![]() ![]() Despite several important studies, Indigenous fisheries generally receive less attention from scholars and managers than the 17th–20th century capitalist commercial fisheries that decimated many keystone species, including oysters. Historical ecology has revolutionized our understanding of fisheries and cultural landscapes, demonstrating the value of historical data for evaluating the past, present, and future of Earth’s ecosystems. But, to the extent that media contribute to collective identity among residents of the watershed at all, they do so in a complex and heterogeneous manner. These differences in content may be attributable to varying demographic and environmental characteristics along with proximity to the Bay. Multidimensional scaling revealed different structures to collective identity as a function of place. The results showed substantial variation in frequency across time and place but low absolute levels of coverage of the Bay and the watershed. Computerized content analysis assessed the frequency with which the Chesapeake Bay and watershed were mentioned alongside a set of keywords thought to represent different facets of identity (e.g., agriculture, fishing, swimming). The data were drawn from local papers published in municipalities located at the headwaters of the Susquehanna River, midway down the Susquehanna, and where the river meets the Bay. ![]() This study looked for evidence of a collective identity in newspaper articles that referenced the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Improved management has assisted in this recent limited recovery, improving these efforts further by enhancing stock recovery via large no-take sanctuaries, among other actions, could assist in stock recovery.Īlthough collective action is needed to address many environmental challenges, it cannot proceed in the absence of collective identity, that is, evidence of group belongingness expressed in or via communicative behavior. The wild fishery has also increased as disease resistance is developing naturally in the wild stocks, but remains ~5% of peak landings. In recent years, expanding hatchery-produced seed oysters and aquaculture significantly increased leasehold landings. ![]() Overfishing and concomitant habitat loss followed a pattern of sequential population collapses observed in wild oyster fisheries along the Coastlines of the United States and worldwide. This disease outbreak was likely related to warming waters. The private leasehold fishery, in which individuals rent areas outside the public grounds to plant shells and oysters for their own private use, surpassed the public fishery by the late 1920s, which partly masked this decline due to overfishing, habitat degradation, and diseases until both public and private fisheries completely collapsed in the mid-1980s after a third disease outbreak. Despite management and increasing repletion efforts, the public fishery collapsed (annual landings <10% of peak historical landings) by the early 1960s. Declines were noted by the late 1880s and eventually prompted the creation of Virginia's shell-planting and oyster-seed (young-of-the-year, YOY) moving repletion program in the 1920s. The public fishery, where oyster fishers harvest on state-owned bottom, rapidly developed after the Civil War and peaked in the early 1880s. ![]() Early signs of overexploitation and habitat degradation were evident by the 1850s. Oyster populations in Virginia's waters of Chesapeake Bay were lightly exploited until the early 1800s, when industrial fishery vessels first arrived, driven south from New England due to the collapse of northeastern oyster fisheries. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |