Photo: N. Olivier Sven Koschinski, Volker Dierschke & Julia Carlström HELCOM SEAL 11, Göteborg 4-6 October 2017
•Principle of the indicator •Provisional assessment •Some problems with underlying data •Regulatory framework •The way forward: Mission impossible? •HELCOM data needs Photo: K. Skora
By- catch Fishing rate effort High risk areas Compare by-catch numbers against threshold value Photo: Australian Fisheries Management Authority, graph: Kindt-Larsen et al. 2016, artwork: Jaqueline Rothschies
Species chosen for provisional assessment •Harbour porpoise •Long-tailed duck •Greater scaup •Common guillemot Reasons Best data availability Removal targets formulated in agreements or former studies More species to be added when data/targets become available Photos: Wikipedia
Assessment Incidental catch [hunting, value oiling] 0 Reported: 66 (1990-2009), harbour porpoise 1(2014) Baltic Proper population 1,0% of ‚best SCANS III abundance estimate harbour porpoise population vs. ICES WGBYC bycatch Western Baltic, Belt Sea and estimate‘ estimate for ICES rectangles 21, Kattegat population 22 and 23: SCANS III census area corresponds to 0.26 to 0.92 % of the abundance tentative population area (Sveegaard et estimate (combined 95 % confidence al. 2015) but area with bycatch estimate interval for abundance and incidental by- does not catch rate) PBR=22.600 22.000 [24.000, tens of long-tailed duck thousands] Western Palearctic population PBR=3.700 2000 in NL, X western Baltic greater scaup [>2000,?] Western Palearctic population PBR=620 common guillemot 1500 Baltic-breeding population
Eastern Gotland Basin (SE, PL, RU. LT, LV, EE) Northern Baltic Proper (SE, FI EE) Bornholm Basin (SE, DK, DE, PL) Bay of Mecklenburg (DE, DK) Western Gotland Basin (SE) Gulf of Finland (FI, RU, EE) Arkona Basin (SE, DK, DE) Gdansk Basin (PL, RU) Bothnian Sea (SE, FI) Bothnian Bay (SE, FI) The Sound (DK, SE) Gulf of Riga (LV, EE) Great Belt (DK, DE) The Quark (SE, FI) Aland Sea (SE, FI) Kattegat (DK, SE) Kiel Bay (DE, DK) harbour porpoise Baltic Proper population x x x x x ? ? x ? ? ? harbour porpoise uncertainties in estimated population size and Kattegat/Belt Sea/Western pressure -> bycatch rate close to the tentative threshold does not imply a good or bad status Baltic population x x x x x x ? greater scaup ? x ? x x ? x x ? ? x ? ? long-tailed duck x ? ? x x ? x x x ? x x x ? ? common guillemot x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x One-out-all-out x = incidental catches proven, ? = incidental catches remain to be shown (overlap of distribution with gillnet fisheries)
Bycatch assessment must also take other causes of anthropogenic mortality into account: collisions, detonations, contaminants, oiling, hunting, ghost nets for which data is also lacking Bird by-catch data is not recent (thus also compared to not recent abundance data), some populations in heavy decline PBR method is an initial and rapid assessment tool for waterbird bycatch which needs testing and validation before it can be considered reliable. Bycatch monitoring for Baltic proper harbour porpoise population would need ~100 % coverage or trustful self-reporting which is unlikely. Bycatch estimate of Western Baltic harbour porpoise population lacks reliable effort data and uses only one catch rate for rectangles 21, 22 and 23 Complicated regulatory framework, often combined with a lack of political will is an obstacle for the collection of more reliable data. Photos: R. Borcherding, J. Haelters
European European European COMMISSION COUNCIL DG MARE PARLIAMENT DG ENVIRONMENT Regional Seas Conventions Scientific, Technical North Sea Baltic Sea and Economic Committee for Advisory Council Advisory Council Fisheries STECF OSPAR HELCOM NSAC BSAC Baltic Sea EcoQO environmental policy - fisheries policy Action Plan Marine Strategy Council & Parliament BSAP Regulation 1380 / CORE Indicator Framework M6 2013 on the Common Number of drowned Directive MSFD Bycatch Fisheries Policy mammals and waterbirds in fishing environmental Indicator Council Regulation gear Data Collection – targets 812/ 2004 measures Multiannual Plan Measures concerning incidental catches of DC-MAP cetaceans National interests COM DC-MAP Decision Art. 8 Parliament and Council Regional Regulation on Guidance Coordination Meeting CMS Bycatch conservation of fishery „RCM