European research on lost fishing gears Philip MacMullen APEC - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

European research on lost fishing gears

Philip MacMullen APEC workshop, January 2004

Fantared* projects (1995 - 2003)

European studies to:

identify, quantify and ameliorate the impacts of static gears lost at sea

*studies supported by the European Union and *studies supported by the European Union and national govts national govts

New lost gear studies needed because

• previous work was poorly targeted
• little systematic study of the fate of lost

gears

• losses & impacts need to be quantified
• real problems need to be identified and

resolved

• all fishing methods need to comply with

best practice

and our industry and our industry advisory groups advisory groups The Fantared The Fantared partnership: partnership:

Approach

• identify the causes of loss and predisposing

factors - interviews

• establish the extent of loss - interviews and

seabed surveys

• determine evolution, impacts and significant

influences - simulated loss & monitoring

• investigate mitigating measures - various
• optimise industry involvement - NAGs
• all in parallel with Norway’s retrieval programme

Leading to . . .

• putting gear loss in context
• establishing management options
• estimating costs and benefits of

change

• agreeing future strategies with

industry

Approach

• identify the causes of loss and predisposing

factors - interviews

• establish the extent of loss - interviews and

seabed surveys

• determine evolution, impacts and significant

influences - simulated loss & monitoring

• investigate mitigating measures - various
• optimise industry involvement - NAGs
• all in parallel with Norway’s retrieval programme

Causes of loss

• gear conflicts
• water depth
• fleet length
• ground conditions
• gear specification

Nation Highest score Second Third Fourth

UK

Wreck fishing (all areas) Tangle netting in W Channel Hake in W Channel Trammel netting for sole

Norway

Joint are fisheries for Greenland halibut @ 500-700m and ling and blue ling @ 200-500m Joint third are two fisheries for saithe

• n the shelf north and south of 62ºN

respectively

Sweden

Sweden has only one significant métier – for cod in the Baltic.

France – north & west

Flatfish and monkfish Sole and plaice crawfish Joint fourth – hake and wreck fishing

France – Mediterranean

crawfish hake sole Cuttlefish

Spain

Monkfish fisheries @ 50-500m Joint are two hake fishing métiers one inshore for smaller fish, the

• ther offshore using a larger mesh size; and an inshore shellfish

métier.

Portugal

Inshore trap fishing Inshore trammel netting for mixed spp Inshore gill netting for mixed spp Offshore gill netting for hake

Approach

• identify the causes of loss and predisposing

factors - interviews

• establish the extent of loss - interviews and

seabed surveys

• determine evolution, impacts and significant

influences - simulated loss & monitoring

• investigate mitigating measures - various
• optimise industry involvement - NAGs
• all in parallel with Norway’s retrieval programme

Seabed surveys

• Divers
• ROV
• Sonar - SSS & multi-beam
• ‘creeping’ with grapnel-type

devices

Approach

• identify the causes of loss and predisposing

factors - interviews

• establish the extent of loss - interviews and

seabed surveys

• determine evolution, impacts and significant

influences - simulated loss & monitoring

• investigate mitigating measures - various
• optimise industry involvement - NAGs
• all in parallel with Norway’s retrieval programme

Main types of outcome

Four major types of fishery:

• shallow water
• wrecks and reefs
• enclosed sea areas
• deep water

and trap fisheries

Main types of outcome

Four major types of fishery:

• shallow water
• wrecks and reefs
• enclosed sea areas
• deep water
• and trap fisheries

Soak time (days) Estimated catch (kg/100 m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 EstCatch=2.89817e-0.09736t r2=0.9571

A

Soak time (days) Estimated catch (no./100 m net) 3 6 9 12 15 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 EstCatch=9.77778e-1.142947t r2=0.9209

A

All species Hake (target sp)

10 20 30 40 50 60 100 200 300 400 500 600

• No. of days at sea
• No. Of old/other

Norway - inshore

50 100 150 200 250 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 Time after shooting net (months) Fishing area of the net (m2)

Wreck net evolution

Main types of outcome

Inshore:

• biofouling
• wave action
• currents
• towed gear

catch rates fall rapidly, fishing area decreases and nets are inactivated - usually within days

• r weeks

Main types of outcome

Inshore wrecks and reefs:

• netting may be held open
• biofouling occurs rapidly
• catch rates generally fall rapidly
• some fishing potential may remain
• netting suffers from abrasion and tangling

For these fisheries permanent net loss and ghost catches as a proportion of commercial catch were below ~1%

