AGENDA
Meeting of the Environmental Committee Thursday 12th April 2018 at 13:30pm
Fisheries Department Meeting Room
Distribution List:-
Hon. Ms Teslyn Barkman, MLA Hon. Mr Ian Hansen, MLA Representative, Falkland Islands Tourist Board Representative, Rural Business Association Representative, Department of Agriculture Representative, Falkland Islands Fishing Companies Association Representative, Falklands Conservation Representative, South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute Mr Mike Evans, Community Representative Mr Dan Fowler, Community Representative Miss Emily Hancox, Community Representative
Environmental Officer Head of Environmental Planning Director of Policy and Economic Development
HE The Governor Principal Crown Counsel
Environmental Committee
13:30 pm, Thursday 12th April 2018
Fisheries Department meeting Room
Part I (Open)
1.0 Apologies for Absence
2.0 Declarations of Interest
3.0 Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 15th December 2017
4.0 Matters Arising
5.0 Update on Natural Capital Assessment: Ness Smith Presentation
6.0 Stanley Common Management Plan update See Attached
7.0 Fisheries Research Plan 2018-2020: Dr. Haseeb Randhawa See Attached
8.0 Research Application See Applications Attached
8.1 Foraging ecology and population genetics of Falklands fur seals and sea lions 2018/2019
8.2 Brown trout in the Falklands: invasion ecology, population structure and genetic diversity
9.0 Papers of Interest Available upon request
Poncet, S. and K. Passfield. 2017. Saunders Island Spear Thistle Control 7-11 December 2017. Island LandCare report to FIG Environmental Planning Department.
Poncet, S. and K. Passfield. 2017. Keppel Island Spear Thistle Control 28 November-7 December 2017. Island LandCare report to FIG Environmental Planning Department.
Lavery, A., 2018. Spiders of the endemic Genus Falklandoglenes: A report to Falkland Islands Government and Falklands Conservation on spiders from Steeple Jason Island, November 2017 to January 2018.
10.0 Date of next meeting
June 2018 – date TBC
Minutes
Meeting of the Environmental Committee
Friday 15th December 2017 at 9.00am
Fisheries Dept Meeting Room
Present: MLA Teslyn Barkman Chair MLA Ian Hansen IH Denise Blake (Policy) DB James Bates (FIFCA) JB Esther Bertram (FC) EB Paul Brewin (SAERI) PB James Bryan (DoA) AG Nick Pitaluga (RBA) NP Richard Hyslop (Policy) RH Emily Hancox (Community Rep) EH Dan Fowler (Community Rep) DF Mike Evans (community Rep) ME
Colin Summers (PWD) CS
Minutes: Denise Blake (Policy) DB
Press and Public Attending: 1
Part I (Open)
1.0 Apologies for Absence
Stephanie Middleton of the Tourist Board, Diane Simsovic, Director of Policy and Economic Development, who Richard Hyslop has stepped in for, Paul Brickle of SAERI, who Paul Brewin has stepped in for and Adam Dawes for the Agricultural Department who James Bryan has stepped in for.
2.0 Declarations of Interest
PB declares interest for matters pertaining to SAERI, DB declares interest for item 7.2 pertaining to her PhD, Chair declares interest for matters relating to Bleaker.
3.0 Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 21st September 2017
PB noted that point 7.0 in the 3rd line from the bottom, this should read territory advisory group not technical advisory group.
4.0 Matters Arising:
Darwin Plus project funding outcome
DB put this item on the agenda to say well done to Falklands Conservation and SAERI for gaining Darwin Plus funding for three Falkland’s projects. PB gave a 1
short overview of SAERI’s 2 projects; “Fine scale design of Falkland Islands Marine Management Areas” and “Soil mapping and online database as climate change mitigation tools”. EB gave a short overview of Falkland Conservation’s grant to continue the work on whales from Berkley Sound “Conserving Falkland’s whale populations, addressing data deficiencies for informed management”.
Landing fees and environmental funding
EH advised that the paper on Environmental Funding went to the Strategic Oil Group before Christmas but needed more information on the financial side. This is now with the Chief Executive and Director of Mineral Resources to be taken forwards awaiting for a direction from members.
Natural Capital Assessment
PB and DB highlighted that this was on the agenda for next time due to time constraints.
5.0 Waste Management Strategy
DB gave an overview of the paper on waste management presented to the Environment Committee. CS attended the Committee meeting to help answer questions.
NP asked what happens in terms of hazardous waste. CS answered that we will deal with the ones we can deal with first. Hazardous waste is the more difficult to deal with and we first need to classify what is hazardous waste and then decide how to deal properly with this waste. We will aim to deal with the other waste first and this will help us gain an overview of what we are producing. We know roughly what is produced but not sure exactly what is produced and have no real measure on how much is produced. NP also asked whether government still stores the dip that was collected off farms a few years ago. CS answered that there are a couple of small containers left of dip that was collected but most of it was now gone. We need to find solutions for hazardous waste such as dip and this can be minimised by minimising what is brought into the islands. Going forwards with understanding the amount of waste produced CS highlighted that as of the 1st of March FIG and their construction partner are segregating their waste into three streams; metal, timber and others. Probably only 1/5th of Saturday collection constitutes what goes into Eliza Cove. Aims to get metal into Mary Hill instead of Eliza cove and reuse wood as possible. Encourage others to do the same. NP asked how this fits into education levels within schools. CS said he’s been working together with the PR team in FIG and the MoD at Mount Pleasant to find a structured approach from both ends. This is independent of whether we are trying to achieve the same thing and end goal is the same. Both a public campaign and an educational campaign aimed at children. CS also commented on glass recycling where the number of glass recycling points and is investigating the likelihood of using a crusher. Chair highlighted the need to have longevity with a PR campaign. EH commented that it would be useful to have a summary of the results from the household study but also it would be useful to have estimates of colours going
2
through the crusher and record that. She also noted that in a previous conversation CS noted the budget requests for additional labour. CS commented that this budget request for additional labour was in support of tip management. He noted that the current situation was not ideal but needed to better manage what was there until a solution is found. Volumes are uncertain and are currently not recorded, and are starting to be recorded. EH noted that it is really positive that all of these things are happening and going forward. EH asks what the next steps are and whether the strategy will have stuff built into it going forwards. DB answered that this is a first high-level draft and is hoping that this will then go through ExCo with a view to start working on finer scale tasks. EH noted that previous work and reports can be incorporated in the next draft. Chair noted this was a valid point and can be referenced and that good work was being done. EH asked whether from MLAs or the Environmental we could endorse the project of the Wise Waste facebook group for “Plastic Free Stanley”. DB and CS noted that they had already met with the group. Chair noted that MLAs had discussed this issue and their campaign had unified support here, acknowledging that the group has global support. She encourages support going forwards. Further discussions ensued about the implementation of the scheme. Also discussed was waste management within fisheries and marine context. Here Chair highlighted that we have international obligations for dealing with this waste. CS noted that it is unsure of how much waste from fishing vessels goes to the tip and this can be addressed together with the private sector and FIFCA. He noted that we complied with MARPOL regulations being met with respect to waste being accepted but potentially not being met with how it is then discarded thus creating a grey area. DF noted that vessels incinerated their waste. Chair noted that there are skips for fishing vessel waste at FIPASS. She also noted that some of our wider environmental legislation was not as robust in some areas as we would like it to be, CS noted that we need to put policies and procedures in place before 6.0 going through a process. EB and EH noted the beach clean-up Falklands Conservation organised and asked for the data from this to be sent to DB.
The strategy was agreed by the committee. Action: DB
Stanley Common Management Plan ToR
DB introduced the terms of reference (ToR) for the creation of the management plan for Stanley Common within FIG. IH asked what the time-scale was for the creation of a Common management plan. DB answered that the plan would be ready by August. EH highlighted that there were a few good wording changes from the Terms of Reference outlined in 2015 including the future-proofing. EH expressed concerns that the no-net loss principle was taken out. DB replied that this principle was included in the ordinance. CS noted that it would not be possible to achieve this as FIG do not own any more land to add to the common. EH noted that when this had been previously discussed it was intended to go out to tender to ensure independence and the capacity to carry out the work within FIG does not appear to have change and independence was sought. Chair noted that independence can be achieved through a steering group and the committee. She also noted that public money was being spent and that this public money can achieve the same within the time frame with the same involvements from
3
independent groups and parties. She also noted that she understood the capacity to handle this work existed in-house and questioned whether it was responsible to take the work out to tender if the same thing can still be achieved in-house in that time-frame. DB noted that the capacity to do the work in-house existed especially within the team at policy which is growing. EB noted that some of the biodiversity framework strategies still need to be created and we must not lose sight of this. EB questioned the wording of point 5 bullet point 2 under the ToR and queried whether this was intended to be voluntary. DB replied that this was intended to be voluntary in the first instance; the one thing that would need regulation would be the use of ranges since demined areas are opened up. ME noted that a Stanley Common’s Officer is a worthwhile role. Chair and IH noted that this role has been proposed in the past but had not been taken further. Chair noted that the management plan would identify what this role will be. CS noted that a Common’s Officer not necessarily warranted a full time role but a Lands Officer has been identified as being useful. He also noted that it is not necessary to wait for the budget cycle but posts can be created throughout the year. EH noted that going forward she does not approve of the ToR and thinks this should go out to tender and done separately as this is what was agreed and that she believes there is not the official capacity within FIG on environmental issues in general and adding this to a heavy workload is unnecessary. EB noted that she supports the need to have more capacity for environmental work and has suggested a change in wording on the document at point 5 bullet point 4 to read instead “Make provisions for the sustainable management for areas and species that are of conservation concern”. PB asked at what point the capacity is reviewed. RH noted that issues in capacity are reviewed constantly within the team at policy. DB noted that there are frequent team meetings where capacity could be discussed if needed. Chair assured that FIG were not losing sight of their environmental commitments. ME noted that time frame wise this needed to 7.0 happen now.
7.1 DB to update the committee on progress with the management plan in April.
Action: DB
Research Licence Applications
Dolphins of the kelp – Biopsy sampling of ‘rare’ cetaceans around the Falkland Islands Further information sought. PB introduced the project. Dr. Costa had identified the opportunity to collect opportunistic samples of rare species. EH highlighted that there was some concern over the technique used to sample as Marina had shown no experience using a rifle or crossbow and the wide ranging group of species listed as her experience using these sampling techniques was not clear. DF noted that though he agrees with EH’s comments he also sees the opportunity for unique 7.2 research. EB agrees with EH’s comments in that we do not want to set a low bar for the approval of invasive techniques in research permits. Chair noted that some of this information was lacking but Dr. Costa had enough experience from prior work and we cannot expect her to have experience with prior samples. It was requested that DB follow up with Dr. Costa and request more information.
4
7.3 Action: DB
Modelling Cultural Ecosystem Services based on demographics Approved. DB informed that she took this permit to committee as it forms part of her PhD to understand the impact of invasive species on Ecosystem Services.
Action: DB 8.0 Amendment to permit R22.2015 Approved. DB informed that this permit was to add nest camera traps for Striated Caracara at Bleaker Island.
Action: DB
Papers of Interest
Sally Poncet. 2017. Report on Calafate Control on Keppel Island 28 November-7 December 2017. Island LandCare report to FIG Department of Agriculture.
Granadeiro, J.P. et al., 2017. Albatrosses bathe before departing on a foraging trip: implications for risk assessment and marine spatial planning. Bird Conservation International.
Campioni, L. et al., 2017 Albatrosses prospect before choosing a home: intrinsic and extrinsic sources of variability in visit rates. Animal Behaviour.
These papers have been noted by the committee and DB has forwarded them to members of the committee. 9.0 Any Other Business EH reminded all interested parties that the consultation of the Premier EIS was currently ongoing and open for comments.
Part II (Closed)
Confirmation of the exempt minutes of the meeting held on 15th December 2017.
Exempt minutes were confirmed.
Any other Business 10.0 Following the meeting, the committee discussed the use of show-of-hands voting on agenda items needing approval. EH also asked what the £8000 that had been put aside for the common was going to be used for. DB answered this is currently used for fencing and signage. Chair added that if this sum were not used it can be used towards other needs and can be used elsewhere in the department and can be carried over.
Date of next meeting
5
April 2018, to be confirmed
The meeting ended at 10.45am
Minutes confirmed this ………………..………………..… day of ……………………………………………………. 2018
Chairman: ………………………………………………….……. Clerk: …………………………………..…………………
6
Dear Stanley Common User,
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this consultation to assess the types of uses of Stanley Common. We are looking for as much input as possible on your use of Stanley Common to complement the creation of a management plan for the Common. This Management Plan is being designed with the needs of the general public in mind; Stanley Common should be a well-managed, enjoyable space for the community while still meeting our goals for sustainability.
Background:
In August 2017 a new Commons Ordinance was agreed by MLAs and in January 2018 it was published in the Gazette. This new Commons Ordinance has resulted in several changes to how Common Land, and Stanley Common in particular, is managed. Through this new Commons Ordinance, Stanley Common has been increased to include the Two Sisters Camp and has been divided into Category A and Category B land. Essentially, Category B land allows for development under certain conditions, while Category A land does not.
The new Ordinance is designed to be accompanied by a Management Plan covering all of the activities that take place on the Common. This survey is the first step in the creation of the Management Plan and will identify the types of activities happening on Stanley Common. Following this we will assess the results and hold a Workshop for stakeholders to decide on management actions for Stanley Common. If you would like to be included in the Workshop please leave you contact details in the space on the survey.
The Survey:
This survey asks you a few details about yourself, what you and your family use the Common for, and where you do your activities. This can be any activity and includes: walking, dog-walking, horseback riding, berry picking or off-roading. If you do list off-roading as an activity please specify the type of vehicle being used (eg: quadbike). Please also note your children’s activities. The information you provide will be treated confidentially and all data published will be anonymised so that you won’t be identifiable.
To do the mapping portion of the survey, simply circle the areas where you do your activity and label it on the map. We have given you two copies of the map should you need more space to record your activities. Roads and landmarks are marked to help you find your bearings but if you need help please contact us.
The survey is available from the 16th of April till the 11th of May 2018. If you have any questions or need any help or assistance, you can contact me on 28427 or by e-mail on [email protected].
Best Wishes,
Denise Blake
Environmental Officer and Policy Advisor
Background Questions:
These questions are optional and will help inform us on the types of users of Stanley Common.
1. What age are you? o <15 o 40-64 o 16-24 o >65 o 25-39 o Prefer not to say
2. Where is your main address? o Stanley o Camp o Prefer not to say
3. What is your residence status on the Islands?
o Falkland Island Status Holder / Permanent Residence Permit o Work permit holder / partner or dependant of work permit holder o Other o Prefer not to say.
4. If you would like to be included in the Workshop to assess management actions for Stanley Common then please leave your contact details below:
Mapping your use of Stanley Common:
The maps attached here are to help identify your use of Stanley Common. To map an activity circle the area in question on the map. You can list up to 5 different types of activity. Then label this area clearly describing the activity in question. If your map gets too full, we have included a second map to continue on. Below is an example.
Environment Committee
Title of Report: Update Report of Stanley Common Management Plan
Report of: Environmental Officer and Policy Advisor
Date: 3/4/2018
1. Purpose
The purpose of this report is to update the Environmental Committee on progress made to date on the management plan of Stanley Common. This is in response to an agenda item raised on the meeting of the 23rd of February 2018.
2. Recommendation
None – this piece is for information only.
3. Report
At the Lands Committee meeting of the 15th of March 2018, the Terms of Reference for the Stanley Common Management Plan were approved and work has since begun on the creation of a management plan for Stanley Common.
Existing structures on the common have been identified, the responsible parties for these structures have been identified and management actions are being identified or have been identified. These structures are:
• Fencing surrounding horse grazing areas: management actions for these will be discussed together with the Department of Agriculture and Horse Owners in May. • Crown leases and grazing licences: There are 9 crown leases and/or grazing licences on Stanley Common. These have been identified and mapped and will be managed in conjunction with their lease agreement. • Animal burial site: An animal burial site has been identified on the Common. This has been mapped and is the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture. Stipulations and management actions outlining further burial sites will be discussed and management actions created together with the Department of Agriculture. • Communication equipment: The majority of communication masts are found on land and are managed under Crown Leases. Some of these structures are located on Common land and will need to have management actions created in line with those found in lease agreements. • Fencing surrounding conservation and environmental management areas: fencing at Yorke Bay Pond (together with the area of Yorke Bay Pond) falls under a management plan, fencing at Gypsy Cove falls under a management plan which will be reviewed, fencing at Cape Pembroke is the responsibility of the Environmental Officer, this will be included in the management plan for that area. • Signs: signs for a variety of purposes including road traffic, environmental and tourism as well as access management exist on the common. These have been mapped (tourism and environmental) or are the responsibility of the Falkland Islands Government for maintenance. Tourism signs have been identified and the management of these will be addressed with the Tourist Board. • Minefield fences: fencing surrounding minefields has been identified and mapped. Surrounding cleared minefields, these fences were left in place to allow for various reasons including allowing the ground to recover. These will be subject to review and the gradual taking down of fences after review. Ideally this work will be carried out with input from the Habitat Restoration Officer at Falklands Conservation. • Fire Arms Ranges: there are several ranges on Stanley Common, these have been identified and work has begun on the possible relocation of these ranges together. The management of these will be handled in the public’s best interest and safety guidelines are to be included. • Ammunition Storage: an ammunition store is located on Stanley Common and is managed by the FIDF restricting all access to the site. • Monuments: these are being identified together with the Museum and National Trust and management needs will be assessed together with FIMNT. • Navigational Aids to Mariners: two aids have been identified on Stanley Common. These, together with the fencing are the responsibility of the Harbour Master including their preservation and upkeep. • Roads and Carparks: These have been mapped and are the responsibility of the Public Work’s Department for maintenance, upkeep etc. • Water Catchment, pumphouses and drainage: These have been mapped and are the responsibility of the Public Works Department for maintenance, upkeep, etc. • Wind Farm and Power Lines: These have been mapped and are the responsibility of the Public Works Department for maintenance, upkeep, etc. • Peat Cutting: this is currently being assessed as the responsibility within government is unclear. • Mary Hill and Eliza Cove: these will be addressed separately as part of the waste management strategy. • Sand Extraction: this will be further managed together with input from the PWD and will fall under the wider Yorke Bay area management. • Magnetometer: TBC • Model Airplane Club: the club no longer exists. • Archery Club: wider management including needs for public safety and other site provisions TBD.
Stanley Common will be managed through a zoned management approach and managed in consultation with all interested parties. To achieve this; a public consultation has been prepared to identify the areas of the common used for recreational purposes. This information will then be used to form material for a workshop to develop zoned management approaches for the various areas of the Common to be held in late May. A copy of this Public Consultation is attached here and will be conducted both on paper and digitally via the internet.
Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
MISSION STATEMENT
The Fisheries Department’s primary mission is to achieve maximum sustainable yield from fish and squid stocks in Falkland and adjacent waters in order to create long- term wealth for the community. This process is to be underpinned by effective Fisheries Science, Fisheries Protection, and Administration.
OBJECTIVES OF FISHERIES SCIENCE
1. To carry out stock assessment and biomass estimates of main commercial species of fish and squid.
2. To collect and analyse all available commercial data, produce licensing advice and establish the TAC/TAE (where available) for the main commercial fisheries.
3. To study the biology, ecology and life cycles of the main commercial marine species inhabiting waters around the Falkland Islands.
4. To enhance our ecosystem approach by studying key biological and physical parameters and dynamics in the Falkland Conservation Zones and adjacent waters.
5. To produce fisheries reports for Government and fishing industry and publish scientific papers for international readership.
6. To study and minimise environmental impacts of fishing practices, and promote good environmental stewardship in the Falkland Islands.
2 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
PERSONNEL
Senior Fisheries Scientist Grade A
Observer Senior Stock Fisheries Scientist PhD Intern Assessment Co-ordinator Scientist Grade C (2 posts, Grade E)
Grade D Grade B
Scientific observers Seabird observer Data Analyst Stock Assessment Fisheries Scientist Fisheries Scientist Scientist (6 posts, Grade E Grade C (Laboratory) (Toothfish) (2 posts, Grade C) Grade E) Grade E Grade D
Data Manager Grade F
There is a team of 19 people grouped into three subsections (scientific observers, stock assessment and fisheries studies) working on various subjects within the Scientific Fisheries Section, plus PhD intern positions.
3 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
MAIN COMMERCIAL SPECIES WITHIN FICZ/FOCZ
Total catch (metric tonnes) of main commercial species in Falkland waters in 1987 and 2016 and their average catches in the last decade (2006-2015).
2006-2015
1987 (Mean) 2016
Red Cod 85 4,180 3,143
Blue Whiting 47,985 8,745 5,415
Illex 142,501 133,819 2,360
Kingclip 748 3,289 1,612
D.Gahi 82,547 46,010 46,447
Martialia 12 1 0
Hakes 16,507 12,445 23,894
Rays 426 5,748 5,906
Toothfish 31 1,416 1,499
Hoki 19,307 16,491 11,562
Rock cod 48,412 7,039
Scallops 121 8
Others 6,309 1,635 4,178
Total 316,458 282,312 113,063
4 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Total catch of main commercial species within FICZ/FOCZ in 2015 and 2016 and their commercial value in £ British pounds.
