Reviewers ' comments indicate that precise impacts of 

 different fishing levels on habitats or ecosystems are not 

 usually predictable. If impacts are not considered to be 

 predictable, that should be stated in the plan. The addi- 

 tional data or theoretical developments necessary for im- 

 proved prediction should be indicated. 



V. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 



Although there are differences in the specific intents 

 and provisions of the FCMA , the MMPA, and the ESA, the gene- 

 ral intents of the Acts are similar, namely, to protect and 

 conserve living marine resources and the ecosystems of which 

 they are a part. Together, the FCMA, MMPA and ESA mandate 

 an ecosystem level perspective on and approach to fisheries 

 management . 



The fishery management plans that have been developed 

 to date recognize, but do not fully reflect, the ecological 

 concepts embodied in the FCMA, MMPA and ESA. While the fish- 

 ery management plans have recognized that optimum yield must 

 consider biological, ecological and socio-economic factors, 

 in most cases OY has been selected without attempting to take 

 account of the impacts of other species on target species , or 

 of either direct or indirect impacts of fishing on species 

 dependent on or associated with target species or on the eco- 

 systems of which they are a part. The strict single species 

 orientation of most of the management plans is contrary to 

 the intents of the MMPA, ESA, and MMPA and to the require- 

 ments of sound management . 



Traditional fisheries management has been single species 

 oriented and has not taken into account interactions among 

 species, or changes in environmental conditions. The incorp- 

 oration of an estimate of natural mortality rate in MSY cal- 

 culations is often considered to be sufficient consideration 

 of the requirements of natural predators. However, long term 

 changes in the abundance of a target species due to fishing 

 can reasonably be expected to result in long term changes in 

 food available to predators . 



Lack of data is generally cited as the reason why fish- 

 ery management plans do not take account of interactions be- 

 tween species, but in most if not all cases, data are suffi- 

 cient at least to evaluate the risk or chances that a proposed 

 or alternative management decision would have adverse biolog- 

 ical, ecological, or socio-economic effects. The estimation 



48 . 