Baltic“ resources and the ASCOBANS resolution (Convention protection of ecosystems Council Regulation on Migratory Habitats through technical Birds Directive measures 2005/2187 Species) Directive Baltic Sea Technical Jastarnia Annex I Annexes II & IV Measures Regulation Plan GAP Area EUPoA AEWA Commission Regulation Plan Regulation North Sea 2244 / 2003 Seabirds 1224/2009 Conservatio on detailed provisions National regarding Vessel n Plan Control Regulation implementation Monitoring Systems Scientific advice Baltic Sea International National interests Fisheries Forum Council for the BALTFISH (highlevel Exploration of the national legislation CLA group of national fisheries Sea ICES or directors) environment --- fisheries PVA Working Group Working Group on OSPAR/HELCOM/ on Marine ICES Expert Bycatch of Seefischerei- BNatSchG Group on Seabirds Protected Species Mammal Ecology ordnung Federal Nature WGBYC JWGBIRD Conservation Act WGMME Sea Fishing Regulation Federal level DC-MAP National Work By- catch Plan data The ??? of EU fisheries policies NatSchAG MV KÜFVO MV Nature Conservation Coastal Fisheries related to by-catch of protected species Implementation Law Regulation LNatSchG SH KÜFO SH State Nature Conservation Coastal Fisheries Act Regulation Voluntary State level agreement MELUR (SH)
European European European COMMISSION COUNCIL DG MARE PARLIAMENT DG ENVIRONMENT Regional Seas Conventions Scientific, Technical North Sea Baltic Sea and Economic Committee for Advisory Council Advisory Council Fisheries STECF OSPAR HELCOM NSAC BSAC Baltic Sea EcoQO environmental policy - fisheries policy Action Plan Marine Strategy Council & Parliament BSAP Regulation 1380 / CORE Indicator Framework M6 2013 on the Common Number of drowned Directive MSFD Bycatch Fisheries Policy mammals and waterbirds in fishing environmental Indicator Council Regulation gear Data Collection – targets 812/ 2004 measures Multiannual Plan Measures concerning incidental catches of DC-MAP cetaceans National interests COM DC-MAP Decision Art. 8 Parliament and Council Regional Regulation on Guidance Coordination Meeting CMS Bycatch conservation of fishery „RCM Baltic“ resources and the ASCOBANS resolution (Convention protection of ecosystems Council Regulation on Migratory Habitats through technical Birds Directive measures 2005/2187 Species) Directive Baltic Sea Technical Jastarnia Annex I Annexes II & IV Measures Regulation Plan GAP Area EUPoA AEWA Commission Regulation Plan Regulation North Sea 2244 / 2003 Seabirds 1224/2009 Conservatio on detailed provisions National regarding Vessel n Plan Control Regulation implementation Monitoring Systems Scientific advice Baltic Sea International National interests Fisheries Forum Council for the BALTFISH (highlevel Exploration of the national legislation CLA group of national fisheries Sea ICES or directors) environment --- fisheries PVA Working Group Working Group on OSPAR/HELCOM/ on Marine ICES Expert Bycatch of Seefischerei- BNatSchG Group on Seabirds Protected Species Mammal Ecology ordnung Federal Nature WGBYC JWGBIRD Conservation Act WGMME Sea Fishing Regulation Federal level DC-MAP National Work By- catch Plan data The ??? of EU fisheries policies NatSchAG MV KÜFVO MV Nature Conservation Coastal Fisheries related to by-catch monitoring Implementation Law Regulation LNatSchG SH KÜFO SH State Nature Conservation Coastal Fisheries Act Regulation Voluntary State level agreement MELUR (SH)
Dedicated monitoring needed, but costly DCF (observer) monitoring focuses on fishing methods with highest landings (i.e. trawl fishery rather than static net fishery). This must be accounted for and adapted in DCF contracts between EU and Member States. 812/2004 monitoring of cetacean bycatch also focuses mainly on trawlers (monitoring of vessels >15m, <2% of vessels in the Baltic Sea). DRAFT Technical Measures Regulation (to replace 812/2004) does not address this. Species table in DC-MAP is often perceived as ‘wish list’ to pick from. Others understand it as obligation. Funding of additional obligations must be secured. Effort monitoring in meaningful parameters needed, also small vessels and recreational fisheries. Development of catch limit algorithm CLA or population viability analysis PVA (some parameters already available), quantify other sources of mortality
Recommend
More recommend