Catch and Value 2015
Illex 357,719 tonnes, £615.8 Million 50,000 200 45,000 180 40,000 160 35,000 140 30,000 120 25,000 100
20,000 80 Catch (Mt) Catch
15,000 60 Value £'000,000 10,000 40 5,000 20 0 0
Illex Hake Hoki D.Gahi Others Kingclip Butterfish Martialia Red Cod Frogmouth Rock Cod Skate/Ray Blue Whiting
Grenadier Species Toothfish (Trawler) Toothfish (Longliner) Species
Catch Value
Catch and Value 2016
50,000 200 45,000 180
40,000 160 35,000 140
30,000 120 25,000 100
Catch (Mt) Catch 20,000 80
15,000 60 Value £'000,000
10,000 40
5,000 20
0 0
Illex Hake Hoki D.Gahi Others Kingclip Butterfish Martialia Red Cod Frogmouth Rock Cod Skate/Ray Blue Whiting
Grenadier Species Toothfish (Trawler) Toothfish (Longliner) Species
Catch Value
5 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
KEY ACHIEVEMENTS AND OUTCOMES IN THE LAST DECADE
1. Stock assessment of main commercial species (D. gahi, toothfish, rock cod and skates) and Licensing Advice are now made in the Fisheries Department without major external contracts as happened previously.
2. Ecology, population structure and life cycles of two spawning cohorts of the valuable squid domestic resource (D. gahi) are now well studied. Various conservation measures to keep the D. gahi stock sustainable have been implemented including fishing ban in their spawning/nursery grounds, restriction in catching of both juvenile and spawning squid by shortening the fishing seasons, reduction of exploitation rates by decreasing fishing effort and equalizing the fishing effort to exploit both cohorts. As a result, the abundance of both cohorts has a positive trend since 2004, and fishing industry have a mean stable annual catch of 40-45 thousand tonnes.
3. Implementation of commercial fishery biomass surveys on D. gahi since 2004 allowed monitoring the status and abundance of the commercial stocks just before the fishing season.
4. Development and usage of a new DeLury stock assessment model with several depletion events enabled monitoring the D. gahi biomass with synoptic precision during the fishery and closing the season with a two-week warning period to the industry if necessary.
5. Investigations of key environmental factors determining distribution and migrations significantly improved our knowledge of the South Patagonian Stock of the most abundant squid in the Southwest Atlantic, Illex argentinus, which is a key resource to the Falkland fishery.
6. Studies of stock status, demography and structure of the species range of the most valuable fisheries resource in Falkland waters, Patagonian toothfish made it possible to identify period and locations of its spawning and introduce a fishing ban in these areas and locations. Usage of several stock assessment models enabled to identify the decrease in toothfish abundance in recent years and to ease exploitation of its stocks by temporary reduction of TAC. In 2013 – 2016, validated age estimates were used in age-structured stock assessment modelling. Since 2016, a tag-recapture program for adult Patagonian toothfish
6 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
captured in the longline fishery was implemented. Shape analysis methods of otoliths were used to confirm stock identification in toothfish.
7. Demographic studies have been done with two other important finfish stocks, southern blue whiting and red cod, with the establishment of fishing ban for all commercial fishery operations in their spawning area and seasons in 2010. The stocks especially that of southern blue whiting are now being rebuilt.
8. Feeding spectrum and trophic relations have been studied for almost all abundant commercial species of fish and squid inhabiting waters off the Falkland Islands that constitute a background for further ecosystem approach in population modelling.
9. A number of new abundant species with potential interest to the fishery has been identified, and their population structure and abundance estimated, including Falkland mullet, Patagonian rock cod, Patagonian scallop, deepwater grenadiers and shallow water king crab.
10. Mortality of seabirds during commercial operations on longliners was reduced to negligible levels and on trawlers to lower levels by implementing a seabird mitigation policy that has been monitored by dedicated seabird observers. Usage of Fixed Aerial Array (FAA) to reduce seabird mortalities in trawlers has been proven less effective and more technically challenging than originally thought. Preliminary observations suggest that FAAs are likely to provide an improved alternative to the standard tori-line if adequately constructed.
11. Discard management procedures have been initiated with the aim to reduce seabird mortality in trawlers. Two batch discarding studies demonstrated significant reductions in bycatch risks when waste is temporarily stored. In addition, a fleet-wide investigation into waste management options and feasibility was conducted between July 2016 and June 2017. A consultation is under way relating to the specifics and timescales of implementing a waste management policy in the Falkland Islands trawl fleet.
12. In 2011-2013, a study to reduce by-catch of small rock cod and other commercial fish species was carried out. It was recommended that changes in trawl fishing gear should be introduced for all demersal trawl operations, excluding D. gahi licenses. To reduce the unwanted catch of fish under minimum commercial size, it was recommended that the minimum mesh size in trawl codends should be increased to 110 mm (diamond mesh), and that a 40 mm square mesh panel should be inserted in the top panel 2 m before the codend.
7 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
13. MSC certification of the toothfish (longline) fishery was achieved in March 2014, reflecting the ongoing high-standard of fisheries science and management in the Falklands. The fishery was re-assessed in November 2017 and showed marked improvement in the score due to the research conducted on habitat modelling, stock discrimination, and integration of uncertainty in the stock assessment model.
8 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
STATUS OF STUDIES AND STOCK ASSESSMENT OF MAIN COMMERCIAL SPECIES OCCURRING IN FALKLAND WATERS The data on the status of studies of each commercial species and their stock assessment are summarized in the Table below. Traffic light indicators are applied to describe the status.
Green – well studied, needs seasonal or annual monitoring of stock status. Yellow – some important points are unknown, needs further studies. Red – major points are unknown, needs to be studied.
Species Abundance Commercial Life cycle studies Stock structure Stock assessment Conservation value: models applied measures applied Total catch (per kilo)
Illex Variable, between High Well studied. Well known, several Straddling stock, 40,000 t spawning very high (catch seasonally spawning problems in biomass threshold. >100,000 t) and very (Medium) Spawning grounds cohorts application of stock low (<10,000 t) known, feeding grounds assessment models
known, migrations, without the trophic relations knowledge of the Argentinean part
Loligo High High Well studied. Well known, two Biomass survey 10,000 t spawning seasonally spawning before fishing biomass threshold, (catch 20,000-60,000 (High) Spawning grounds cohorts season, depletion fishing ban on t) known, feeding grounds model in-season, spawning and
known, migrations, biomass projection nursery grounds trophic relations model post-season
9 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Rock cod High (catch ~60,000- High Well studied. Stock consists of one Regular annual 30,000 t TAC 77,000 t) interbreeding swept-area surveys threshold in 2017 (Low) Spawning grounds known, population around of the stock in FICZ and 20,000 t for the feeding grounds known, the Falkland Islands. 2018 fishing season the migration extent is Relationship with known, trophic relations stocks from the known Argentine EEZ is unclear.
Southern blue Static at low level Low Well studied. Well known, Straddling stock, TAC of 2,000 t for whiting (catch ~2,000 t) interchangeable some problems in 2013; fishing ban in (Low) Spawning grounds known, stocks with application of stock spawning grounds feeding grounds known, Argentina and Chile. assessment models since 2010 migrations known, trophic without the relations known knowledge of the Argentinean part
Hoki, whiptail Medium (catch Medium Not well studied. Not well-known, Straddling stock, Finfish effort hake ~20,000 t, with needs further problems in limitations possibility to increase) (Low) Spawning grounds studies, possibly application of stock unknown, feeding grounds interchangeable assessment models known, migrations known, stocks with without the trophic relations unknown Argentina and Chile. knowledge of the Argentinean part
Hakes Medium (catch Medium Well studied. Not well-known, Straddling stock, Catch by limited >10,000 t, with needs further some problems in effort in A-licensed possibility to increase) (Medium) Spawning grounds known, studies, application of stock fishery and feeding grounds known, interchangeable assessment models targeted fishery not migrations known, trophic stocks with without the allowed for other relations known Argentina and Chile. knowledge of the licences (W and G) Argentinean part
10 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
11 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Red cod Low (catch <10,000 t, with Medium Well studied. Not well-known, Low migratory Fishing ban in possibility to increase) needs further stock, swept-area spawning grounds (High) Spawning grounds known, studies, possibly method since 2010 feeding grounds known, interchangeable migrations known, trophic stocks with Argentina relations known and Chile.
Kingclip Low (catch <10,000 t, with Low Not well studied. Not well-known, Straddling stock, Finfish effort possibility to increase) needs further some problems in limitations (High) Spawning grounds unknown, studies, possibly application of stock feeding grounds known, interchangeable assessment models migrations unknown, trophic stocks with Argentina without the relations known and Chile. knowledge of the Argentinean part
Toothfish Low (catch <10,000 t) Medium Well studied. Not well-known, Age-based 1,040 t TAC, needs further production model (High) Spawning grounds known, studies, possibly with use of CASAL fishing ban in feeding grounds known, minor interchange statistical package spawning grounds migrations known, trophic with stocks from relations known Argentina and Chile
Skates Low (catch <10,000 t) Medium Not well studied. Not well-known, Skate stocks are No specialized needs further assessed annually fishery to the south (Medium) Spawning grounds unknown, studies, possibly using a biomass of 51ºS. feeding grounds known, interchangeable production model. migrations unknown, trophic stocks of some relations known species with In some years, by Argentina and Chile. swept-area surveys during research cruises
12 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
MAIN GOALS OF THE PROGRAM The following main goals should be followed to ensure stock assessment and management of the commercial fishery resources of the Falkland Islands.
1. Abundance and stock dynamics of main commercial species should be estimated both in-season and after-season and used for licensing advice, TAC/TAE allocation and management.
2. Ecology, stock structure and migrations of main commercial species inhabiting waters around the Falkland Islands should be studied in sufficient detail that would create a basis to apply stock assessment models properly.
3. Hydrographical/oceanographic factors affecting the variability in stock abundance should be studied to reveal possible environmental predictors to forecast the trends in stock biomass with at least several months in advance.
4. The impacts of various fisheries on the environment and ecosystems should be minimised.
In recent years, stocks of a few finfish species in waters around the Falkland Islands decreased with corresponding decrease in fish size. This is especially evident with rock cod Patagonotothen ramsayi, whose abundance drastically decreased by 2016-2017. In 2018-2020, a substantial scientific effort will be directed to studies of demography, abundance dynamics and migrations of the main finfish species from Falkland waters such as hakes, hoki, southern blue whiting, toothfish and rock cod. These will also done for valuable bycatch such as kingclip and red cod.
