Habitat triage for exploited fishes: Can we identify essential Fish Habitat?

dc.acquisition-srcen_US
dc.contract-noen_US
dc.contributor.authorLevin, PSen_US
dc.contributor.authorStunz, GWen_US
dc.contributor.otherEstuarine, Coastal and Shelf Scienceen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-02-15T16:46:02Z
dc.date.available2010-02-15T16:46:02Z
dc.date.issuedJuly 2005en_US
dc.degreeen_US
dc.descriptionpgs. 70-78en_US
dc.description-otheren_US
dc.description.abstractThere is little doubt that estuarine habitat is important for some exploited fish species, at some times, and in some places. However, it is also clear that we do not have enough resources to conserve or restore all estuarine habitat. Consequently, a simple, quantitative and transparent approach to prioritizing estuarine habitat management is required. Here, we present a general framework for identifying critical habitats of exploited fishes. Our approach requires three basic steps: (1) develop stage-structured models and identify sensitive life history stages; (2) determine what habitats, if any, are important to these stages; and (3) identify sites in which high densities of critical life stages occur in important habitat. We will illustrate the utility of this approach using red drum, Sciaenops ocellatus. Results of a simulation-based sensitivity analysis of a stage-structured matrix model show that most of the variability in population growth rate (?) of red drum is explained by larval and juvenile survival rates. Thus, this approach indicates that larval/juvenile red drum habitat should be given higher priority for conservation and/or restoration than habitats used by other life history stages. To illustrate the potential importance of juvenile habitat to red drum, we modeled the growth of a hypothetical red drum population using different population matrices as manifestations of varying habitat conditions. These numerical experiments revealed that restoration of both marsh and seagrass habitats would yield a ca. 24% increase in post-settlement survival and would result in a ca. 2% increase in an increase sufficient to stem a long-term population decline. Our results illustrate that protection of fish habitat depends not only on protecting sites where fish occur but also on protecting the ecological processes that allow populations to expand. Quantitative and synthetic analyses of ecological data are a first step in this direction.en_US
dc.description.urihttp://gbic.tamug.edu/request.htmen_US
dc.geo-codeGalveston Bayen_US
dc.history1-15-09 kswen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1969.3/18513
dc.latitudeen_US
dc.locationNot available in house - Please contact GBIC for assistanceen_US
dc.longitudeen_US
dc.notesen_US
dc.publisheren_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries10038.00en_US
dc.relation.urien_US
dc.scaleen_US
dc.seriesen_US
dc.subjectessential fish habitaten_US
dc.subjectfish habitaten_US
dc.subjectlife cycle modelen_US
dc.subjectmatrix modelen_US
dc.subjectred drumen_US
dc.subjectsensitivity analysisen_US
dc.titleHabitat triage for exploited fishes: Can we identify essential Fish Habitat?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.universityen_US
dc.vol-issue64(1, Spec. Iss.)en_US
Files