest availableknowledge andthe results from642

interviews carried out with stakeholders (government, industry,

fishermen, boat owners, fish traders), values were assigned to

each attribute for each production system. When qualitative,

these values were discussed among the researchers for consensus

of categorization to avoid subjective qualifications.

Data analysis

Landings data were obtained from the official fishery statistics

(IBAMA, 2007). The coefficient of regression (slope) oflanding values was used as indicator of the trend (trend index)

in the temporal sequence of data, 19672004. Negative values

indicate decreasing tendency. The data matrix with the

attribute values for each system was analyzed using the

RAPFISH methodology (Pitcher et al., 1998; Pitcher and

Preikshot, 2001), a multi-disciplinary rapid appraisal tech-

nique for evaluating the comparative sustainability of fisheries.

The technique employs simple, easily-scored attributes to

provide a rapid, cost-effective, and multi-disciplinary evalua-

tion of the status of a fishery, in terms of sustainability (Pitcher

et al., 1998).

Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) was applied to the matrix

of the squared Euclidian distances. The MDS method spatially

distributed the systems such that the rank order of distances

agreed with the rank order of similarities (Clarke, 1993;

Legendre and Legendre, 1998). The stress value was used as a

measure of how well the solution recreates the dissimilarities:

values


3/14

Table 1Comparison of fishery systems. Bold areas: sustainability indicator attributes

Dimension Attribute Description of classes

Social Professional indicators 1 (bad) to 6 (excellent)Working relationships 1 family artisanal; 2 boat owner; 3 employeeSchooling 1 (lower) to 3 (higher)Origin of fishermen 1 local; 2 neighboring region; 3 from the state, but far

from locale; 4 out of state; 5 abroadHealthcare 1 (bad) to 6 (excellent)Social organization 1 non-existent; 2 exist s, operat es precariously; 3 exists, has

little community adhesion; 4 exists, has good communityadhesion; 5 high degree of community intervention, many members

Transportation and infrastructure 1 only by maritime fluvial route; 2 precarious landconnections; 3 good land connections

Housing location of fishermen 1 isolated locale; 2 village; 3 rural city; 4 capitalHousing quality 1 (bad) to 5 (excellent)No. of people exploiting the system 1 in decline; 2 stability maintained over past 5 years; 3 slight

growth in recent years; 4 accentuated growth in past 5 years

Ecological Degree of vulnerability 1 (low) to 4 (high)Primary productivity 1 (oligotrophic) to 3 (eutrophic)Degree of degradation 1 (compromised), 2 (degraded) and 3 (conserved)Changes in degree of degradation 1 (worsening) to 3 (recovering)Variation in habitat extension 1 (rapidly reducing) to 4 (increasing)Number of target species 1 mono-specific; 2 multi, up to 10; 3 multi >10Variation in composition of target species 1 changes in species; 2 changes in proportions; 3 no

changesAverage duration of life cycle 1 short; 2 medium; 3 longRange of migration 1 nonexistent; 2 local; 3 regional; 4 inter EEZVariation in the extension of distribution

of fishery system1 increasing; 2 stable; 3 slowly reducing; 4 rapidly

reducingVulnerability to reproduction 1 (high) a 3 (none)Vulnerabil ity in cultivation area 1 (high) a 3 (none)Level of discards 1 (high) to 4 (null)Exploitation status 1 (over-exploited) to 4 (under-exploited)Changes in catch size 1 strong change; 2 gradual change; 3 no change

Technological Gear selectivity 1 (low) to 3 (high)Autonomy (days of trip) 1 (01); 2 (25); 3 (615); 4 (1630); 5 (>30)Product processing and conservation

technology

1 none; 2 exists, slightly sophisticated;

3 very sophisticatedLocalization and navigation technology 1 (none) to 4 (high)Evolut ion of fishing power 1 decreasing; 2 constant; 3 increasingEffect of gear 1 non-destructive; 2 slightly destructive; 3 very destructivePropulsion 1 on foot; 2 oars; 3 sail; 4 motor up to 20 hp; 5 from 20

to 200 hp; 6 over 200 hpCommunication system 1 none; 2 some range; 3 long rangeEvolut ion of fishing effort 1 decreasing; 2 constant; 3 increasing

Economic Average catch price (R$ per kg) 1 (02); 2 (36); 3 (715); 4 (1630); 5 (> = 30)Average production per year (kg) 1 (0100); 2 (1011000); 3 (100110 000); 4 (10 001100 000);

5 (>100 001)Aggregation of value worth 1 (low) to 3 (high)Per capita income comparison 1 (lower) to 3 (higher)Frequency of other activities 1 never; 2 occasionally; 3 regularlyImportance of other activity 1 (low) to 3 (high)Cost of equipment 1 (high) to 4 (low)

Price variation rate 1 (high) to 4 (low)Product destination 1 local; 2 regional; 3 national; 4 internationalSubsidies to activity 1 (many) to 3 (none)Dependence on middlemen 1 (high) to 4 (none)

Management Limitation in access to resource 1 free access; 2 not very effective; 3 very effectiveExistence of points of reference 1 no; 2 partially; 3 completelyTraditional measures 1 no; 2 some; 3 manyGovernmental measures 1 no; 2 some; 3 manyHuman impact 1 no; 2 partially diagnosed; 3 diagnosed with mitigated

action; 4 complete mitigationUsers represented 1 no; 2 some; 3 allExistence of conflict s 1 yes, broken relations; 2 yes, serious; 3 yes, mild; 4 noneStatistics 1 do not exist; 2 partially collected; 3 completely;

4 reliable statistics; 5 availableScientific research 1 does not exist; 2 exists, not utilized; 3 utilized

Existence of reserves 1 no; 2 established, not managed; 3 established, managedInstitutionalized procedures 1 no; 2 partially; 3 sat isfactorilySupervision monitoring efficiency 1 does not exist; 2 is not efficient; 3 is efficient

246 V. J. Isaac et al.


4/14

cou sea catfish Sciades herzbergii and crucifix sea catfish

Hexanematichthys proops demonstrated a slightly increasing

tendency (Table 1).

Fishery production systems

The fishery production systems (Table 3) exhibited a large

variety of characteristics, operating in distinct environments

and targeting diverse species. Three of the 20 systems studied

(shrimp trawl nets; Laulao catfish drag nets and red snapper

with traps) were considered to be industrial, as they preferen-

tially use large steel boats with greater traveling autonomy and

fishing capacity. Another four were classified as large-scale

artisanal operations (artisinal snapper, lobster, Acoupa weak-

fish and gillbacker sea catfish), as they have more advanced

technological attributes (engine power, autonomy, boat size),

although they use wooden vessels and conserve the catches in

containers with ice. The remaining systems were classified as

small-scale artisanal operations, as they perform catches with

small vessels, at times with no motor, communication devices

or navigation assistance. Catches are conserved in ice and the

trips have short durations of up to 5 days.