Monitoring of stock status and abundance of the main commercial squid species Illex and Doryteuthis gahi will be also carried out.
13 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
RESOURCES – SCIENTIFIC BUDGET 2018 – 2020
The following funds are budgeted to accomplish the scientific tasks in 2017- 2018. Similar funding is anticipated in future years of the programme.
Main budget votes of the Scientific Budget 0326:
1. Salaries and wages 690,641
2. Research 53,520
3. Charter fees for research vessel 370,440
4. Charter fuel 184,150
4. Fishing equipment 27,310
The detailed breakdown of the research budget is being prepared every year and is subject to tasks allocated for a given year.
14 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMME 2018 – 2020: KEY TASKS. (DETAILED PLANS WILL BE PRODUCED EACH YEAR)
Objective Task or Action Lead Person Targeted Output Targeted Outcome Resources Timescales and Milestones
Objective #1 Carry out stock Stock Assessment Review relevant stock Stock assessment The Fisheries In-house stock assessment and Scientists, Senior assessment models reports and licensing Department will assessment for On-going biomass estimates Fisheries Scientist and techniques. advice work on stock main commercial of main commercial Develop new stock assessments directly species by 2019?
species of fish and assessment models subcontracting squid. that will include statistical modellers environmental for specific advice if parameters. necessary.
2018-2019 Introduction of TAC Data Analyst, TAC of all commercial TAC based Demersal surveys of Introduction of new in finfish fisheries Stock Assessment finfish species for calculation of VUs in standing biomass of form of Licensing with allocation of Scientists, Senior individual companies finfish fishery finfish species in advice for finfish individual TAC to Fisheries Scientist FICZ fisheries in 2019 companies
2018-2020 Stock assessment of Stock Assessment Introduction of new New approach to Juvenile surveys, Updated stock toothfish using Scientists, Senior parameters into Age assess the stock size catches in observed assessment model abundance of Fisheries Scientist based production of toothfish available commercial trawls, in 2020 juveniles in the model using CASAL to longline fishery data on out of zone shelf, and taking into catches and whale account out of zone depredation catch and whale depredation
15 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Objective Task or Action Lead Person Targeted Output Targeted Outcome Resources Timescales and Milestones
Objective #2 To collect and Data Analyst, Address the data Full operational The Fisheries Annual licensing analyse all available Stock Assessment quality issue; improve commercial and Department will advice for all ongoing commercial data Scientists the data base biological databases, work directly. fisheries. and produce structure and queries. licensing advice and
licensing advice and TAC TAC (where recommendations. available) for every type of Falkland fisheries.
2018 Catch reporting by Data Analyst, Same day acquisition Gradual substitution The Fisheries e-logbooks in all of catch data from of regular catch Department in Falkland fisheries Stock assessment finfish fleet reports to e-logbooks collaboration with scientists In in all fishing fleets Synergy conjunction with Facilitation of data Synergy entry and data management in all fisheries
16 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Objective Task or Action Lead Person Targeted Output Targeted Outcome Resources Timescales and Milestones
Objective #3 Studies of biology, Senior Fisheries Reveal population Reports on biology The Fisheries Structure and ecology and life Scientist structure by genetic and life cycles of Department will functioning of the On going cycles of main and fine chemical main commercial work directly, Patagonian commercial marine methods. Identify species from Falkland subcontracting ecosystem species inhabiting migration routes and Islands waters. external genetic and waters around the stock dynamics by chemical Falkland Islands research surveys. laboratories when necessary.
2018 Environmental Senior Fisheries Possible incorporation Reports Oceanographic and factors influencing Scientist, Stock of environmental SST satellite data, abundance and assessment parameters into stock Illex catch reports migrations of Illex scientist assessment models from jiggers and squid trawlers
2018-2020 Investigation of Fisheries Understanding of Reports The Fisheries Hakes by 2019. stock structure and Scientist, Stock spatial and temporal Department will ongoing population dynamics assessment variability in work directly, of main finfish scientists abundance, subcontracting species (hake, rock reproductive, and external genetic and cod) and bycatch trophic patterns chemical species (kingclip, red laboratories when cod) necessary.
2018-2019 Studies of Senior Fisheries Data for stock Reports E-licensed short First paper distribution and Scientists, assessment of trips using published in year 2. migration of juvenile Fisheries scientist toothfish commercial vessels toothfish on the Falkland Shelf
17 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Objective Task or Action Lead Person Targeted Output Targeted Outcome Resources Timescales and Milestones
Objective #4 Decrease of finfish Senior Fisheries Summary of mesh Fisheries Report, The Fisheries Recommendations by-catch in skate Scientist, size experiments to license regulations Department will of applicable mesh 2018-2019 fisheries avoid the by-catch of for skate fishery work directly. size to skate trawl Stock assessment finfish and squid fisheries by 2019
scientists, species in skate Sea trials using fisheries commercial vessels Fisheries Scientist involved into skate fishery
Objective #5 Study key Senior Fisheries Investigate dynamics Reports on variability The Fisheries parameters and Scientist, Data in oceanography of environment and Department will On-going dynamics of marine Analyst/Stock during research possible impact of work directly ecosystems in the Assessment surveys and standard recent climate subcontracting
Falkland oceanographic change. external Conservation Zones transects. oceanographic and adjacent waters institutions when necessary.
Monthly oceanographic transects, hydrological surveys
18 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Objective Task or Action Lead Person Targeted Output Targeted Outcome Resources Timescales and Milestones
Objective #6 To produce fisheries Senior Fisheries Summarize all Fisheries Statistical The Fisheries Falkland Islands reports for Scientist, commercial and Report, commercial Department will Fisheries Statistical On going Government and Fisheries biological data after reports, scientific work directly. Report annually, all fishing industry and Scientist, Data each fishery season, papers. other reports when
publish scientific Analyst/Stock encourage personnel required, scientific papers Assessment to publish results of papers. Scientists their research without delays.
Objective #7 Reduction of Senior Fisheries Mitigation measures Licensing regulations The Fisheries Annual mortality unwanted Scientist, Seabird to reduce contacts of to implement Department will estimates On going mortalities of Observer, sea birds and marine mitigation measures work directly. seabirds, sea Observer Co- mammals with fishing mammals and ordinator gear sharks to negligible levels
2018-2020 To reduce seabird Seabird Observer, Improved Bird Scaring Licensing regulations The Fisheries Annual mortality mortality in longline Observer Co- Devices, or discard to implement Department will estimates and trawl fisheries ordinator management systems mitigation measures, work directly. installed on the ships fisheries reports
2018-2019 To reduce and avoid Senior Fisheries Optimum seal Licensing regulations The Fisheries Annual mortality seal mortalities in Scientist, exclusion devices put to implement Department will estimates trawl fisheries Scientific within the trawl nets mitigation measures, work directly. Observers, to prevent seals from fisheries reports Observer Co- entering codends and ordinator drowning
19 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
Objective Task or Action Lead Person Targeted Output Targeted Resources Timescales and Outcome Milestones
Objective #8 To meet the MSC Stock assessment Habitat model, with Data will be Fisheries Complete the first standards in the scientist, assessment of the summarised in Department staff. recertification in On going toothfish longline Toothfish longline impact and reports. Peer Collaboration with 2018 fishery scientist, development of a reviewed CFL and external Fisheries scientist move-on rule for VME publications will be organisations for Prepare for the next species. produced where technical analyses. certification with appropriate. MSC v.2 in 2023 Research on adult movement, and The fishery will juvenile mortality continue to be MSC certified. Continued testing of the stock assessment model for robustness in face of uncertainty
20 Directorate of Natural Resources – Fisheries Science Plan 2018- 2020
To fulfil some of the tasks listed above, the following research cruises on the chartered fishing vessel Monteferro are planned in 2018. The times and main tasks of research cruises in 2019 and 2020 will be determined later and will depend in part on a current situation with the fishery and stock abundance, but the demersal survey in February will likely to continue in 2019 and 2020. Recruitment surveys of D. gahi will be carried out before each fishing season using commercial vessel.
1) Demersal survey of February 2018 Monteferro groundfish resources 3 weeks
2) Juvenile toothfish survey December 2018 Monteferro
2 weeks
21 Dr Alastair M. M. Baylis e-mail: [email protected]
Q UALIFICATIONS
• Postgraduate Certificate (2012-2014). Veterinary Conservation Medicine, Murdoch University, Australia. • PhD (2004 – 2008). University of Adelaide, Adelaide South Australia. Dissertation: Seasonal and colony differences in the foraging ecology of New Zealand fur seals. • Hons (2003). Honours degree (cum lade) LaTrobe University, Melbourne, Victoria. Thesis topic: ‘Ontogeny of diving in New Zealand fur seal pups’. • B.Sc. (1999-2002). Zoology major. University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania.
P ROFESSIONAL E XPERIENCE I am a pinniped biologist with a broad interest in the ecology and conservation biology of marine predators. My PhD (2004-2008) explored seasonal and colony differences in New Zealand fur seal foraging ecology. I also have a Postgraduate Certificate in Veterinary Conservation Medicine (2014), which reflects my interest and expertise in pinniped aneasthesia. My post-PhD employment experience between 2008 and 2011 was principally management rather than research focused (South Atlantic seabirds, fisheries and “grassroots” conservation). In 2012 I decided to pursue my passion for research, and the main thrust of my research effort since 2012 has been to develop unique and multidisciplinary projects on little studied pinniped populations breeding at the Falkland Islands and Iceland, in collaboration with colleagues from around the world. This research includes understanding the processes governing past changes in population abundance, and the ecological, genetic and conservation consequences of historical population crashes. To achieve my research objectives, I combine healthy doses of field and laboratory work, with time spent exploring archives.
