Evaluating Suitability of Fishing Areas for Squid-Jigging Vessels in the Northwest Pacific Ocean Derived from AIS Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a very interesting study. It would be great to see ongoing research aimed at efficient and sustainable fisheries resource management. Below are some questions and comments:

Introduction: What is the annual squid production in the North Pacific due to squid fishing? Is it decreasing or stable? Furthermore, what international preventative measures are being implemented regarding this issue? For instance, setting fishing quotas or establishing closed seasons etc. It seems that a clear research objective, such as the reduction in squid population, should be mentioned.

In Figure 5(a), the fishing effort (EF) represented by '0' is a bit hard to discern. It would be better to use different shapes for each interval to make it more distinguishable.

The content of subsection 3.4 is somewhat challenging to understand.

Line 192: In Figure 5(b), fishing activity is also occurring at lower HSI. Clearer wording is needed.

Figure 6: In the comparison between AMM and GMM, there is a need to provide clear evidence for why AMM is more effective based on specific criteria (focusing on lines 198-199 and lines 206-209 as highlighted by the authors).

When looking at the figures alone, the fishing effort/frequency graph from GMM appears more effective.

It would be beneficial to include numerical data comparisons, such as the actual number of fishing vessels operating in each HSI segment (using data from 2018) for a better understanding.

Since this study begins with the selection of AMM, there appears to be a need for more substantial justification for why AMM was chosen.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments on this manuscript “Evaluating suitability of fishing areas for squid-jigging vessels in the Northwest Pacific Ocean derived from AIS data”! We have made all the necessary changes to clarify issues identified by the you on the manuscript. Red font was used for the revised parts. Please see our point-to-point responses to your comments below.

Your consideration of our manuscript is appreciated greatly.

Respectfully submitted,

Yours sincerely,

Sanling Yuan

Mail address:

Prof. Sanling Yuan,

College of Science, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology,

516 Jun Gong Road, Shanghai 200093, P. R. China,

E-mail: [email protected]

Tel: 086-021-6533-3510

Our detailed and point-to-point responses to

your comments on manuscript

Responses to reviewer #1

Point: What is the annual squid production in the North Pacific due to squid fishing? Is it decreasing or stable? Furthermore, what international preventative measures are being implemented regarding this issue? For instance, setting fishing quotas or establishing closed seasons etc. It seems that a clear research objective, such as the reduction in squid population, should be mentioned.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

We have added the corresponding content according to your suggestion. Please see the revised manuscript.

Responses to reviewer #1

Point: In Figure 5(a), the fishing effort (EF) represented by '0' is a bit hard to discern. It would be better to use different shapes for each interval to make it more distinguishable.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

We have revised the Figure 5 according to your suggestion. Please see the revised manuscript.

Responses to reviewer #1

Point: The content of subsection 3.4 is somewhat challenging to understand.

Line 192: In Figure 5(b), fishing activity is also occurring at lower HSI. Clearer wording is needed.

Figure 6: In the comparison between AMM and GMM, there is a need to provide clear evidence for why AMM is more effective based on specific criteria (focusing on lines 198-199 and lines 206-209 as highlighted by the authors).

When looking at the figures alone, the fishing effort/frequency graph from GMM appears more effective.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

We have rewritten the section 3.4. The corresponding reasons are also provided in the revised section 3.4. Please see the revised manuscript.

Responses to reviewer #1

Point: It would be beneficial to include numerical data comparisons, such as the actual number of fishing vessels operating in each HSI segment (using data from 2018) for a better understanding.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

We apologize that this fishery data does not have corresponding fishing vessel information. Because the initial data has been pre-gridded and does not include information on individual fishing vessels.

Responses to reviewer #1

Point: Since this study begins with the selection of AMM, there appears to be a need for more substantial justification for why AMM was chosen.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

The results of the weighted-GMM model underestimated the suitable areas for squid-jigging vessel activity. Thus, the weighted-AMM model was considered to be a better model. In addition, the following literature supports the viewpoints of this study.

Yu, W.; Chen, X.; Zhang, Y.; Yi, Q. Habitat suitability modelling revealing environmental-driven abundance variability and geographical distribution shift of winter–spring cohort of neon flying squid Ommastrephes bartramii in the northwest Pacific Ocean. ICES Journal of Marine Science 2019, 76, 1722–1735.