In terms of habitat and environment, 75% of the FPSs

operate in estuarine areas or near the coast. Most of the

systems are directed at various species, with alterations in the

qualitative and quantitative composition of the production in

recent years. A total of 20% of the systems target species are

considered overexploited and 65% have recorded reductions in

the size of the specimens caught.

Catches from the artisanal fisheries have low commercialvalue (an average of less than US$1 per kg). Only the lobster

and industrial shrimp systems sell their products for satisfac-

tory profits, with average prices of US$ 40 and US$ 14 per kg,

respectively (US$ 1 R$ 2.20). Catch costs are generally high,

as fishing gear costs between US$ 500 and US$ 2000 for most

systems and only the large-scale and industrial modalities

receive government subsidies designed to reduce fuel costs.

The fishermen from more than half of the fishery production

systems have very low monthly incomes, accounting for less

than the minimum salary (US $130) and therefore pertain to

the most underprivileged social classes. In order to supplement

their income, some individuals participate in other economic

activities, mainly agriculture. Fishermen of the artisanal

systems live in small communities or rural settlements and

have little access to education, health services or adequate

living conditions. Illiterate fishermen and those with an

education level below the regional average predominate with

60% in these fishery systems.

Comparisons between fishery systems

In all evaluation fields analyzed using MDS, the scale of the

fisheries appeared as the most important separation factor,

clearly distinguishing the artisanal from the industrial systems.

Those considered large-scale artisanal modalities were nearly

always located at an intermediate position, but closer to the

industrial systems. There was also a clear distinction with

regard to fishing environment, separating those that operate in

estuaries or near the coast from those that operate on the

continental shelf. In the analysis of technological attributes,

the industrial systems targeting red snapper, laulao catfish and

shrimp, as well as the lobster system, present themselves at the

far left of the graph. These modalities utilize vessels with

powerful motors, take long trips of up to 30 days, operate in

waters on the continental shelf, and use communication and

navigation equipment. These fishery systems also stand out

due to their more sophisticated catch processing and improve-

ment methods (as an added value for products with quality

control) both before and after landing. Laulao catfish and

industrial shrimp catches are performed with trawl nets; gill

nets are used for lobster catches, placed adrift over the ocean

bottom. These nets have low selectivity and incidentally

catch a variety of species (Fig. 2; Table 4) allowing for large

by-catch.

Manual collections of crab and longline artisanal catches incoastal areas (principally catching species from the family

Ariidae) are more selective fishing systems. Together with

artisanal (line) and industrial (fish trap) red snapper catches,

these systems compose a group that presents itself in the upper

portion of the analytical graph based on technological

attributes (Fig. 2). The quadrant in the lower right unites

artisanal fisheries (shellfish, sardines, coastline, estuarine nets,

beach shrimp, fish traps, etc.), which operate in estuarine

regions or near the coast and are distinguished from the other

systems by their lower fishing capacity.

In the ecology field, the systems appearing on the right side

of the graph (Fig. 3) coincide with industrial and large-scale

artisanal fisheries, which are characterized by well-defined

target species. The average size of target species has been

diminishing over time as a consequence of excessive fishing

Table 2Marine fish landings (tonnes, live weight) by main species, trend index 19972004, Para State

Species

Landings (t)Trend index(slope)1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Sciades herzbergii 3304 3698 2985 2984 5848 5731 2685 3881 120Bagre bagre 4487 3056 3761 3761 5255 2946 1965 2971 )202

Farfantepenaeus subtillis 4951 5333 4110 4110 3039 3898 3474 3655 )

239Scomberomorus cavalla 240 374 823 823 508 971 775 565 52Aspistor parkeri 8941 9039 9939 9939 12274 7989 8099 9465 )54Palinuridae and Scyllaridae 71 726 247 247 1121 912 1180 323 82Lutjanus spp. 7126 5222 6431 6431 4926 5664 4993 6303 )128Cynoscion acoupa 12 227 16 612 14 254 14 254 17 181 21 631 21 027 14 337 737Macrodon ancylodon 5301 5697 6732 6732 3452 3858 3329 6116 )215Scomberomorus brasiliensis 9275 12 255 10 999 10 999 6080 6858 6822 10 882 )396Sciades proops 2510 3319 3228 3228 4175 3690 4427 3071 140Total 90 579 108 630 95 876 101 518 98 553 104 705 93 305 88 980

Source of data: IBAMA, 2007.

An interdisciplinary evaluation of fishery production systems 247


5/14

Table 3Marine fishing production systems and their differentiation criteria, Para State

CodeName of thesystem Fleet* Gear Target Environment

Workrelationship Revenue**

Isolationdegree***

ISN Industrial snapper Industrial Trap Red Snapper Continentalshelf

Entrepreneurial Larger Not isolated

ISR Industrial shrimp Industrial Trawl net Shrimp Continental

shelf

Entrepreneurial Larger Not isolated

ICT Laulao Catfish Industrial Trawl net Laulao Catfish Coast Entrepreneurial Larger Not isolatedALO Lobster Large-scale