R E C E N T P ROF E S S I O N A L A PPOINTMENTS • Associate Editor (2017 - present): Frontiers in Marine Science: Marine Megafauna • Research Associate (movement ecology and hydrocarbons). South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute, Falklands (2017 – present) • Research Associate, Icelandic Seal Centre, Iceland (2016 –2017) • Associate Research Fellow in Marine Science, Deakin University, Warrnambool, Australia (2012 –2015) • Conservation Officer, Falklands Conservation, Stanley, Falkland Islands (2009 –2012)
P E E R R EVIEW ED P UBLICATIONS
I have published 37 manuscripts (19 first author). According to Google Scholar (Feb 2018), my publications have been cited 557 times and I have an h-index of 14. For a full list of publications please visit my personal webpage
1
Recent peer reviewed publications 37. Baylis AMM, et al. (2018) Habitat use of adult male South American fur seals. Frontiers in Marine Science 36. Baylis AMM, et al. (2018) Geographic variation in the foraging ecology of South American fur seals. MEPS 35. Auge A, et al. (2018) Framework for mapping key areas for marine megafauna to inform Marine Spatial Planning: the Falkland Islands. Marine Policy (accepted Feb 2018) 34. Sequira A, et al. (2018) Convergence of marine megafauna movement patterns in coastal and open oceans. PNAS (accepted Jan 2018) 33. Baylis AMM, et al. (2017) Habitat use and spatial fidelity of male South American sea lions during the non-breeding period. Ecology and Evolution 7(11): 3992–4002 doi: 10.1002/ece3.2972 32. Handley J, et al. (2017) Jack of all prey, master of some: Influence of habitat on the feeding ecology of a diving marine predator. Marine Biology 164: 82 doi: 10.1007/s00227-017-3113 31. Knox T, Baylis AMM, Arnould JPY. (2017) Habitat use of male Australian fur seals. Marine Ecology Progress Series 566: 243-256. doi: 10.3354/meps12027 30. Baylis AMM, et al. (2016). Contrasting patterns of sexual segregation in a highly dimorphic marine predator. Marine Ecology Progress Series doi: 10.3354/meps11759 29. Baylis AMM, et al. (2016). Pup vibrissae stable isotopes reveal geographic differences in adult female southern sea lion habitat use during gestation. PlosOne 11(6): e0157394. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0157394 28. Huckstadt et al. (2016) Regional variability in diving physiology and behavior in a widely distributed air-breathing marine predator, the South American sea lion Otaria byronia. Journal of Experimental Biology doi: 10.1242/jeb.138677 27. Hoffman et al. (2016) Genetic structure and historical demography of the South American sea lion (Otaria flavescens) provide insights into the catastrophic decline of a marine mammal population. Royal Society Open Science 26. Volpov et al. (2016). Dive characteristics can predict foraging success in Australian fur seals (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus) as validated by animal-borne video. Biology Open doi: 10.1242/bio.016659 25. Baylis AMM, Orben RA, Arnould JPY, Christiansen F, Hays GC, Staniland IJ (2015). Disentangling the cause of a catastrophic population decline in a large marine mammal. Ecology 96: 2834-2847. 24. Baylis AMM, Orben RA, Peters K, Knox T, Arnould J, Costa DP, Staniland IJ (2015). Diving deeper into individual foraging specializations of a large marine predator, southern sea lions. Oecologia 179: 1053-1065.
O N T H E W EB
Twitter: https://twitter.com/al_baylis WordPress: http://albaylis.wordpress.com/ Publons: https://publons.com/author/1227957/alastair-baylis#profile ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alastair_Baylis GoogleScholar: http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=LwB8pH8AAAAJ&hl=en
2
Falkland Islands Government
The Environmental Planning Department P.O. Box 611 Stanley Falkland Islands [email protected] tel 28480
APPLICATION FOR VISITOR PERMIT TO VISIT ISLANDS IN FALKLAND ISLAND GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP
Name of Island you wish to visit: Bird Island
Number of people in your party: Three
Name of Group Leader:
Alastair Baylis
Does the group leader have remote small-island landing experience in the Falkland Islands or in remote islands elsewhere?
Yes (previous sea bird and sea lion censuses and tracking work at the Falkland Islands).
Contact Address: SAERI, Ross Road, Stanley, Falkland Islands
Email: [email protected]
Reason for visiting island: e.g. tourism, scientific research, commercial filming
Scientific research (fur seal deployments).
Date of visit: 4-6 weeks. 15 July 2018 to 30 August 2018
Do you plan to stay overnight? Yes • All rubbish will be taken off the island at the end of the trip • All rubbish will be stored in sealed containers • No materials, (with the exception of biodegradable toilet paper – deposited in the sea) will be left at the site. • A full risk assessment will be conducted shortly after arriving to identify the most suitable camp site / cooking site and toilet site taking into account the sensitivities and vulnerabilities of the island and associated fire risks. • It is preferable that a toilet be designated where there is suitable access to the sea. • There will be no campfires – cooking via gas stove only • Daily communications will be via satellite phone and ‘in-reach’ messages • All foodstuffs should be stored in see-through sealed plastic boxes to minimise the chance of rodents hitchhiking to islands. • If boxes are used, they should be well taped up (ie all holes >5mm and openings sealed). • Boots will be washed prior to shore in a biocide; in this case it will be Virkon. • All clothing will be inspected prior to shore paying particular attention to Velcro, footwear, gaiters, trouser turn-ups and jacket hoods. • No fresh meat, vegetables, fruit or dairy products, especially poultry products and eggs, will be brought ashore.
Name of vessel taking you to the island: Protegat (fishery patrol vessel) or private charter
Will you be accompanied by a local guide: I have visited Bird Island on three prior occasions.
If yes, Local Guide’s name:
Your name: Date: 19.02.2018 Alastair Baylis
Your signature:
THE FALKLAND ISLANDS GOVERNMENT
Environmental Planning Department, P.O. Box 611 Stanley Falkland Islands
Telephone: (+500) 28480 Facsimile: (+500) 27391 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.falklands.gov.fk
RESEARCH LICENCE AGREEMENT
APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH IN THE FALKLAND ISLANDS
Foraging ecology and population genetics of Falklands fur Project title: seals and sea lions 2018/2019
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT DETAILS
Name of the person leading Alastair Baylis the research
Affiliation SAERI
Position Senior Research Fellow
Postal Address Stanley Cottage North, Ross Road, Stanley, Falkland Island
Phone number 500 27374
Email [email protected]
SECTION 2 – ASSISTANTS DETAILS
Name-Surname Affiliation Role Country
Kayleigh Jones BAS Field researcher UK
Rachael Orben Oregon State Uni. Field researcher USA
SECTION 3 – ORGANISATION PARTNER/POINT OF REFERENCE IN THE FALKLAND ISLANDS
SAERI, Falkland Islands Fisheries Department
SECTION 4 – PURPOSE OF RESEARCH In brief, our project aims to better understand the spatial overlap between fur seals, sea lions and the Loligo fishery, and will provide baseline data that can be used to mitigate and manage risks associated with bycatch.
The components of the project are as follows: Fur seals (1) Deploy GPS tags on adult female fur seals at Bird island to quantify the spatial overlap between adult female Falkland fur seals and commercial fishing activity during the winter non-breeding period (July – September). (2) Tag pups at Bird island (using plastic livestock tags) to collect baseline data on fur seal pup survival.
Sea lions (3) Deploy satellite tags on pup/juvenile sea lions to understand movements over the winter non-breeding period (July – September) – various locations. (4) Deploy GPS tags on adult female sea lions in summer (Feb/March 2019) to continue long-term tracking program at Big Shag Island.
SECTION 5 – RESEARCH PROCEDURE
Summary -(1) Deploy and recover 30 GPS tags on adult female fur seals at Bird Island -(2) Tag one 100 fur seal pups with plastic livestock tags -(3) Deploy 6 satellite tags on juvenile sea lions -(4) Deploy and recover 10 GPS tags on adult female sea lions at Big Shag Island -Collect genetic and whisker samples from all animals (n=146) -Collect scats at Bird Island
Fur seals (1) Fur seal adult female: Deploy and recover GPS tags on adult female fur seals (total n = 30) Adult female fur seals will be captured by remote chemical immobilization (ie. Darting – please see section 12.1). Adult females will be equipped with a GPS tag (220 grams, 10 cm x 6 cm x 2 cm depth). GPS tags will be attached to the dorsal pelage using a fast setting araldite epoxy. GPS tags will record both foraging locations and dive behaviour. Tags are archival and seals must be recaptured in order to retrieve the data. Deployment period could last up to 3 weeks, but we expect deployment duration will typically be 1 week. We have successfully used this method to capture adult female fur seals on North Fur Island and Volunteer Rocks without complications. Recapture follows the same procedure as capture.
(2) Fur seal pup tagging (total n = 100): A total of 100 fur seal pups will be captured by hand or by net, and manually restrained. A uniquely numbered plastic tag will be applied to the trailing edge of the fore-flipper (both right and left fore-flipper) using tagging pliers. The pup will then be released. This will enable individual animals to be identified
Sea lions (3) Sea lion pups/juveniles: Deploy penguin PTT tags on pups/juveniles (total n = 6) We will capture six sea lion pups/juveniles in June using a net. Animals will be manually restrained and tags will be attached to the dorsal pelage using a fast setting araldite epoxy.
(4) Sea lion adult females: Deploy and recover GPS tags on adult female sea lions (total n = 10) As per (1). Adult female sea lions will be captured by remote chemical immobilization (ie. Darting – please see section 12.1). Adult females will be equipped with a GPS tag (220 grams, 10 cm x 6 cm x 2 cm depth). GPS tags will be attached to the dorsal pelage using a fast setting araldite epoxy. GPS tags will record both foraging locations and dive behaviour. Tags are archival and seals must be recaptured in order to retrieve the data. Deployment period will be 1 week. We have used this method to capture sea lions on Big Shag Island since 2012. Recapture follows the same procedure as capture.
For all animals captured, collect genetic samples and whiskers (total n = 146) - Tissue samples will be collected by snipping a small piece of skin from the hind flippers using a piglet ear notcher. - Whiskers will be snipped at the base using scissors. - Opportunistically collect scats at Bird Island to assess fur seal diet.
SECTION 6 – ETHICS STATEMENT (Please include copies of any ethics permits issued for the project by your own institution or nation or permits issued by other nations for this project).
I am based in the Falkland Islands.
SECTION 7 – PLEASE STATE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF EACH MEMBER OF THE RESEARCH TEAM (please also attach relevant CVs of the research team)
Name – surname Qualifications (PhD) Alastair has ongoing fur seal and sea lion research at the Falkland Island, the Alastair Baylis outputs of which include the 2014 population census of sea lions, 2018 census of fur seals, population genetics
and foraging ecology. Alastair has expertise in deploying tags on sea lions and fur seals in the Falklands, and a Postgraduate Certificate in Veterinary Conservation Medicine (Murdoch University) – please see personal website for a list of publications https://albaylis.wordpress.com/.