Main types of outcome

Four major types of fishery:

• shallow water
• wrecks and reefs
• enclosed sea areas
• deep water
• and trap fisheries

and our industry and our industry advisory groups advisory groups The Fantared The Fantared partnership: partnership:

Main types of outcome

Enclosed sea areas:

• little or no tidal energy
• no ground swells
• prolonged fishing possible

For these fisheries gear losses were up to ~10% p.a. & ghost catches maybe ~5% of commercial catches

Main types of outcome

Four major types of fishery:

• shallow water
• wrecks and reefs
• enclosed sea areas
• deep water

and trap fisheries

Main types of outcome

Deep water:

• change at ~200 metres depth
• limited water movement
• little or no biofouling
• prolonged fishing possible

Norwegian retrieval programme

• ~12 years’ duration
• 200-400 nets/year
• >10 years’ fishing life possible

Low energy ground conditions AND conflict

Deep water fishing methods: Deep water fishing methods:

• trawling

trawling

• longlining

longlining

• gill netting

gill netting

Deep water fleets: Deep water fleets:

• Norwegian

Norwegian

• Icelandic

Icelandic

• Faeroese

Faeroese

• Scottish

Scottish

• Anglo

Anglo-

• Spanish

Spanish

• Spanish

Spanish

• Portuguese

Portuguese

• German

German

• German

German-

• Spanish

Spanish

• French

French

• Irish

Irish

• Russian . . . . . .

Russian . . . . . .

Evidence of problems in deepwater

• >10 years of Norwegian retrieval work
• anecdotal information about conflicts
• amount of gear being brought ashore
• ‘naturally conflicting’ operating methods
• all predisposing factors present

Approach

• identify the causes of loss and predisposing

factors - interviews

• establish the extent of loss - interviews and

seabed surveys

• determine evolution, impacts and significant

influences - simulated loss & monitoring

• investigate mitigating measures - various
• optimise industry involvement - NAGs
• all in parallel with Norway’s retrieval programme

Mitigation:

• Studies of schemes in UK, Canada,

New England, Faeroe, Lofotens, Australia & New Zealand,

• looked at effort control, technical fixes

and the use of CoPs

Defining good practice

Defining good practice

• the Fantaccord workshop
• brought together all the Fantared research

partners and industry advisors

• built a consensus on the way forward

Main features

• promoted by the fishing

industry

• aimed at:
• sustainability in fisheries
• conservation of marine

resources

• applicable for all commercial

fishermen in Canadian waters

• Canadian fisheries agencies will

ensure that regulatory actions must be in line with the Code

• managed by a Fishing Industry

Board

• The Gillnet debate
• Gillneting in Canadian Atlantic

waters

• Lost gear casualties and gear

recovery

• “Ghost fishing”
• DFO and Fishermen dealing with

the problem:

• Best practices
• Management measures

Contents

Defining good practice

• Only setting the amount of gear that can be handled

regularly and efficiently.

• Marking gear properly, including the identity of the vessel.
• Paying close attention to weather patterns and not setting

gear when poor weather is expected.

• Ensuring that gear is set in such a way as to avoid conflict

with other users, and taking appropriate precautions when fishing in areas of high marine traffic.

• Always carrying net retrieval gear aboard.
• Always attempting to retrieve lost gear and reporting its

loss where possible

Models to draw upon?

• Codes of good practice,
• Fishermen co-operating across

national boundaries, and

• statutory measures including

monitoring and/limiting effort

Recommendations

• fishermen’s associations to adopt

code - from all sectors

• special meeting of Baltic Sea

Fisheries Commission

• set up forum to discuss issues raised

by deep water fisheries

Conclusions

• net loss is amenable to systematic study, the

predisposing factors are consistent,

• significant numbers of nets are lost but their

impact in water <200m is not a cause for concern,

• ghost fishing losses are small compared to

commercial take and discarding,

• CoPs can provide solutions,
• losses in deep water are very problematic

and require urgent action

Next moves

• adoption of the CoP by the European

Commission, promotion to regional authorities & to fishers’ associations,

• developing initiatives on gill net effort control,
• action on deep water fisheries - effort

mapping, conflict reduction & NE Atlantic workshop

• various gear retrieval programmes

European research on lost fishing gears

Philip MacMullen APEC workshop, January 2004

‘Mahalo’ (and sorry if I’ve over- run) from

Philip MacMullen APEC workshop, January 2003