artisanalGill net Lobster Coast Entrepreneurial Larger Not isolated

AGW Acoupa Weakfish,coastal gill net

Large-scaleartisanal

Gill net Acoupa Weakfish Coast Ship owner Larger Not isolated

ALC Longline, GillbackerSea Catfish

Large-scaleartisanal

Longline Gillbacker Sea Catfishand sharks

Coast Ship owner Larger Not isolated

ASN Artisanal snapper Large-scaleartisanal

Line Red Snapper Continentalshelf

Ship owner Larger Not isolated

AGM Spanish Mackerel,coastal gill net

Small-scaleartisanal

Gill net King Weakfish andSpanish Mackerel

Coast Partnership Equal Not isolated

ALS Coastal Longline Small-scaleartisanal

Longline Coco sea catfish Coast Partnership Equal Not isolated

ALI Coastal line Small-scaleartisanal

Line King Mackerel andMutton Snapper

Coast Partnership Larger Not isolated

AEW Estuarine netwithout engine


Gill net King eakfish, pemecousea catfish,Bagre bagre, cocosea catfish

Estuary Partnership Smaller Not isolated

AEE Estuarine netwith engine


Gill net King eakfish, pemecousea catfish, Bagre bagre,coco sea catfish

Estuary Partnership Equal Not isolated

ARG River gil l net Small-scaleartisanal

Gill net King eakfish, pemecousea catfish, Bagre bagre,coco sea catfish

Estuary Partnership Smaller Not isolated

ALE Estuarylongline


Longline King eakfish, pemecousea catfish, Bagre bagre,coco sea catfish

Estuary Partnership Equal Not isolated

ATR Estuarybarriers


Trap King eakfish, pemecousea catfish, Bagre bagre,coco sea catfish

Estuary Partnership Equal Isolated

ASA Sardine Small-scale

artisanal

Gill net Sardine Beach Family owned Smaller Isolated

ASR Artisanalshrimp


Gill net Shrimp Beach Family owned Smaller Isolated

ABN Block net Small-scaleartisanal

Gill net Misture of fish species Mangrove Family owned Smaller Isolated

ASH Shellfish Small-scaleartisanal

Manual Crustaceans andmollusks

Mangrove Family owned Smaller Isolated

ACR Crab Small-scaleartisanal

Manual Crab Mangrove Family owned Smaller Isolated

*Fleet: Industrial: Motorized steel boats equipped with navigation, catch and fish conservation devices, length equal to or larger than 15 m,decked with cabin and greater autonomy. Large-scale artisanal: Motorized steel or wooden boats, decked with cabin, length equal to or largerthan 12 m. Small-scale artisanal: Wooden boats smaller than 12 m. with or without cabin. Propulsion: engine, engine and sail, sail and rowing.Canoes included in this category. **Revenue: per capita in relation to local revenue. ***Isolation degree: Access to facilities based on roadconditions and distance to town.

ALE

ASH

ABN

ASR

AEW

ATR

AGM

ALS

AGW

ALCASN

AEE

ARG

ALI

ASA

ACR

ISN

ISR

ICT

ALO

2D Stress: 0.07

Gear

Manual

Net

Net

Longline

Net

Trap

Net

Longline

Line

Trawling

Line

Trap

Trawling

Mangrove

Beach

Estuary

Coast

Shelf

Fig. 2. Distribution of fishery produc-tion systems along Para coastaccording to MDS for technologicalattributes. ISN Industrial snapper;ISR Industrial shrimp; ICT Laulaocatfish; ALO Lobster; AGW Acoupa weakfish, coastal gill net,ALC Longline, gillbacker sea catfish;ASN Artisanal snapper; AGM Spanish mackerel, coastal gill net; ALS Coastal longline; ALI Coastal line;AEW Estuarine net, no engine; AEE Estuarine net with engine; ARG River gill net; ALE Estuary longline;ATR Estuary barriers; ASA

Sardine; ASR Artisanal shrimp;ABN Block net; ASH Shellfish;ACR Crab



6/14

pressure. Their stocks are in a state of either over-exploitation

or highly intense exploitation. Among the artisanal systems

grouped on the left side of the graph, block net, shellfish and

crab fisheries perform catches in estuaries or mangroves in

environments that are more productive, but are also more

vulnerable to degradation compared to coastal areas. Crab

stands out from the other mentioned systems, despite being

caught manually, because of the long life cycle of the species.

This fishery experienced an average size reduction in the

catches; and presents high vulnerability of the adults during

their reproductive phase. There has also been a reduction in

the distribution area and size of suitable habitat as a

consequence of the degradation caused by other human

activities (Fig. 3; Table 5).

Regarding economic aspects, the fisheries can be formed

into three groups (Fig. 4). All industrial and large-scale

artisanal systems are assembled on the right side of the graph

due to the high production level, high average price of the

catch and high income of the fishermen. The final products of

these systems are either exported or sold to other regions in

Brazil. These fisheries are also characterized by the high cost oftheir equipment. Lobster fishing takes an extreme position in

the lower right-hand quadrant due to its aggregate value and

high prices (Fig. 4; Table 6).

Small-scale artisanal fisheries (sardines, crab and beach

shrimp) form a second group on the lower left-hand side

(Fig. 4). These products have little market value and no

aggregate value, which is correlated with the low income of

the fishermen and their supplementary economic activities.

The final group is located in the upper left-hand quadrant of

the graph and includes fisheries with intermediate economic

characteristics (Fig. 4).

Considering social attributes (Fig. 5), the industrial systems

and the lobster fishery stand out once again, as they haveemployees with more stable work relations and, above all, have

more organized class representation. Red snapper and lobster

are caught by fishermen originally from other states of the

Brazilian northeast who came to Para when the stocks in their

own areas were exhausted; these fishermen have greater

acquisitive power. Fishermen targeting the laulao catfish and

shrimp prefer to live in urban centers and thereby enjoy greater

access to health services and education (Fig. 5; Table 7).

Artisanal fishermen gain few benefits from their activities, as

they are the poorest in the entire population. With low levels of

education, they occupy humble residences outside the cities

and find themselves within unorganized class representation

and almost exclusively informal work relations.

Considering political attributes (Fig. 6; Table 8), the groupformed by the industrial fisheries is once again distinguished by

the existence of governmental management measures deter-

mining control of access, assisting with research groups,

supporting the availability of information regarding the

temporal evolution of catches and estimations of reference

points, and providing a greater inspection efficiency. Diverse

social conflicts also take place under these fishery modalities

due to the impact of the fishing gear as well as the greater

technological and economic power of these industrial fishers.

Regarding the artisanal fisheries, despite a relatively lower

environmental impact there are insufficient scientific and

ALE

ASH

ABN

ASR

AEW

ATR

AGMALS AGW

ALC

ASN

AEE

ARG

ALI

ASA

ACR

ISN

ISR

ICT

ALO

2D Stress: 0.12

Gear

ManualNet

Trap

NetLonglineNetTrapNetLonglineLineTrawlingLine

Trawling

Mangrove

Beach

Estuary

Coast

Shelf

Fig. 3. Distribution of fishery produc-tion systems, Para coast, according toMDS for ecological attributes. ISN Industrial snapper; ISR Industrialshrimp; ICT Laulao catfish; ALO Lobster; AGW Acoupa weakfish,coastal gill net, ALC Longline, gill-backer sea catfish; ASN Artisanalsnapper; AGM Spanish mackerel,coastal gill net; ALS Coastal Long-line; ALI Coastal line; AEW Estuarine net, no engine; AEE Estu-arine net with engine; ARG River gillnet; ALE Estuary longline; ATR

Estuary barriers; ASA Sardine; ASRArtisanal shrimp; ABN Block net;ASH Shellfish; ACR Crab

Table 4Correlation coefficients for technological attributes associated withfirst two dimensions (DIM1 and DIM2) obtained in the MDS analyses

Attribute DIM 1 DIM 2

Selectivity of fishing gear 0.39 0.73Duration of trip )0.91 0.04Processing and conservation of catch )0.74 )0.17

School location and navigation devices )

0.88 0.27Evolution of fishing capacity 0.21 )0.70Effect of equipment on the ecosystem )0.77 )0.37Propulsion power of the motor )0.93 0.07On-board communication devices )0.87 0.19Evolution of fishing efforts 0.44 )0.29

Table 5Correlation coefficients for ecological attributes associated with firsttwo dimensions (DIM1 and DIM2) obtained in the MDS analyses


Degree of ecosystem vulnerability )0.92 0.21Primary productivity )0.85 0.22Degree of ecosystem degradation 0.64 )0.21

Modifications in degree of degradation 0.17 )

0.47Variation in extension of habitat 0.38 0.36No. of target species )0.24 0.12Variation in composition of target species 0.58 0.10Duration of life cycle 0.26 0.78Migration range 0.63 )0.01Variation in extension of distribution 0.46 0.68Reproduction vulnerability )0.39 0.74Vulnerability of nursery area )0.59 0.08Discard level )0.26 0.10State of exploitation )0.69 )0.54Changes in sizes of specimens 0.33 0.87



7/14

statistical data that may contribute to management measures.A predominance of open access systems with little control

leads to unorganized growth in the sector. In this dimension,

crab collection stands out from the other systems as it has

some traditional and governmental management measures,

such as the protection of females and collection prohibition

when crabs move in large bands for mating purposes.