SECTION 8 – DATE OF THE FIELD WORK
From To 2 July 2018 20 September 2018
1 Feb 2019 31 March 2019
SECTION 9 – LOCATION OF THE FIELD WORK
Bird Island (fur seals) Port Harriet (sea lions winter) Cape Dolphin (sea lions winter) Big Shag Island (sea lions summer)
SECTION 10 – LANDOWNER PERMISSION OBTAINED (please cross)
X YES NO
SECTION 11 – INSURANCES (please cross if you have any of the following types) All people entering the Falkland Islands must have medical insurance that covers medical evacuation.
Type All individuals Group
Medical X
Personal Accident X
Public liability X
Professional indemnity X
Travel X
SECTION 12 – PROTECTED WILDLIFE RESEARCH LICENCE REQUEST (Species protected under the Conservation of Nature and Wildlife Ordinance, see Appendix 1 of the researchers’ guideline)
SECTION 12.1 PURPOSE OF RESEARCH
Fur seals • Deploy and recover GPS tags on adult female fur seals (total n = 30): Fur seal capture procedure • Before a seal is darted, a visual estimate of body mass will be made to allocate a dose. Dose will be 1.8 mg/kg estimated weight for females (Baylis et al. 2015). • Zoletil will be administered IM into the lumbar or shoulder muscles of seals via a CO2 powered dart gun and 0.5cc darts. • Once darted, breathing rate will be monitored at a distance using binoculars • At 5 minutes and finally at 10 minutes (peak immobilization), the level of sedation will be assessed • The seal will be approached after 10 minutes has lapsed, unless it is showing signs of respiratory depression, in which case we will approach the animal immediately and respiration simulated as necessary. • If required, gas anesthesia using isoflurane will be used to induce or maintain/regulate anaesthesia. • In some instances, darting may not be necessary and fur seals will first be captured in a purpose-built net, manually restrained and masked until sufficiently immobilised (approx 15 to 20 breaths of isoflurane). • The seal will be gently worked out of the net to facilitate gluing of units and to ensure the animal can be properly monitored. The procedure will take less than 30 minutes.
• Fur seal pup tagging (total n = 100): Individual fur seal pups will be marked using uniquely numbered plastic tags (livestock ear tags), when they are approximately 6 months old. Pups will be captured when they are alone or in small groups of pups (not with their mothers). Pups will be captured away from main breeding beaches to limit disturbance to other animals. A maximum of three (3) pups will be captured at any one time. If more than one pup is captured, additional pups will be temporarily kept in nets (approx. 5 mm mesh, hence breathable). The tagging process itself takes less than 1 minute. Pups will be manually restrained (no anaesthetics will be used). Tags will be applied to the trailing edge of their fore- flipper (photographs from other species can be sent on request). Pups will then be released at the same location captured. Flipper tagging is widely used among pinnipeds. Although pups will be disturbed during capture, the technique is considered to have no effect on behaviour and survival.
Sea lions • Sea lion pups/juveniles (total n=6): We will deploy penguin PTT tags (match-box sized) on sea lion pups/juveniles (approx. 7 months old). We will capture sea lions using a net. Animals will be manually restrained and tags will be attached to the dorsal pelage using a fast setting araldite epoxy. The tags will fall off in approximately 6 months.
• Sea lion adult female GPS deployments (total n = 10): Capture procedure (as per fur seals) • Before a seal is darted, a visual estimate of body mass will be made to allocate a dose. Dose will be 2.8 mg/kg estimated weight for females (Baylis et al. 2015). • Zoletil will be administered IM into the lumbar or shoulder muscles of seals via a CO2 powered dart gun and 1.5cc darts. • Once darted, breathing rate will be monitored at a distance using binoculars • At 5 minutes and finally at 10 minutes (peak immobilization), the level of sedation will be assessed • The seal will be approached after 10 minutes has lapsed, unless it is showing signs of respiratory depression, in which case we will approach the animal immediately and respiration simulated as necessary. • The entire procedure (deployment/recovery) takes 25 minutes.
Seals under anesthesia will be continually monitored for physical signs of the level of anesthesia and stress. Monitoring includes respiratory rate and depth, muscle tone in flippers and jaw, gum colour and capillary refill, palpebral reflex, eye position, iris appearance, and response to pain stimulus (e.g. pinching of the flippers). Seals will be cooled if necessary (seawater on flippers) or warmed (jackets, heat packs). I will be solely focused on animal monitoring. Field assistants will glue tags.
In the event of an emergency, the respiratory stimulant doxapram (Dopram-V®, Hoechst Roussell; 20mg/ml), the cardiac stimulant adrenalin (1:10000, 0.1mg/1 ml), the benzodiazepine antagonist flumazenil (Anexate®, Roche Products Pty Ltd 0.5mg/5ml), atropine and equipment for intubation and manual ventilation will be available at all times. Doxapram will be pre-drawn. I have a Postgraduate Certificate in Veterinary Studies (Conservation Medicine; Murdoch University) and have refined darting as a safe and reliable capture method for southern sea lions and fur seals at the Falkland Islands and New Zealand fur seals and Australian fur seals, in Australia (Baylis et al. 2015).
Finally, to facilitate GPS tag recovery, we will first wrap tags in cloth tape prior to deployment. This avoids the need to cut fur to remove tags. Rather, we will simply cut the tape and peel the tag away from the tape, leaving a small glue footprint which will be moulted off in March/April. This also greatly reduces the time required to retrieve tags.
Darting is necessary because it reduces disturbance, and minimizes capture stress, and the risk of injury to animals. Other methods are impractical because of size (i.e., sea lions), or colony terrain (i.e., fur seals).
Baylis AMM, et al. (2015) Taking the sting out of darting: Risks, restraint drugs and procedures for the chemical restraint of Southern Hemisphere otariids. Marine Mammal Science. DOI: 10.1111/mms.12148 PDF
SECTION 12.2 PRINCIPAL FIELD WORKERS LIST
Alastair Baylis
SECTION 12.3 PRECAUTIONS AND MITIGATIONS
With regard to bio-security - my seal capture equipment was purchased new, and does not leave the Falklands. To limit disturbance, I will opportunistically catch animals that are alone or in small groups. I will avoid the main breeding beaches. We use small GPS tags and deploy tags for a short period of time comparative to lactation length (<3 weeks, both species have a lactation length of approximately 10 months). GPS tags are widely used and we do not anticipate any detrimental effects to individual or offspring survival.
SECTION 13 RESEARCH TOPIC CATEGORY (indicate the main category your research falls in)
Flora and fauna in natural environment Climatology-meteorology-atmosphere Economy Earth science Hydrography Oceanography Society and culture X Environmental resources and conservation Other (specify the topic below)
SECTION 14 PROPOSED TIME REQUIRED BEFORE SENDING COPY OF THE DATA COLLECTED IN THE CURRENT RESEARCH TO THE FALKLAND ISLANDS GOVERNMENT (notice that the maximum time is within 2 years from data collection and researchers should send only quality checked data)
Movement data will be deposited with SAERI IMS-GIS database shortly after field work is completed.
SECTION 15 FEES (If your research is subject to a fee indicate if you agree to pay this by cheque)
Yes
I, the undersigned, am applying to the Falkland Islands Government for a permit to carry out the research detailed within this application. By signing the application form I agree with the terms and conditions stated by the Research Licence Agreement guidelines which
include: • returning to the IMS-GIS data centre data manager a complete metadata form and data submission agreement • sending any subsequent scientific paper and/or report to the environmental planning department • sending, within the agreed time, a copy of the data collected in the field (data should have been quality checked by the researcher) to the IMS-GIS data centre data manager
All the information provided is, to my knowledge, correct and is the planned course of research action. Should any changes be made to any of the information above I shall notify the Environmental Planning Officer accordingly.
Signed:
Date:19 Feburary 2018 Jessica Minett Pen Y Rhedyn Farm, Swansea, SA65SP Email: [email protected] or [email protected] http://www.swansea.ac.uk/csar/students/ http://fishbee.wixsite.com/fishbee/meet-the-team-1 Tel: 07817788349 Education and qualifications 2018-2021 Swansea University PhD Bioscience depart Swansea University (starting January 2018) Thesis: Brown trout in the Falkland Islands: invasion ecology, population structure and genetic diversity. 2016-2017 MRes Bioscience With a focus on Behaviour and Movement Ecology and Marine Biology Fishers and Aquaculture. Thesis: Visual recognition in lumpfish (Cyclopterus lumpus), an emerging aquaculture species used as cleaner fish. 2013-2016 BSc Marine Biology, 2:1 Modules include: Fisheries and aquaculture, Diseases in aquatic animals, tropical marine ecology and conservation, Ecology of marine animals, Environmental impact assessment and Ocean and climate. Dissertation: The effects of a 10 day treatment of an antibiotic and antibacterial on lumpsuckers (Cyclopterus lumpus).
2009-2013 Morriston Comprehensive school A levels: BTEC Sport (Distinction*), Biology (B), Chemistry (C). GCSE: 1 A*, 2 A’s, 6 B’s and 3 C’s. January 2014 RYA Sea Survival August 2013 PADI Open Water Diver Sept 2012 Driving Licence
Research work Jan 2018- Ongoing PhD Research, Swansea University and South Atlantic Environmental Research Project I am carrying out research to determine the invasive ecology of brown trout in the Falkland Islands. Jan 2018 Ocean Tracking Network equipment loan approved. Jan 2017 – Oct 2017 MRes Project, CSAR Swansea University I carried out my research project at CSAR (Centre of Sustainable Aquatic Research) examining visual recognition in lumpfish. Nov 2017 Wales Ecology and Evolution Network Conference, presented speed talk and poster on MRes research. May 2017 Competed at 3 Minute Thesis, Swansea University. June 2015 – July 2016 Dissertation Project, CSAR Swansea University I carried out my research at CSAR examining the effects of antimicrobial treatments on juvenile lumpfish. Work experience and Volunteering Oct 2016 – Ongoing Demonstrator, Swansea University I have participated in 40+hr of demonstrating and marking. July 2016 – Oct 2016 Lab Technician, CSAR Swansea University I have undertaken work experience as a lab technician in CSAR. References Professor Carlos Garcia de Leaniz Email – [email protected] Professor Sonia Consuegra Email – [email protected]
THE FALKLAND ISLANDS GOVERNMENT
Environmental Planning Department, P.O. Box 611 Stanley Falkland Islands
Telephone: (+500) 28480 Facsimile: (+500) 27391 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.falklands.gov.fk
RESEARCH LICENCE AGREEMENT
APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH IN THE FALKLAND ISLANDS
Brown trout in the Falklands: invasion ecology, population Project title: structure and genetic diversity
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT DETAILS
Name of the person leading Jessica Minett the research
Affiliation Swansea University
Position PhD Student
Postal Address Swansea University Wallace Building, Singleton Park Swansea SA2 8PP Wales UK Phone number 07817788349 / 64098
Email [email protected]
SECTION 2 – ASSISTANTS DETAILS
Name-Surname Affiliation Role Country
SECTION 3 – ORGANISATION PARTNER/POINT OF REFERENCE IN THE FALKLAND ISLANDS
South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute
SECTION 4 – PURPOSE OF RESEARCH This project aims to provide resource managers with information to facilitate conservation planning to minimize impacts of brown trout on native galaxiids.