Reviewer 2 Report

Good paper overall. Readability could be improved with the structure of the sections. I would like the see at the start of the discussion, a paragraph that briefly recaps the issue, your approach, and outcomes before rolling into the nitty gritty. Also there are a lot of unnecessary commas, which also impacts the reading.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments on this manuscript “Evaluating suitability of fishing areas for squid-jigging vessels in the Northwest Pacific Ocean derived from AIS data”! We have made all the necessary changes to clarify issues identified by the you on the manuscript. Blue font was used for the revised parts. Please see our point-to-point responses to your comments below.

Your consideration of our manuscript is appreciated greatly.

Respectfully submitted,

Yours sincerely,

Sanling Yuan

Mail address:

Prof. Sanling Yuan,

College of Science, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology,

516 Jun Gong Road, Shanghai 200093, P. R. China,

E-mail: [email protected]

Tel: 086-021-6533-3510

Our detailed and point-to-point responses to

your comments on manuscript

Responses to reviewer #2

Point: I would like the see at the start of the discussion, a paragraph that briefly recaps the issue, your approach, and outcomes before rolling into the nitty gritty. Also there are a lot of unnecessary commas, which also impacts the reading.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

We have added the corresponding content in the “Discussion” section according to your suggestion. Please see the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 3 Report

The author of this study has conducted valuable research on the spatial distribution of fishing activity for squid-jigging vessels in the Northwest Pacific Ocean. They have employed a sound methodology that includes the development of Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models, the use of the Boosted Regression Tree (BRT) model, and the analysis of important environmental variables. The study's findings are important for fisheries management and provide insights into the relationship between fishing activity and climate-related habitat changes.

Here are some positive aspects of the study:

Methodological Rigor: The use of advanced modelling techniques like HSI and BRT demonstrates a commitment to scientific rigour in analyzing the data.

Practical Implications: The study's findings have practical implications for fisheries management, especially in identifying areas of high fishing pressure and the need for targeted conservation efforts.

Alternative Data Sources: The consideration of fishing effort data as an alternative source for research highlights a practical approach to data limitations.

However, there are also some potential areas for improvement or further consideration:

Data Limitations: The study acknowledges that fishery data have limitations due to their spatial and temporal distribution and potential biases. The author might consider discussing these limitations in more detail and suggesting ways to mitigate them.

Policy Recommendations: While the study highlights the need for increased attention to high-pressure fishing areas, it could be strengthened by discussing specific policy recommendations or conservation measures that could be taken to address these concerns.

Overall, the study appears to be a valuable contribution to the field of fisheries management and climate-related habitat changes. By addressing some of the limitations and providing more specific recommendations, the author could further strengthen the study's impact and applicability.

Fairly good

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

Thank you for your comments on this manuscript “Evaluating suitability of fishing areas for squid-jigging vessels in the Northwest Pacific Ocean derived from AIS data”! We have made all the necessary changes to clarify issues identified by the you on the manuscript. Orange font was used for the revised parts. Please see our point-to-point responses to your comments below.

Your consideration of our manuscript is appreciated greatly.

Respectfully submitted,

Yours sincerely,

Sanling Yuan

Mail address:

Prof. Sanling Yuan,

College of Science, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology,

516 Jun Gong Road, Shanghai 200093, P. R. China,

E-mail: [email protected]

Tel: 086-021-6533-3510

Our detailed and point-to-point responses to

your comments on manuscript

Responses to reviewer #3

Point: Data Limitations: The study acknowledges that fishery data have limitations due to their spatial and temporal distribution and potential biases. The author might consider discussing these limitations in more detail and suggesting ways to mitigate them.

Policy Recommendations: While the study highlights the need for increased attention to high-pressure fishing areas, it could be strengthened by discussing specific policy recommendations or conservation measures that could be taken to address these concerns.

Responses: Thank you for your comments very much!

We have added the corresponding content in the section 4.6 according to your suggestion. Please see the revised manuscript.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Please continue to conduct this kind of research in the future.

Thank you.