In the analysis of the sustainability indicators, a singular

distribution of the fishery systems was obtained, arranged

along a vertical gradient from industrial fisheries (bottom),

large-scale artisanal fisheries (middle) and small-scale artisanal

fisheries (top) (Fig. 7; Table 9). However, in analyzing thehorizontal axis and comparing the two reference points, none

of the systems truly approach either the ideal (good) or the

worst (bad) situation; all occupy intermediate positions,

indicating that there are no truly sustainable systems for the

chosen attributes when considering all evaluation fields simul-

taneously.

In the kite diagram, most of the systems demonstrate

irregular polygons, with apices pointed to one or another

extreme of sustainability. For example, the non-motorized

ALE

ASH

ABN

ASRAEW

ATR

AGM

ALS

AGW

ALC

ASN

AEE

ARG

ALI ASA ACR

ISN

ISR

ICT

ALO

2D Stress: 0.07

Gear

ManualNetNetLonglineNetTrapNetLonglineLineTrawlingLineTrapTrawling

Mangrove

Beach

Estuary

Coast

Shelf

Fig. 5. Distribution of the fishery production systems of the Para coast according to MDS for social attributes. ISN Industrial snapper; ISRIndustrial shrimp; ICTLaulao catfish; ALO Lobster; AGWAcoupa weakfish, coastal gill net, ALC Longline, gillbacker sea catfish; ASN

Artisanal snapper; AGMSpanish mackerel, coastal gill net; ALS Coastal longline; ALI Coastal line; AEWEstuarine net, no engine; AEEEstuarine net with engine; ARG River gill net; ALE Estuary longline; ATR Estuary barriers; ASA Sardine; ASR Artisanal shrimp;ABNBlock net; ASH Shellfish; ACR Crab

ALE

ASH

ABN

ASR

AEWATR AGM

ALS

AGW

ALC

ASN

AEE

ARG

ALI

ASA

ACR

ISN

ISR

ICT

ALO

2D Stress: 0.05 Gear

ManualNetNetLonglineNetTrapNetLongline

LineTrawlingLineTrapTrawling

Mangrove

Beach

Estuary

Coast

Shelf

Fig. 4. Distribution of fishery production systems of the Para coast according to MDS for economic attributes. ISN Industrial snapper; ISRIndustrial shrimp; ICTLaulao catfish; ALO Lobster; AGWAcoupa weakfish, coastal gill net, ALC Longline, gillbacker sea catfish; ASN Artisanal snapper; AGMSpanish mackerel, coastal gill net; ALS Coastal longline; ALI Coastal line; AEWEstuarine net, no engine; AEEEstuarine net with engine; ARG River gill net; ALE Estuary longline; ATR Estuary barriers; ASA Sardine; ASR Artisanal shrimp;ABNBlock net; ASH Shellfish; ACR Crab

Table 6Correlations coefficients for economical attributes associated with firsttwo dimensions (DIM1 and DIM2) obtained in the MDS analyses


Average price of 1st commercialization (R$) 0.54 0.67Average production kg year)1 by unit of production 0.85 0.22Aggregate value )0.77 )0.45Per capita income 0.90 )0.16Frequency of activities )0.85 0.17Relative importance of other activities )0.67 0.49Cost of equipment )0.90 )0.10Rate of price variation )0.92 )0.05Destination of product 0.93 )0.12Subsidies and public resources )0.90 0.25Degree of dependency on middlemen 0.87 0.11

Table 7Correlation coefficients for social attributes associated with first twodimensions (DIM1 and DIM2) obtained in the MDS analyses


Profession indicators )0.88 )0.01Work relations )0.91 0.00Schooling )0.66 )0.18Origin of fishermen )0.77 )0.47Assistance and health services )0.94 )0.10Social organization )0.71 0.40Transportation and road infrastructure )0.75 0.36Place of residence )0.74 )0.03Housing quality )0.72 )0.02No. of fishermen 0.10 0.77



8/14

estuary fisheries using longlines and nets and the collection of

shellfish (first line in Fig. 8) appear more sustainable from the

technological standpoint (pointing toward the lower right);

they do not use high technology, but have high selectivity andavoid the collection of juveniles. Furthermore, they occur in

ecosystems that are considered more productive and, thus,

these kites are somewhat highlighted from the ecological

standpoint, although not with regard to economic or political

sustainability as they yield little and have no specific regula-

tions for their management.

The second line of Fig. 8 displays systems that have a good

performance regarding ecological, technological and, in somecases, social sustainability, such as motorized estuarine fisher-

ies and sardine and coastal longline fisheries. The longline

Table 8Correlations coefficients for management attributes associated withfirst two dimensions (DIM1 and DIM2) obtained in the MDS analyses


Limited access to resource )0.93 0.18

Reference points )

0.67 )

0.52Traditional regulatory measures 0.08 0.81Governmental regulatory measures )0.76 0.55Diagnosed human impact )0.96 0.07Sectors identified and considered in management )0.84 0.08Existence of conflicts 0.72 0.10Complete, reliable statistics )0.68 )0.11Research assistance )0.94 0.02Conservation organizations 0.59 0.60Assessment of management measures )0.81 )0.30Inspection efficiency )0.92 )0.15

ALEASH

ABN

ASR

AEW

ATR

AGM

ALS

AGW

ALCASN

AEE

ARG

ALI

ASA

ACR

ISN

ISRICT

ALO

2D Stress: 0.03

Gear

Manual

Net

Net

Longline

Net

Trap

NetLongline

Line

Trawling

Line

Trap

Trawling

Mangrove

Beach

Estuary

Coast

Shelf

Fig. 6. Distribution of the fishery pro-duction systems of the Para coastaccording to MDS for managementattributes. ISN Industrial snapper;ISRIndustrial shrimp; ICTLaulaocatfish; ALO Lobster; AGW Acoupa weakfish, coastal gill net,ALC Longline, gillbacker sea catfish;

ASN Artisanal snapper; AGM Spanish mackerel, coastal gill net; ALSCoastal longline; ALI Coastal line;AEWEstuarine net, no engine; AEE Estuarine net with engine; ARG River gill net; ALE Estuary longline;ATR Estuary barriers; ASA Sardine; ASR Artisanal shrimp;ABN Block net; ASH Shellfish;ACR Crab

ALE

ASH

ABN

ASR

AEW

ATR

AGM

ALS

AGW

ALC

ASNAEE

ARG

ALI

ASAACR

ISN

ISR

ICTALO

Good

Bad

2D Stress: 0.11

Gear

Manual

Net

Net

Longline

Net

Trap

Net

Longline

Line

Trawling

Line

Trap

Trawling

Mangrove

Beach

Estuary

Coast

Shelf

Fig. 7. Distribution of fishery produc-tion systems of the Para coast accord-ing to MDS for sustainabilityattributes. ISN Industrial snapper;ISRIndustrial shrimp; ICTLaulaocatfish; ALO Lobster; AGW Acoupa weakfish, coastal gill net,ALC Longline, gillbacker sea catfish;ASN Artisanal snapper; AGM Spanish mackerel, coastal gill net; ALSCoastal longline; ALI Coastal line;AEWEstuarine net, no engine; AEE Estuarine net with engine; ARG River gill net; ALE Estuary longline;ATR Estuary barriers; ASA

Sardine; ASR Artisanal shrimp;ABN Block net; ASH Shellfish;ACR Crab

Table 9Correlation coefficients for sustainability attributes associated withfirst two dimensions (DIM1 and DIM2) obtained in the MDS analyses

Attributes DIM 1 DIM 2

Average schooling of fishermen 0.79 )0.19Social organization of fishermen 0.72 0.16Number of fishermen 0.26 0.49Degradation of the catch environment 0.65 0.31Catch discards 0.12 0.81Exploitation status )0.32 0.68Selectivity of fishing gear 0.10 0.76Evolution of fishing capacity 0.23 0.44Evolution of fishing effort 0.00 0.55Per capita income 0.90 )0.11Existence of subsidies )0.49 0.77Degree of dependence on middlemen 0.88 )0.17Traditional management measures )0.11 0.39Existence of conflicts 0.07 0.76Assessment of management measures 0.72 0.07



9/14


10/14

sustainability of fisheries in Para is not an easy task.

Sustainability has many definitions and can be measured in

various ways (Chuenpagdee and Alder, 2001). Organizing

fishery systems through MDS and the comparison of good

and bad reference points should allow an assessment of the

situation of each fishery system in relation to an ideal

multidimensional sustainability. We observed, however, that

most systems of the Para coast are arranged in a mid-positionbetween goodand bad. This means that most of the fisheries

in the region are not in a position of ideal sustainability. While

the small-scale systems stand out for their ecological sustain-

ability, the industrial and large-scale artisanal systems produce

good economic yields and possess a number of fishery control

and management measures. Other fisheries seem more sus-

tainable from the technological standpoint (e.g. longline) due

to high selectivity or the maintenance of a relatively stable

fishing capacity or effort. Thus, practically no system presented

balanced scores in all evaluation fields.

Artisanal fishing is a traditional activity along the coast of

the North Region of Brazil, originating among the ancient

Amerindian populations that once inhabited the coast. Indus-

trial fishing emerged in the 1960s as a consequence ofgovernment subsidies that led to the installation of large

enterprises coming from other regions of the country with a

considerable capacity for exploitation. This development

model was intended to assure the occupation of the Amazon

territory as a matter of national security. It was also

established with the principle that technical-instrumental

modernization would increase productivity and generate

economic benefits from the fishery activities. Technology

transformed the traditional production relations and intro-

duced a new capitalist logicinto the activity, which in turn led

to environmental degradation (Mello, 1994; Leitao, 1995).

Based on a small number of scientific research studies, the

government regulated industrial fisheries through the control

of fishing efforts (licensing), delimitations regarding the type of

gear (mesh sizes), catch seasons (closed seasons) and coastal

closed areas. Perhaps because of having been planned in a

relatively centralized way, fishermen most often failed to obey

the measures, which consequently led to either the over-

exploitation of resources or economic collapse, as in the cases

of shrimp (Isaac et al., 1992), lobster (IBAMA, 1994), the

laulao catfish (Barthem and Petrere, 1995; IBAMA, 1999), and

red snapper (Salles, 1997; Souza, 2002).

Large-scale artisanal fisheries emerged more recently. The

shift of the fleet from the northeast to the northern region of

Brazil in search of more productive sites leads us to think that

the stocks caught by these fisheries could very well follow the

same pattern as in the northeast and be rapidly exhausted(Dias Neto et al., 1997) if control measures are not urgently

taken.

Production systems that exploit the acoupa weakfish,

gillbacker sea catfish, catfish, sharks and Spanish mackerel

are considered artisanal according to Brazilian law. As such,

there is no specific legislation or control regarding these

fisheries. However, as we can see in the present work these

fisheries occupy an intermediate position between industrial

and small-scale artisanal systems. There is also a noticeable

tendency toward increased fishing pressure as a consequence of

good economic yields and government subsidies for purchas-

ing fuel and financing fishing vessels. As these systems target

species with long life-cycles, the risk of over-fishing due to the

growth of these fisheries is imminent. Therefore sustainability

should be reinforced. Control measures regarding the number

of boats (through limiting, specific licenses) as well as the

establishment of minimum specimen sizes for target species

should be prioritized in these fishery modalities. A small

number of scientific studies have warned of the high levels of

effort in these fisheries, such as those targeting the gillbacker

sea catfish, Acoupa weakfish and Spanish mackerel (Araujo,

2001; Souza et al., 2003a,b in Fre dou and Asano-Filho, 2006).

With these precedents, it also appears evident that greaterresources are needed for research development regarding these

systems so that new information is available to serve as a basis

for the formulation of management measures to help avoid the

exhaustion of stocks.

The small-scale fishery modalities, such as those performed

within estuaries or regions near the coast for the capture of

fish, crabs and shellfish, proved to be systems that are still

quite sustainable, especially from the ecological standpoint, as

they have a relatively low environmental impact despite

occurring in sites that are rather vulnerable to degradation.

These systems receive no government assistance, as subsidies

require a certain degree of entrepreneurial organization that is

lacking in this group, which works informally and has very

little political leverage. These fisheries also present the worsteconomic indicators and the lowest social attributes, which

explains the lack of accumulated capital and deplorable living

conditions of the stakeholders (Diegues, 1995). Thus, an

increase in social organization and the aggregate value of the

products should be considered priority actions for the devel-

opment of this fishery group in order to improve economic

yields. Technological development and government subsidies

do not assure sustainability, as can be seen in the larger-scale

production systems, and should therefore be avoided.