Brown trout (Salmo trutta) were introduced to the Falkland Islands on several occasions during the 1940’s and 1950’s, mostly for recreational fishing. Since, there has been a marked decline in the native freshwater fish fauna, which consists of only three species of galaxiid fishes, endemic to the Southern Hemisphere (zebra trout Aplochiton zebra, Aplochiton taeniatus, and the Falklands minnow Galaxias maculatus; Vanhaecke et al. 2012). Given the threats to the long- term conservation of the native galaxiids, detailed knowledge about the life history, movement ecology of brown trout and their overlap and interactions with the native species is urgently needed. However, at present virtually nothing is known about the extent and seasonality of brown trout movements in the Falkland Islands, or how these can impact on native galaxiids. Two presence/absence surveys, conducted 10 and 20 years ago respectively, provided valuable synoptic snapshots of the distribution of brown trout and galaxiids in the Falklands. McDowall et al. (2001) used electrofishing to survey the islands in 1999 and showed that brown trout had invaded most rivers with the exception of those in the southwest region of West Falkland (Lafonia). Elsewhere, brown trout showed a high degree of spatial segregation with zebra trout in particular, which may indicate competitive displacement and/or predation of zebra trout by brown trout, and may thus explain the decline of Aplochiton sp. since the 1950s. At the time of the survey, most zebra trout were concentrated within small refuge areas uninvaded by brown trout, specifically in Lafonia. However, the tendency of brown trout to display anadromy in the Falklands, makes it likely that they could eventually colonize all the accessible rivers in the Falklands. The risk of native galaxiid extinction is therefore high. In addition, until very recently it was assumed that A. zebra was the only representative of the Genus Aplochiton species in the islands. However, a barcoding study carried out by Swansea University in 2012 found that A. taeniatus was being misclassified as its sister species, and that 85% of the Aplochiton in the Falklands could actually be A. taeniatus, meaning that A. zebra are even scarcer than previously thought (Vanhaecke et al. 2012). The most recent survey in 2008-2009 (Ross 2009) found that brown trout had already spread into Lafonia, but whether there are still some galaxiid refuges, free of brown trout is not known. It is thus important to monitor and reassess the current distribution of brown trout in the Falklands, and to document their movements and connectivity among river systems. This sort of information will be valuable to conservation and/or mitigation efforts. Indeed, the preservation of native galaxiids has been identified as a priority for the Falklands Islands Government (Ross 2009). Studies on invasive salmonids at Swansea University, in the Falklands and elsewhere, suggest that brown trout can be highly invasive and cause significant damage (Garcia de Leaniz et al 2010; Young, et al 2010; Arismendi et al 2014; Monzón-Argüello et al 2014a, b). In New Zealand, for example, brown trout are highly aggressive, and in conjunction with their migratory behaviour and larger size, tend to have a competitive advantage over native species when they compete for food and resources. This is presumably also occurring in the Falklands, as observed by McDowall et al. (2001) and Ross (2009), whereby brown trout seem to be displacing Aplochiton sp, and the two species rarely co- occur. With this in mind, our study aims to answer two main questions about the movement ecology of brown trout in the Falklands: (1) what is the current distribution, abundance and population structure of brown trout in the Falklands? and (2) what are the impacts of brown trout on native galaxiids? These questions will be answered by employing a variety of techniques including environmental DNA to non-destructively assess the distribution and abundance of brown trout and native galaxiids in various watershed, in conjunction with electrofishing, which will allow us to estimate population (or river stock) abundance as well as assess the health and reproductive status of individuals and stocks. Electrofishing will also provide us with an opportunity to capture individual brown trout for acoustic tagging from different watersheds, thus allowing us to meet our first aim by tracking individual movements and dispersal patterns, among watersheds and between East and West Falklands. We will also take fin samples from individuals for genotyping, thus obtaining data on the genetic diversity and gene flow between watersheds of brown trout and native species. Stable isotope analysis will also be conducted on fin samples from brown trout and native galaxiids to determine the levels of trophic overlap and predation between species. We will also map the loss of habitat and stream connectivity, assessing its impacts on the dispersal of brown trout.
SECTION 5 – RESEARCH PROCEDURE
Electrofishing – To gain information on the health and reproductive status of the population we will need to catch (via electrofishing) and examine individuals. Electrofishing will also give us the opportunity to tag individuals, allowing us to track their movement, and take samples for genotyping and isotope analysis. The length and body mass of brown trout and native galaxiids caught during electrofishing will be measured, and any additional samples required can be obtained. In saline locations where electrofishing is not possible seine and fyke nets will be used.
Genotype and isotope analysis – Will allow us to determine the population structure and what brown trout and native species are feeding on and how they are interacting and competing. Individuals will be anesthetized (clove oil at a proposed concentration of 40-80 p.p.m) one at a time and a 2mm fin clip and a sample of 2-3 scales will be obtained from brown trout and native galaxiids. Samples of possible brown trout and native galaxiid prey will be obtained along with stomach contents and muscle samples from dead individuals for isotope analysis. A minimum of 15 native galaxiids and 30 brown trout will be sampled per catchment (preferably 30 fish pre catchment).
Tagging fish – We aim to tag 40-80 individuals from six different watersheds with acoustic tags/ combined acoustic radio tags to gain an understanding into how brown trout move in and between watersheds. To achieve this, we will place pairs of acoustic receivers (VR2Ws) at the mouth of six watersheds (N=12 receivers), which will allow us to detect the movement of individuals in and out of the rivers/estuaries. We will also place additional receivers (N=8) up into a single watershed that is populated by brown trout to track finer-scale movements. This watershed (e.g. The Malo) is a key river located at the boarder of Lafonia, and is a presumed colonization front from which brown trout are moving into the last known refuge for zebra trout (e.g. McDowell et al. 2001, Ross 2009). Up to 80 brown trout (>20 cm) caught from electrofishing or rod and line will be anesthetized (clove oil at a proposed concentration of 40-80 p.p.m) one at a time, fish will then be placed into a V-trough board covered with wetted absorbent towel, ventral side up. Acoustic or combined radio-acoustic tags (Thelma Biotel model ID-2LP9 9 mm x 28 mm, weight in water 2.4 g) will be sterilized for a minimum of 15 minutes in ethanol or an iodine solution before use and all hands and work surfaces will be washed with the same solution. A small mid-ventral incision will be made starting 1cm anterior to the pelvic girdle. The disinfected tag will then be rinsed in sterile saline and positioned to lie directly under the incision in the pectoral cavity. The incision will be closed with three simple interrupted stitches tied with surgeon’s knots. The small amount of liquid tissue adhesive will then be placed on the closed incision. After surgery, fish will be placed in a recovery tank and allowed to recover from anesthesia before being released. Fish will be assessed over three stages of recovery to monitor individual welfare. During stage one individuals remain immobilized and start to regain opercula movements, stage two individuals begin to regain body movements, and stage three individuals regain equilibrium and their pre-anaesthetic appearance. Any individuals that show adverse effects to the anesthetic will be monitored and if they do not recover fully they will be killed using schedule 1 procedures. The operation will be carried under veterinary supervision or by trained member of the team signed off by the local veterinary.
Catch and release of brown trout – Will provide us with information on their abundance around the Falklands, as well as providing insights into their movements between rivers and estuaries. A few experienced anglers will be trained by the local vet and me to PIT tag, they will be provided with PIT tags (12 x 2 mm) so that any brown trout (>20cm) the capture can be tagged and recorded when recaptured. All fish to be PIT tagged will be anaesthetised with clove oil (40-80 ppm).
SECTION 6 – ETHICS STATEMENT (Please include copies of any ethics permits issued for the project by your own institution or nation or permits issued by other nations for this project).
Approval No: SU-Ethics-Student-090118/299 1. Title of research project/teaching activity:
Brown trout in the Falklands: Invasive ecology, population structure and genetic diversity
2. College:
Science
3. Staff contact:
Carlos Garcia De Leaniz - [email protected]
4. Summary of project/activity:
Acoustic/ combined acoustic-radio tagging: Up to 80 brown trout (>20 cm) caught from electrofishing will be anesthetized (2 phenoxy-ethanol) one at a time, fish will then be placed into a V-trough board covered with wetted absorbent towel, ventral side up. Acoustic or combined radio-acoustic tags (VEMCO model V13 13 mm x 36 mm, weight in water 6 g) will be sterilized for a minimum of 15 minutes in a iodine solution before use and all hands and work surfaces will be washed with the same solution. A small mid-ventral incision will be made starting 1cm anterior to the pelvic girdle. The disinfected tag will then be rinsed in sterile saline and positioned to lie directly under the incision in the pectoral cavity. The incision will be closed with three simple interrupted stitches tied with surgeon’s knots. The closed incision will then be cleaned with iodine and a small abound of liquid tissue adhesive. After surgery, fish will be placed in a recovery tank and allowed to recover from anesthesia before being released. The operation will be carried under veterinary supervision or by trained member of the team signed off by the local veterinary. Please note this is NOT a regulated procedure in the Falkland Islands and does not require a project licence there. The number of fish to be tagged (60-80 over 2 years) has been calculated based on the advice of the local sponsor, the need to sample 6 watersheds (10-12 fish per watershed) and the results from other studies (Crossin et al al,.2016; Cons Physiology 4: 2-12) The local collaborators (SAERI Falkland Islands, Falkland Islands Government Fisheries Department (FIFD), Marlo Fishing Club, Env. Dept.) are handling the local ethical application and will also issue the necessary sampling permits. Environmental DNA will allow us to detect the presence of brown trout and native galaxiids and predict the number of individuals present in an area. However, to gain information on the health and reproductive status of the population we will need to catch (via electrofishing) and examine individuals. Electrofishing will also give us the opportunity to tag individuals, allowing us to track their movement, and take samples for genotyping and isotope analysis which will allow us to determine population structure and how brown trout and native species compete and interact. Brown trout and native galaxiids caught during electrofishing we will measured for length and body mass, and fin clips will be taken to do genotype and isotope analysis. Samples of possible brown trout and native galaxiid prey will also be obtained for isotope analysis. Water samples will also be taken from different catchments for environmental DNA. I will also obtain fin clips from brown trout and native galaxiids, a minimum of 15 native galaxiids and 15 brown trout will be sampled per catchment (preferably 30 fish per catchment) in order to preform genotype analysis to determine their population structure, and isotope analysis to determine what fish are feeding from and how invasive brown trout and native species are interacting and competing for resources.
