Introduction
Coastal habitats are one of the most productive and valued ecosystems in the world (Costanza et al. 1997), but they are seriously threatened by factors such as habitat loss and degradation, pollution, overexploitation, species introduction, climate change and fisheries (Suchanek 1994, Cooke and Cowx 2006). Recreational and artisanal fisheries are often concentrated in coastal regions, where multiple uses of natural resources and continued overexploitation and degradation by human activities require increased efforts on the part of fisheries and coastal management (Lazzari et al. 2021). Until recently, it was thought that catches of recreational fisheries were significantly lower than those of commercial fisheries. Global fish catches have been estimated to be 14% higher if recreational fishing is added to commercial catches (Hyder et al. 2018). However, recent studies have shown that in some areas recreational catches are similar or even higher (Cooke and Cowx 2004, Zeller et al. 2008, Pita et al. 2018).
Recreational boat fishing together with the artisanal fishery are included in the category of small-scale fisheries (SSF), which is defined by the Common Fisheries Policy as “fishing carried out by fishing vessels of an overall length of less than 12 m without using towed fishing gear” (European Parliament 2014). The SSF boats usually use passive fishing gear targeting a wide range of pelagic and benthic coastal species, mostly demersal species, and usually resulting in small catches (Lloret et al. 2018). SSF is often considered more sustainable than large-scale fisheries because it involves smaller catches and has lower discards and lower annual fuel consumption (Lloret et al. 2018). However, SSF affects the fish populations from coastal regions (even if on a smaller scale than large-scale fisheries) and contributes to the decline of global fish stocks (Coleman et al. 2004, Cook and Cowx 2006, Morales-Nin et al. 2010, Castro et al. 2019).
SSF is an important socioeconomic activity in the Autonomous Region of Madeira (RAM) and has been an important factor in the success of human colonization of the region (Correia and Mendes 2000). Madeira is characterized by extremely vulnerable ecosystems due to the scarcity of benthic habitats, mainly restricted to the insular shelf and seamounts (Mata et al. 2013). Also, it has a coastline with high cliffs where access to the sea is sometimes difficult, especially on the north coast where the sea is rougher and the weather more unstable. These characteristics strongly influence the fisheries, limiting both the diversity and abundance of resident fishes and the viable fishing methods (Hermida and Delgado 2016). Fisheries in this archipelago are managed by the use of selective fishing techniques, controlled fishing effort and limited development of industrial fishing, to avoid putting ecosystems and resources at risk (DGRM 2018). Due to the low abundance of coastal and demersal resources, Madeiran fisheries are greatly dependent on the exploitation of a few fish species, including large pelagic migratory fishes, especially bigeye tuna, Thunnus obesus, Lowe, 1839, skipjack tuna, Katsuwonus pelamis (Linnaeus, 1758), and albacore, Thunnus alalunga (Bonnaterre, 1788), small pelagic fishes (mainly the blue jack mackerel, Trachurus picturatus, Bowdich, 1825 and the Atlantic chub mackerel, Scomber colias, Gmelin, 1789) and deep-water species (the scabbardfishes Aphanopus carbo Lowe, 1839 and A. intermedius Parin, 1983) (Hermida and Delgado 2016, Tejerina et al. 2019).
Artisanal fishery uses multispecies techniques, mainly traps, longlines and hand lines. However, the Madeiran artisanal fleet is characterized by boats with a multigear licence that permits them to modify their capture techniques to complement their usual catches with other species such as deep-water fishes or large pelagic migratory fishes (DGRM 2018). The multigear techniques mean that fishers are able to adapt to dynamic environmental conditions according to the season and to the presence of different resources, optimizing the performance. A related problem is the difficulty of carrying out accurate monitoring directed at this multigear fishery (Battaglia et al. 2010), to better ascertain the real biomass extracted.
Recreational fishery is a sector that is rapidly growing in Madeira and encompasses modalities, such as boat fishing, shore angling, shellfish gathering and spearfishing (Font et al. 2012, Martínez-Escauriaza 2020a,b).