Small-scale fisheries exhibit relatively few conflicts and in

some cases, such as with crabs and fish traps, present a number

of traditional management measures that set these systems

apart. Crab collectors avoid catching females at all times and

respect the spawning season by not capturing adults (Almeida

et al., 2006). With fish traps, the aquatic areas for the

construction of these traps are considered private, which

constitutes a form of management and control of fishery effort.

As in other locations in Brazil, planned and controlled

measures exercised by the fishermen themselves offer greater

efficiency than any government-induced measures (Begossi,

1998; Isaac et al., 1998). This reinforces sustainability. How-

ever, from the political standpoint, there are a number of

conflicts and contradictions regarding Brazilian law. For

example, a large number of artisanal fisheries are in mangrove

environments, which are considered environments of perma-

nent, integral protection and are therefore untouchable. To

reconcile this impasse, the Brazilian Environmental ProtectionAgency, IBAMA, decreed a number of reserves along the Para

coast in order to assure the fishermen residents the use of

these natural resources while simultaneously assuring preser-

vation (Cabral et al., 2005; Glaser et al., 2005).

The results of the multivariate comparison of the fishery

production systems of Para allowed the detection of the need

for differentiated management measures depending on the

system in question. Furthermore, it has taught us something

about the concept of sustainability, which does not seem viable

in all evaluation fields simultaneously. Glaser and Diele (2004)

also found asymmetric responses between biological sustain-

ability on one side and socioeconomic sustainability on the

other in the crab fisheries of the North Region of Brazil. These

findings indicate that it is necessary to make choices in the

adoption of management measures. It seems evident that



11/14

environmental sustainability should be considered a priority,

as the degradation of resources could lead to the collapse of

fisheries, which will obviously affect the social and economic

aspects of the activity.

Public policy failure in controlling the systematic increase

in fishery efforts can be attributed, at least in part, to the

verticality in which control regulations are established, as

well as to the lack of legitimacy of the institutionsresponsible for management. Corrective measures should

be taken swiftly; a more democratic management system

that encourages the sharing of responsibilities among all

interest groups and that delegates part of the responsibility

in decision-making would allow increased governability of

management measures as well as assure the most suitable

priorities in order to optimize yields while guaranteeing the

preservation of resources and the environment. There are a

number of successes in this type of approach in various

fisheries of the world and Brazil (Isaac et al., 1998; Vieira

et al., 2005) that can serve as incentives to improving the

performance of sustainability indicators regarding the fishery

modalities of the coast of Para .

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support from

the National Council for Scientific and Technological Devel-

opment (CNPq), and the anonymous referees for comments on

earlier drafts of the manuscript.

References

Alder, J.; Pitcher, T. J.; Preikshot, D.; Kaschner, K.; Ferriss, B., 2000:How good is good? In: Methods for assessing the impact offisheries on marine ecosystems of the North Atlantic, Vol. 8.D. Pauly, T. J. Pitcher (Eds). Fisheries Centre Research Reports,

Vancouver, Canada , pp. 136182.Alder, J.; Zeller, D.; Pitcher, T.; Sumalia, R., 2002: A method forevaluating marine protected area management. Coast. Manage30,121131.

Almeida, M. C.; Bentes, B.; Esprito-Santo, R. V.; Mourao, K. R.;Oliveira, C. M.; Fre dou, F. L., 2006: A explotacao do caranguejoUcides cordatus (Decapoda: Ocypodidae) (Linaeus, 1763) nomunicpio de Braganca, litoral do Estado do Para , Vol. 2. Anaisdo Congresso de Biologia Marinha, Nitero i, Brazil, pp. 162162.[Exploitation of Ucides cordatus crab (Decapoda: Ocypodidae)(Linaeus, 1763) in Braganca, Para State].

Araujo, A. R. R., 2001: Dinamica populacional e pesca da gurijubaArius parkeri (Traill, 1824) (Siluriforme; Ariidae), na costaatlantica do Estado do Amapa . MSc. Thesis. UniversidadeFederal do Ceara , Fortaleza, Brazil, 74 pp. [Population dynamicsand fishery of Arius parkeri (Traill, 1824) (Siluriforme; Ariidae) inthe Atlantic coast of Amapa State].

Baeta, F.; Pinheiro, A.; Corte-Real, M.; Costa, J. L.; de Almeida,P. R.; Cabral, H.; Costa, M. J., 2005: Are the fisheries in theTagus estuary sustainable? Fish. Res. 76, 243251.

Barthem, R. B., 2004: O desembarque na regiao de Bele m e a pescana foz amazonica. In: A pesca e os recursos pesqueiros naAmazonia brasileira. M. L. Ruffino (Ed.). Ibama (Institutobrasileiro do meio ambiente e dos recursos naturais renova-veis) ProVarzea, Manaus, Brazil, pp. 153211. [Fish landings inthe Bele m region and the fishery in the mouth of the AmazonRiver].

Barthem, R. B.; Fabre , N. N., 2004: Biologia e diversidade dosrecursos pesqueiros da Amazonia. In: A pesca e os recursospesqueiros na Amazonia brasileira. M. L. Ruffino (Ed.). Ibama(Instituto brasileiro do meio ambiente e dos recursos naturaisrenova veis) ProVarzea, Manaus, Brazil, pp. 1763. [Biology andbiodiversity of fishery resources in the Amazon].

Barthem, R. B.; Petrere, M., Jr, 1995: Fisheries and populationdynamics of Brachyplatystoma vaillantii (Pimelodidae) in theAmazon Estuary. In: Condition of the worlds aquatic habitats.

World Fisheries Congress Proceedings, Theme 1. N. B. Armant-rout (Ed.). Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt, New Delhi, India,pp. 329340.

Begossi, A., 1998: Property rights for fisheries at different scales:applications for conservation in Brazil. Fish. Res. 34, 269278.

Bentes, B., 2004: Diagno stico da Pesca no Litoral Paraense. MSc.Thesis, Zoology, Museu Paraense Emlio Goeldi, UniversidadeFederal do Para , Bele m, Brazil, 138 pp. [Assessment of the fisheryin the littoral of Para ].

Cabral, N.; Mathis, A.; Glaser, M., 2005: Polticas publicas, capitalsocial e participacao na pesca artesanal no Nordeste paraense.In: Gente, ambiente e pesquisa. Manejo transdisciplinar nomanguezal. M. Glaser, N. Cabral, A. L. Ribeiro (Eds). UFPA(Universidade Federal do Para ) NUMA (Nucleo de meioambiente), Bele m, Brazil, pp. 207222. [Public policies,social capital and participation in the artisanal fishery of NEPara State].