Despite the social and economic benefits related to these fisheries (Shon et al. 2015), they also involve significant ecological risks, including overfishing and habitat disturbance (Coleman et al. 2004). To reduce these problems, fishery legislation was introduced and implemented in Madeira in 1973 (National Legislative Decree Nº 9/73, 6 January 1973) for artisanal fishery and only in late 2016 (Regional Legislative Decree N° 484/2016, 14 November 2016) for the recreational fishery. The legislation should reduce the ecological impact of the two fisheries, imposing restrictions on fishing methods and techniques, total catch limits, the minimum legal landing size for certain species, closed seasons and forbidden areas and species (Lloret et al. 2018). Moreover, the legislation for the recreational fishery includes the need for a recreational fishing licence issued by the Regional Fisheries Directorate (DRP).
To date, there are no studies about boat recreational or artisanal SSF in Madeira. For the first time, in this study, the differences and similarities between these activities are highlighted. We analysed artisanal fisheries in the Madeira archipelago from 2013 to 2019, describing the basic characteristics that include the fleet structure, fishing techniques and catch composition. We assessed the catch composition, effort and social characteristics of boat recreational fishery by analysing information obtained from interviews with fishers in 2017. Finally, we propose some measures that should be implemented in order to improve fisheries management.
Discussion
Fleet characteristics
The artisanal fleet in the RAM targeting coastal fishes was relatively small, not exceeding 46 boats in all the years studied, and the boats (average LOA between 4.6 and 6.7 m according to the technique) usually had multipurpose licences allowing them to use different fishing gear for different target species.
Recreational boats showed a similar LOA (4.7 to 6.5 m), but considering the number of licences requested by fishers in 2017, they constitute a much larger fleet, about 17 times the size of the artisanal fishing fleet (789 boats), although a decrease of 14.7% in the number of licences issued was observed from 2017 to 2019. According to the number of licences issued, the number of recreational boat fishers in Madeira represents around 0.3% of the population, which is a lower participation rate than either in mainland Portugal (0.7%) or the Azores archipelago (1.1%) in 2016 (Diogo et al. 2020). However, the number of people fishing recreationally by boat could be underestimated, as has been assessed for the whole recreational fishery in the Atlantic region and Europe (Hyder et al. 2018).
The interviews revealed that recreational boats tended to operate around 2 nm from the coast, while artisanal fishers combined fishing close to shore with trips to more distant fishing grounds, as also occurs in the Azores archipelago (Diogo and Pereira 2013). The commercial artisanal fishers commonly moved further away from the coast, sometimes reaching the Desertas Islands, the Barlavento Sea and Porto Santo. However, sometimes, particularly in winter due to worse weather conditions, artisanal fishers spent more time in shallower waters close to the coast overlapping the fishing grounds of recreational boat fishery.
Artisanal catches varied according to the technique employed and the most abundant catches were D. gibbosus with handline and rod and reel and P. phycis and P. pagrus with longlines. In recreational fishery, the main species caught using rod and reel and hand line were P. pagrus and Serranus atricauda (Günther, 1874), while the trolling technique was used to target large pelagic fishes.
Despite the relatively stable number of artisanal boats over time (except for a decrease in 2014), a noteworthy increase in the catches was observed. The number of fishing operations trebled from 2013 to 2019, reflecting the amount in kg of the annual catch, which in 2018-2019 was three times more than at the beginning of the study period (2013).
The increase in the number of fishing operations observed since 2017 seems to be related to the increase in the catches of D. gibbosus. The first record of this species in the RAM was in 1986, when a specimen was caught in the Bay of Funchal (Wirtz et al. 2008). From 2017, D. gibbosus became the main target species, surpassing 40 t in 2018 and 2019, which would justify a study of the state of its population and how to control its captures. This increase may be associated with three factors: i) the size of this species, because the specimens captured usually had an average weight greater than three kg (Table 3); ii) its high economic value (€7.3/kg in 2017, DRP data) in comparison with P. phycis (€2.85/kg), S. atricauda (€5.18/kg) and P. pagrus (€6.61/kg); and iii) knowledge transmission between fishers of the specific techniques for capturing this species using L. vulgaris as live bait. Moreover, technological advances focusing on improving the efficiency in locating and catching fishes (Cook and Cowx 2006) may have contributed to the increase in catches over time. For example, the technique of squid hand-jig line described for recreational boat fishing changed over the decades due to improvements in gear technology, increasing the fishing efficiency thanks to blinking lights, as observed in Mediterranean Sea (Battaglia et al. 2010) and the Azores (Diogo and Pereira 2013).
Finally, the presence of nets, forbidden in the region, has sometimes been observed at some points near the coast (personal communication) and, even more worryingly, explosives, which are obviously illegal, were sometimes used in the region (personal communication).
Catch species composition
During the study period, 91 taxa were landed by the Madeiran artisanal fleet and 58 taxa were declared by recreational fishers. The number of species caught was much higher, because some genera and families (e.g. Seriola, Isthiophoridae, Mugilidae, Sphyraena and Synodus) encompass several species, and Chondrichthyes were recorded by order: i.e. rays can include individuals of Myliobatis aquila (Linnaeus, 1758) and of the genus Raja, Leucoraja, Dasyatis and Gymnura, and sharks captured by recreational fishery encompass various species. The capture of Chondrichthyes is not permitted in recreational fishing; so when sharks or rays were caught, they were usually released.
The results obtained from this study suggest that there is competition for marine resources between boat recreational and artisanal fisheries. In fact, the boat recreational fishery catches several highly valuable commercial species, including P. pagrus, S. atricauda and Seriola spp., directly competing with the artisanal fishery for the same resources. Catches of red porgy (P. pagrus) by recreational fishers probably also include some pink dentex (D. gibbosus), as they can be easily confused.
Artisanal fishers are able to use fishing gear that is prohibited in recreational fishery, allowing them to access a greater number of species and improve the effectiveness of catches. Moreover, unlike recreational fishery, the artisanal fishery does not have a maximum catch limit. However, a large overlap of species was observed between the two fisheries, and only five species caught in recreational fishing were not detected in the landings from artisanal fishery. The species absent in the artisanal catches were the non-indigenous species (D. labrax and S. aurata), marlins (mainly M. nigricans and T. albidus) captured by the big game fishing fleet (Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2021) and garfish (B. belone). Intensive monitoring and biological studies are needed to evaluate the state of the stocks, in addition to reproductive, growth and other life history characteristics of the main target species. In addition, special attention should be given to vulnerable coastal species, especially long-lived and slow-growing ones with low reproductive potential (Cheung et al. 2005), such as Epinephelus marginatus (Lowe, 1834) and Scorpaena scrofa Linnaeus, 1758. These species serve as potential indicators of environmental health (Ferri et al. 2012), and their reduction contributes to altering the food web (Rochi et al. 2017).
Some of the most frequently caught species are sequential hermaphrodites. The disproportionate capture of one of the sexes may limit the production of eggs or sperm, leading to an imbalance in the population, as happened in northeastern Spain, where the mean landing size of this species was lower than the sex-change size, and only females were caught (Lloret et al. 2012). For example, P. pagrus is a protogynous hermaphrodite and in some localities has compensated for the effects of fishing by changing sex at smaller sizes (Harris and McGovern 1997, DeVries 2007). Also, protandric hermaphrodites such as Diplodus sargus (Linnaeus, 1758) and D. gibbosus, commonly caught by recreational and artisanal fisheries, respectively, need particular attention, because fisheries tend to target larger individuals, which are mostly female, and can thus have a disproportionate impact on the reproductive success of the population.
Chondrichthyes are particularly vulnerable to exploitation because of life history traits such as slow growth and low fecundity. For this reason, additional management and conservation measures are required. Although the capture of most of them is not allowed in recreational fishery (with the exception of Prionace glauca (Linnaeus, 1758) and Isurus oxyrinchus, Rafinesque, 1810), fishers sometimes caught some individuals, which were usually released. However, even if some fishes die due to the stressful angling techniques used (Arlinghaus et al. 2007), the mortality associated with this practice is thought to be low, and catch-and-release may be an effective measure in the management of the populations of these species (Cooke et al. 2013).