CEPNOR, 2003: Estatstica da pesca martima e estuarina do Estadodo Para 1997 a 2000, Centro de Pesquisa e Gestao de RecursosPesqueiros do Norte do Brasil, Bele m, Brazil, 39 pp. [Marine andestuarine fishery statistics of Para State 1997 to 2000].

Chuenpagdee, R.; Alder, J., 2001: A sustainability ranking of NorthAtlantic fisheries. In: Fisheries Impacts on North AtlanticEcosystems: Evaluation and Policy Exploration, Vol. 9. T. J.Pitcher, U. R. Sumaila, D. Pauly (Eds). Fisheries Centre ResearchReports, Vancouver, Canada, 93 pp.

Clarke, K. R., 1993: Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changesin community structure. Austral Ecol. 18, 117143.

Clarke, K. R.; Warwick, R. M., 1994: . Change in marine commu-nities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation,Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Plymouth, UK, 144 pp.

Dias Neto, J.; Chagas, L. D.; Marrul Filho, S., 1997: Diretrizesambientais para o setor pesqueiro: diagno stico e diretrizes para apesca martima. Ministe rio de Meio Ambiente, Braslia, Brazil,124 pp. [Environmental policies for the fishery sector: Assessmentand policies for marine fisheries].

Diegues, A. C., 1995: Povos e Mares: Leituras em So cio-AntropologiaMartima. Nucleo de Apoio a` Pesquisa sobre Populaco es Huma-nas em A reas Umidas Brasileiras, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sa oPaulo, Brazil, 269 pp. [People and Seas: Lectures on MarineSocial Anthropology].

Fre dou, F. L.; Asano-Filho, M., 2006: Recursos pesqueiros da regiao

Norte. In: Programa REVIZEE Programa de Avaliacao doPotencial Sustenta vel dos Recursos Vivos na Zona EconomicaExclusiva Brasileira. Ministe rio do Meio Ambiente, Secretaria deQualidade Ambiental, Braslia, Brazil, pp. 121152. [Fisheryresources of the Northern region].

Furtado, L. G., 1981: Pesca artesanal: um delineamento de sua histo riano Para . Bol. Mus. Para. Emlio Goeldi, nova se r. Antropologia,Bele m, Brazil, 79, 150. [History of the artisanal fishery in thestate of Para ].

Furtado, L. G., 1991: Uma poltica pesqueira para a Amazonia.Revista Proposta, Bele m, Brazil, 15, 2025. [A fishery politics forthe Amazon].

Furtado, L. G.; Nascimento, I. H., 1982: Pescadores de linha do litoralparaenses: uma contribuicao aos estudos do campesinato naAmazonia. Bol. Mus. Para. Emlio Goeldi, nova ser. Antropolo-gia, Bele m, Brazil, 82, 149. [Line fishers from Para State: acontribution to the study of peasantry in the Amazon].

Glaser, M.; Diele, K., 2004: Asymmetric outcomes: Assessing thebiological economic and social sustainability of a mangrove crabfishery, Ucides cordatus (Ocypodidae), in North Brazil. Ecol.Econ.49, 361373.

Glaser, M.; Berger, U.; Macedo, R., 2005: A sustentabilidade nagestao de florestas de manguezal sob condico es de ilegalidade. In:Gente, ambiente e pesquisa. Manejo transdisciplinar no mangue-zal. M. Glaser, N. Cabral, A. L. Ribeiro (Eds). UFPA NUMA,Bele m, Brazil, pp. 6986. [Sustainability on forest managementunder condition of illegality].

IBAMA, 1994: Perfil do setor lagosteiro nacional, Vol. 12. Ibama(Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos NaturaisRenova veis), Colecao Meio Ambiente, se rie Estudos de Pesca,Braslia, Brazil, 81 pp. [Assessment of the lobster fishery sector].

IBAMA, 1999: V Reuniao do Grupo Permanente de Estudos sobre aPiramutaba, Vol. 26. Ibama (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio

Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renova veis), Colecao MeioAmbiente, se rie Estudos de Pesca, Braslia, Brazil, 92 pp. [5thMeeting of Permanent Group for the Study of Laulao Catfish].



12/14

IBAMA, 2007: Estatstica da pesca, 2005, Brasil. Grandes regio es eunidades da Federaca o. Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente edos Recursos Naturais Renova veis, Diretoria de Fauna e Recur-sos Pesqueiros Difap, Coordenacao-Geral de Gestao deRecursos Pesqueiros CGREP. In: http://www.ibama.gov.br/recursos-pesqueiros/wp-content/files/estati2005.pdf (accessed 13July 2007. [Fishery statistics, 2005, Brazil].

Isaac, V. J.; Barthem, R. B., 1995: Os recursos pesqueiros daAmazonia brasileira. Bol. Mus. Para. Emilio Goeldi, se r. Antro-

pol., Bele m, Brazil, 11, 295339. [The fishery resources of theBrazilian Amazon]

Isaac, V. J.; Dias Neto, J.; Damasceno, F. G., 1992: Biologia, dinamicade populaco es e administracao pesqueira do camarao rosaPenaeus subtilisda regiao Norte do Brasil, Vol. 1. Ibama, ColecaoMeio Ambiente. Se rie Estudos de Pesca, Braslia, Brazil, 187 pp.[Biology, population dynamics and fishery management of thebrown shrimpPenaeus subtilisfrom the northern region of Brazil].

Isaac, V. J.; Ruffino, M. L.; McGrath, D., 1998: In search of a newapproach to fisheries management in the Middle Amazon. In:Fishery stock assessment models for the 21st century. F. Funk,J. Heifetz, J. Ianelli, J. Power, T. Quinn, J. Schweigert, P. J.Sullivan, C. I. Zhang (Eds). Alaska Sea Grant, Fairbanks, AK,USA, pp. 889902.

Isaac, V. J.; Santo, R. V. E.; Silva, B. B.; Castro, E.; Sena, A. L., 2006:Diagno stico da pesca no litoral do Estado do Para. In: A pescamarinha e estuarina do Brasil no incio do seculo XXI: recursos,tecnologias, aspectos socioeconomicos e institucionais. V. J. Isaac,A. S. Martins, M. Haimovici, J. M. Andrigetto Filho (Eds).Universidade Federal do Para , Bele m, Brazil, pp. 1133. [Assess-ment of fisheries in the littoral of the state of Para ].

Legendre, P.; Legendre, L., 1998: Numerical Ecology, Elsevier,Amsterdam, NL, 853 pp.

Leitao, W. M., 1995: Pesca e polticas publicas. Bol. Mus. Para. EmilioGoeldi, se r. Antropol., Bele m, Brazil, 11, 185198. [Fishery andpublic policy].

Loureiro, V. R., 1985: Os parceiros do mar: natureza e conflito socialna pesca da Amazonia, Museu Paraense Emlio Goeldi, Bele m,Brazil, 227 pp. [The partners of the sea: Environment and socialconflicts in the Amazonian fisheries].

Maldonado, S. C., 1986: Pescadores do mar. A tica, Sa o Paulo, Brazil,77 pp.

Mello, A. B. F., 1985: A pesca sobre o capital: a tecnologia a servico da

dominacao. Editora da Universidade Federal do Para , Bele m,Brazil, 296 pp. [The fishery and the capital: the technology fordomination].

Mello, A. B. F., 1994: Capitalismo, pesca e empobrecimento naAmazonia: a contrafase da modernizacao. In: A Amazonia e acrise da modernizacao . M . A . DIncao, I. M. Silveira (Eds).(Colecao Eduardo Galvao), Museu Paraense Emlio Goeldi,Bele m, Brazil, pp. 473489. [Capitalism, fishery and impoverish-ment in the Amazon: the counterface of modernization].

Motta-Maue s, M. A., 1984: A literatura oficial sobre a pesca naAmazonia: uma tentativa de revisao crtica. Semina rio sobre apesca artesanal. Anais, IDESP, Bele m, Brazil, pp. 103129.[Bibliographic references for the fishery in the Amazon: a criticalreview].

Nery, A. C., 1995: Tracos da tecnologia pesqueira de uma area depesca tradicional na Amazonia Zona do Salgado Para . Bol.Mus. Para. Emilio Goeldi, se r. Antropol., Bele m, 11, 199293.

[Fishery technology in a traditional area of the Amazon Salgadozone Para ].

Paiva, M. P., 1997: Recursos pesqueiros estuarinos e marinhos doBrasil. Universidade Federal do Ceara , Fortaleza, 286 pp.[Marine and estuarine fishery resources of Brazil].

Pinheiro, L. A., 2005: Descrica o geral da pesca no Para . Finalgraduation work. (Oceanography) Universidade Federal doPara , Bele m, Brazil, 94 pp. [Description of the fishery of Para ].

Pinheiro, L. A.; Fre dou, F. L., 2004: Caracterizacao geral da pescaindustrial desembarcada no Estado do Para . Revista Cientfica daUfpa, Bele m, Brazil, 4, 116. [Characterization of industrialfishery landed in Para State].

Pitcher, T. J.; Preikshot, D., 2001: Rapfish: rapid appraisal techniqueto evaluate the sustainability status of fisheries. Fish. Res. 49,255270.

Pitcher, T. J.; Bunty, A.; Preikshot, D.; Hutton, T.; Pauly, D., 1998:Measuring the unmeasurable: a multivariate interdisciplinary

method for rapid appraisal of health of fisheries. In: Reinventingfisheries management. T. J. Pitcher, P. J. B. Hart, D. Pauly (Eds).Chapman and Hall, London, UK, pp. 3151.

Pitcher, T. J.; Mackinson, S.; Vasconcellos, M.; Nttestad, L.;Preikshot, D., 1999: Rapid appraisal of the status of fisheriesfor small pelagics using multivariate, multidisciplinary ordination.In: Fishery stock assessment models. T. J. Quinn II, F. Funk, J.Heifetz, J. N. Ianelli, J. E. Powers, J. F. Schweigert, P. J. Sullivan,C. I. Zhang (Eds). Alaska Sea Grant, Fairbanks, USA, pp. 759782.

Preikshot, D. B.; Nsiku, E.; Pitcher, T. J.; Pauly, D., 1998: Aninterdisciplinary evaluation of the status and health of Africanlake fisheries using a rapid appraisal technique. J. Fish Biol.53(Suppl. A), 382393.

Salles, R., 1997: Identificacao dos estoques de pargo, Lutjanuspurpureus Poey, nas regio es nordeste e norte do Brasil entre 43W e 49 W. MSc. Thesis. Engenharia de Pesca, UniversidadeFederal do Ceara , Fortaleza, 89 pp. [Fish stocks of Lutjanuspurpureus in the northern and northeastern region of Brazil].

Senna, A. L., 2003: O trabalhador da pesca industrial em Bele m. PhD.Thesis. Universidade Federal do Para , Nucleo de Altos EstudosAmazonicos, 289 pp. [The workers of the industrial fishery inBele m].

Souza, R. F. C., 2002: Dinamica populacional do pargo Lutjanuspurpureus Poey, 1875 (Pisces: Lutjanidae) na plataforma Norte doBrasil. MSc. Thesis. Animal Science, Universidade Federal doPara , Bele m, Brazil, 81 pp. [Population dynamics of Lutjanuspurpureus Poey, 1875 (Pisces: Lutjanidae) in the northern marineplatform of Para ].

Souza, R. F. C.; Ikeda, R.; Fonseca, A.; Souza, L.; Brito, C.; Fre dou,F. L.; Lima, P. R.; Castro, A. C. L.; Dourado, E., 2003a:Dinamica populacional da serra Scomberomorus brasiliensis dacosta norte do Brasil. Report. Programa REVIZEE-Programa de

Avaliacao do Potencial dos Recursos Vivos da Zona EconomicaExclusiva Brasileira. (mimeo). [Population dynamics ofScomber-omorus brasiliensis of Northern Brazil].

Souza, R. F. C.; Souza, L.; Fonseca, A.; Ikeda, R.; Brito, C.; Furtado,I., Jr; Torres, M. F.; Castro, A. C. L.; Matos, I. P.; Fre dou, F. L.,2003b: Dinamica populacional da pescada amarela Cynoscionacoupa da costa norte do Brasil. Report. Programa REVIZEE-Programa de Avaliacao do Potencial dos Recursos Vivos da ZonaEconomica Exclusiva Brasileira. (mimeo). [Population dynamicsofCynoscion acoupa off the northern coast of Brazil].

SUDEPE, 1988: Diagno stico da pesca do Estado do Ceara , Superin-tendencia de Desenvolvimento da Pesca, Fortaleza, Brazil, 176 pp.(mimeo) [Fishery assessment of the state of Ceara ].

Vieira, P. F.; Berkes, F.; Seixas, C. S., 2005: Gestao integrada eparticipativa de recursos naturais. Conceitos, metodos e experi-encias. Ed. Secco APED, Floriano pois, Brazil, 416 pp. [Inte-grated and participative management of natural resources.

Concepts, methods and experiences].

Authors address: V. J. Isaac, Laboratory of Fisheries Biology andManagement of Aquatic Resources, The FederalUniversity of Para , Bele m-Para , Brazil.E-mail: [email protected]



13/14


14/14

2009 - An interdisciplinary evaluation of fishery production systems off the state of Para´ in...

Documents

Transcript of 2009 - An interdisciplinary evaluation of fishery production systems off the state of Para´ in...