Finally, the technique of squid hand-jig line is quite selective, exclusively capturing cephalopods: T. sagittatus, S. pteropus, O. bartramii and L. vulgaris. This technique is usually performed in summer when these species migrate to near the RAM coasts, and several boat lights can be observed from the coast at night between July and August. The abundant amount of squid captured in this period (the legislation allows a maximum of 45 kg, but some fishers admitted to catching more than 100 kg on some occasions) by the high number of boats does not correspond to the few landings recorded in fishing ports. This lack of records highlights the urgent need for studies focused on this fishery, keeping track of the catches, studying the dynamics of their populations, and if necessary proposing suitable regulations.
Among other invertebrates, the decapod crustaceans Palinurus elephas (Fabricius, 1787) and Scyllarides latus (Latreille, 1802) are included in the vulnerable exploited species list and should be under surveillance. In some European countries recreational fishers are not allowed to catch these and other decapod species due to their vulnerability, and in France even professional fishers are not allowed to catch S. latus (Lloret et al. 2020). Closed periods and minimum landing sizes are recommended for these species, as was established in the Azores (Decree Nº 74/2015).
Discrepancies in the reported fisheries data
Erroneous reporting and underreporting of catches in coastal fisheries are problems that contribute to the lack of accurate information reflecting the real status of the target stocks and leading to inadequate conservation (Lloret et al. 2018). Part of the catch in the artisanal fisheries was used as bait, shared by the crew or consumed during the fishing trip. Consequently, total catches should be substantially higher than the landing statistics data (FAO 2015). Moreover, the existing data on daily landings by artisanal boats do not allow the technique used, the fishing grounds and the duration of the fishing events to be accurately determined, making it hard to calculate a suitable measure of fishing effort and CPUE. Thanks to the survey carried out, it was possible to obtain approximate data and to estimate fishing effort and CPUE for the gears used by the artisanal fishers.
Fishing effort, total catch and CPUE for recreational fishing were estimated on the basis of survey data (with a participation rate of 19.3%) and were therefore subject to various biases associated with this type of sampling (NRC 2006, Groves et al. 2011). For example, during data collection some fishers refused to participate in the study. This reaction is common among fishers with no or few catches and causes a loss of part of information, generating deviation (Tarrant and Manfredo 1993). Moreover, among the respondents, a common error is caused by exaggerations in the information or failure to answer some questions. Another error is generated by fishers’ memories. Fishers often remember past events poorly, especially as the time elapsed since the events increases, and very assiduous fishers may confuse past events with others (Zarauz et al. 2013). However, despite the deviation due to the accumulated bias, the final results allowed us to obtain an approximation of real values.
The results for recreational boat fishing showed that the CPUEs calculated for the hand line, rod and reel, trolling and long line varied between 1.39 and 2.08 kg/angler/h (Table 2), with an average of 1.42 kg/angler/h. In the Azores, the estimated average CPUE reported for recreational boat fishing is slightly higher, at 2.3 kg/angler/h (Pico and Faial) (Diogo and Pereira 2013), and in northern Portugal it reaches 3.1 kg/angler/h (Lima 2006). However, these results are based on older data (more than 10 years old), so the comparisons must be taken with caution. Further studies to update the current CPUE values of other regions of Portugal are necessary to obtain a more accurate view of recreational boat fisheries in the country. However, it was possible to compare the CPUE and total catch of boat recreational fishery (this study) with the same values of other recreational fisheries of Madeira (shore angling and spearfishing) estimated for the same year, 2017 (Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020a,b). The CPUEs obtained for shore angling and spearfishing were both lower than those for boat fishing, with an average of 0.35 kg/angler/h and 1.1 kg/angler/h, respectively. However, shore angling showed the highest total catch (520.7 t), followed by spearfishing (517.7 t) and boat fishing (509.8 t), owing to the number of licences issued for each modality in the same year (4825, 1778 and 789, respectively).
Artisanal fishery showed highly variable CPUE values because of the techniques employed and the target species. By contrast, the CPUE of traps showed no variability because it was obtained from only one survey and was therefore not representative. Because the knowledge on artisanal fisheries in Portugal is limited and focuses on specific target species or specific techniques (e.g. Pita et al. 2015, Pereira et al. 2019), it was not possible to compare our results with those of other studies. However, comparing the CPUEs estimated in the present study, artisanal fishery showed higher yields than recreational fishery. This may result in part from the higher mobility of the artisanal fleet, which reaches farther fishing grounds that may have a higher abundance of fish, presence of larger species and/or larger specimens. In addition, artisanal fishers can use a wider range of techniques which are not permitted in recreational fishing (e.g. longlines with a high number of hooks, traps and seine nets), and some of these have a high CPUE (Morato 2012).
Because in 2017 the number of artisanal fishery boats (SSF) was much lower than the number of recreational ones (42 vs. 789), the total catches also reflected this trend, with 62.3 t for artisanal and 509.8 t for recreational fishery. However, the present study did not involve the total catch from the three artisanal purse seiners, estimated at between 942.90 and 1047.82 t from October 2016 to December 2017 (Tejerina et al. 2019). Considering only this value, the total catch of artisanal fishery would be higher than the total catch of recreational boat fishing. However, adding the estimated catches of recreational boat fishery, shore angling and spearfishing (a total of almost 1500 t), the final weight of catches would be considerably higher than the artisanal one. This result suggests that in Madeira the recreational fishery may have a higher impact than the artisanal fishery on the most frequently caught species. Although the commercial fishery is usually considered the main cause of the decline in stocks of many species (Lloret et al. 2018), the results of this study support the idea that recreational fishing may negatively affect the fauna and ecosystems of Madeira, as suggested for other areas of the world (Coleman et al. 2004, Cooke and Cowx 2004, 2006).
Recreational boat fishers’ characteristics and opinions
The recreational fishers interviewed were mostly local residents, and only a few foreigners were encountered during the surveys. The characteristics of typical Madeiran recreational boat anglers (mostly middle-age and males) were similar to those of other regions of Portugal (Lima 2006, Diogo and Pereira 2013) and several areas of the Mediterranean Sea (Morales-Nin et al. 2005, Pawson et al. 2006, Lloret et al. 2008, Battaglia et al. 2010). The almost total absence of women practising this activity was confirmed in the present study, with the sole exception of one woman interviewed. The absence or low number of women fishers is a recurrent characteristic of recreational boat fishing, as observed in other studies from different parts of the world (Lloret et al. 2008, Diogo and Pereira 2013, Ryan et al. 2013). This contrasts with the relatively high proportion of women fishers in Madeira (in comparison with other regions), around 10%, but they are mostly restricted to other modalities, especially shore angling and limpet collection (Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020a, Hermida and Costa 2020). The average age of recreational boat fishers was similar to that of shore angling fishers (42.9; Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020a), but they were older than spearfishers, an activity which tends to attract younger people with an average age of 32.8 (Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020b).
As expected, the mean expenditure by the owners of recreational fishing boats was higher (€763.1 per year) than that reported for the other modalities practised in the region: spearfishing (€465.4) and shore angling (€254) (Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020a,b).
Among all the recreational fishing modalities, a higher percentage of boat fishers (8.5%) admitted to selling their catches, followed by spearfishers (6.9%; Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020b) and shore anglers (3.5%; Martínez-Escauriaza et al. 2020a). This percentage is surely underestimated for all the modalities, because many fishers who sell their catch illegally are reluctant to admit it in a questionnaire. In a recent study on fish consumption habits in Madeira, almost 15% of people admitted to buying fish directly from fishers (Hermida and Costa 2020). Illegal sale of catches by recreational boat fishers was identified as the main problem for the Azores fishery, because 10.3% of fishers sold part of their catches. This problem was partly addressed in 2008 with an implementation of new specific regulations for recreational boat fishing (Diogo and Pereira 2013). Similar action was adopted in the RAM only in late 2016 (Decree Nº 484/2016), but further inspections and more controls by authorities are needed to reduce black market practices and overfishing related to it.
It is also hard to separate true recreational fishing from subsistence fishing; the very high percentage of recreational boat fishers who report consuming the catch certainly indicates that this may be a strong motivation for engaging in this activity. In a previous study (Hermida and Costa 2020), 7% of the population reported engaging in subsistence fishing (i.e. fishing for personal consumption), but the proportion of people who participated in informal fish acquisition (including fishing for consumption, buying directly from the fisher and obtaining fish from family and friends who fish) was much higher (35%).