5. Location(s) at which the proposed project/activity is to be undertaken:
Falkland Islands
6. External approvals required for the proposed project/activity:
Yes, these are being processed by the Local Collaborator (SAERI, Falklands)
7. Does the proposed project/activity involve schedule 1 method (as defined by ASPA 1986) being carried out by members of this University’s staff or by its student? If yes, please list the individuals involved:
Yes, for stomach content and elemental composition analysis. Jessica Minett - I have been trained in Schedule I
The AWERB committee cannot approve this application but welcomes a re-submission once the following comments have been addressed (30/11/2017) R1 – My only comments are regarding the use of 2-phenoxy for this. Would MS222 be more appropriate for released fish if there is a possibility of the fish ending up in the human food chain? Also, can the student comment on how welfare of the fish during recovery will be monitored and what will happen if a fish is showing adverse effects from the procedure? Can the student also obtain the relevant ethical permissions from colleagues in the Falklands for this work and provide them to AWERB? R2 – No ethical concerns regarding the implant of tags within the fish peritoneal cavity as is happening here. R1 & 3’s point about anaesthetic choice would also fall into this category (MS-222 still has a 70- degree-day meat withdrawal after use, there is also a synthetic clove oil product called Aqui-S licenced in nearby Chile that has a 0-day meat withdrawal but it is not licenced in UK, and I presume Falklands) - if their veterinary governing body has approved the use of phenoxyethanol for this work then I don’t have ethical concerns. R3 – I was wondering which fin(s) the samples will be taken from? The applicant mentioned using fin clips for genotype and isotope analysis. To obtain enough material for both types of analysis could there be a risk of removing too much material, that could then affect the performance of the subject when released back into the natural environment? I had a brief look online and found a few articles that describe the pros and cons of fin clipping. For captive fish this is not such a problem but for fish released back into their natural habitat it might not only affect their ability to swim against strong currents but might also affect their breeding performance.
Could an alternative method be considered for obtaining samples for genotype analysis, such as body swabs? This could reduce the amount of fin material required. Applicants comments to the issues/concerns raised for the previous submission Following the advice of the AWERB committee we have considered alternatives to the use of 2- phenoxy-ethanol as an anaesthetic. Of these, clove oil (isoeugenol, marketed as AQUI-S) is licenced for use in the Falklands, does not enter the food chain and has also antiseptic properties, so we propose to use this at a concentration of 40-60 p.p.m, as this was found to induce rapid anaesthesia and a relatively short recovery time in juvenile trout (Keene et al. 1998). Fish will be assessed over three stages of recovery to monitor individual welfare. During stage one individuals remain immobilised and start to regain opercula movements, stage two individuals begin to regain body movements, and stage three individuals regain equilibrium and their pre-anaesthetic appearance. Any fish that show adverse effects to the anaesthetic will be monitored and if they do not recover fully they will be killed using schedule 1 procedures. A small clip of the adipose fin (c. 2mm) and a sample of 2-3 scales will be taken for genetic identification and isotope analysis. These are standard procedures in salmonid field studies and do not compromise the welfare of the fish, provided these are larger than c. 50 mm (Vander Haegen et al. 2005; Petersson et al. 2014; Andrews et al. 2014). A project proposal is being submitted for ethical review in the Falklands and this will be submitted to AWERB when approval is granted.
Andrews, M., Stormoen, M., Schmidt-Posthaus, H., Wahli, T. and Midtlyng, P. J. (2015), Rapid temperature-dependent wound closure following adipose fin clipping of Atlantic salmon Salmo salar L. J Fish Dis, 38: 523–531. doi:10.1111/jfd.12261
Keene, J. L., Noakes, D. L. G., Moccia, R. D. and Soto, C. G. (1998), The efficacy of clove oil as an anaesthetic for rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum). Aquaculture Research, 29: 89–101. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2109.1998.00927.x
Petersson, E., Rask, J., Ragnarsson, B., Karlsson, L. and Persson, J., 2014. Effects of fin-clipping regarding adult return rates in hatchery-reared brown trout. Aquaculture, 422, pp.249-252.
Vander Haegen, G.E., Blankenship, H.L., Hoffmann, A. and Thompson, D.A., 2005. The effects of adipose fin clipping and coded wire tagging on the survival and growth of spring Chinook salmon. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 25(3), pp.1161-1170.
AMMENDMENT TO SU-Ethics-Student-160118299.docx Anglers in the Falklands are keen to learn more about brown trout, their movements abundance and distribution, therefore, they have asked that a proportion of fish they catch and release are marked. Catch and release of brown trout will provide us with information on their abundance around the Falklands, as well as providing insights into their movements between rivers and estuaries. It is proposed to train (by the local Vet and me) a few experienced anglers on PIT tagging and provide them with PIT tags (type 162 2 x 12mm), http://bts-id.com/pit-tag-for-tagging-fish-and-animals.html so that any brown trout (> 20 cm) they recapture can be recorded. In addition, I seek permission to PIT tag a sample of c. 30 trout (per location) that I will be sampling (approved by AWERB SU-Ethics-Student- 160118/299 and SU-Ethics-Student-160118/307) before returning them to the water. In both cases, it is proposed to anaesthetise the fish to be PIT tagged with 40-80 ppm of clove oil; PIT tagging will be used solely for individual identification.
College Ethics Committee/AWERB Group DECISION on Ethical Review Having examined the information included in the above application with Reference No. STU_BIOL_82474_241017115552_1, this Committee has decided to: Approve this application With the following reputation risk to the university Low risk Moderate Risk High Risk
Approval No: SU-Ethics-Student-081217/307 1. Title of Research Project
Brown trout in the Falklands: Invasive ecology, population structure and genetic diversity
2. Staff/students undertaking research: Jessica Minett
3. Primary staff contact detail (Name, E-mail, Phone):
Carlos Garcia De Leaniz - [email protected]
4. Location where the study will take place:
Falkland Islands
5. If the proposal involves working with a partner body or organisation, please provide the following information
a. Full official title of the partner(s);
b. Details of the work to be carried out (a) at the partner(s) and (b) at the university;
c. Details of the relevant ethical approval processes at the partner(s).
South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute (SAERI), assistance with all aspects of the project Fishermen in the Falklands, help with tagging and collecting fin clips for genotyping and isotope analysis Dr Glenn Crossin, Assistance with tagging brown trout in the Falklands
6. Please state or tick, as appropriate, the following questions relating to your project: (tick any that apply during the progression of an experiment)
a. Species and taxon:
Brown trout (Salmo trutta)
b. Approximate number:
Tag 60-80 individuals with acoustic tags/ combined acoustic-radio tags. Fin clips from a minimum of 15 brown trout and 15 native galaxiids per catchment for genotype and isotope analysis (preferably 30 per catchment)
c. Life stages:
Juvenile/Adults Mammal, bird or reptile embryo beyond halfway through incubation/gestation period Amphibian, cephalopod or fish larvae capable of independent feeding Strictly only gametes/very early developmental stages of embryos 7. Provide a brief scientific background for the work, and describe any pilot work undertaken: Brown trout (Salmo trutta) were introduced to the Falkland Islands several times in the 1940’s and 1950’s, mostly to support recreational fishing opportunities. Since introduction, there has been a marked decline in the native fish fauna, which consists of only two species of galaxiid fishes (zebra trout Aplochiton zebra and the Falklands minnow Galaxias maculatus). Given the threats to the long-term sustainability of the native galaxiids, fundamental knowledge about the movement ecology of brown trout, and their overlap and interactions with galaxiids, is critically needed. However, at present virtually nothing is known about the extent and seasonality of brown trout movements throughout the Falkland Islands and their impacts on native galaxiids, and no studies have documented the distribution and abundance of native galaxiids prior to brown trout introductions.
8. Please provide a clear methodology for the work to be undertaken:
Acoustic/ combined acoustic-radio tagging: Up to 80 brown trout (>20 cm) caught from electrofishing will be anesthetized (2 phenoxy-ethanol) one at a time, fish will then be placed into a V-trough board covered with wetted absorbent towel, ventral side up. Acoustic or combined radio-acoustic tags (VEMCO model V13 13 mm x 36 mm, weight in water 6 g) will be sterilized for a minimum of 15 minutes in a iodine solution before use and all hands and work surfaces will be washed with the same solution. A small mid-ventral incision will be made starting 1cm anterior to the pelvic girdle. The disinfected tag will then be rinsed in sterile saline and positioned to lie directly under the incision in the pectoral cavity. The incision will be closed with three simple interrupted stitches tied with surgeon’s knots. The closed incision will then be cleaned with iodine and a small abound of liquid tissue adhesive. After surgery, fish will be placed in a recovery tank and allowed to recover from anesthesia before being released. The operation will be carried under veterinary supervision or by trained member of the team signed off by the local veterinary. Brown trout and native galaxiids caught during electrofishing we will measured for length and body mass, and fin clips will be taken to do genotype and isotope analysis. Samples of possible brown trout and native galaxiid prey will also be obtained for isotope analysis. Water samples will also be taken from different catchments for environmental DNA.
9. Provide a brief statement of how science will advance or people or animals will benefit from this project:
This project will provide information on how invasive brown trout are effecting native species in the Falklands, we will be able to determine the abundance of brown trout and native galaxiids in different catchments, how they are interacting and what effect brown trout have on native species. We will also be able to determine if there are any refugia for native species and provide information on possible ways to prevent the spread on invasive brown trout.
10. Why do animals have to be used in this study? Explain your choice of species, and justify the number of subjects to be used with a power analysis where appropriate. The number of fish to be tagged (60-80 over 2 yers) has been calculated based on the advice of the local sponsor, the need to sample 6 watersheds (10-12 fish per watershed) and the results from other studies (Crossin et al al,.2016; Cons Physiology 4: 2-12) The local sponsors (SAERI Falkland Islands, Falklands Conservation, Env Dept) are handling the local ethical application and will also issue the necessary sampling permits. Environmental DNA will allow us to detect the presence of brown trout and native galaxiids and predict the number of individuals present in an area. However, to gain information on the health and reproductive status of the population we will need to catch (via electrofishing) and examine individuals. Electrofishing will also give us the opportunity to tag individuals, allowing us to track their movement, and take samples for genotyping and isotope analysis which will allow us to determine population structure and how brown trout and native species compete and interact.
11. What effects will your research have on the study organisms, and how will suffering be kept to a minimum?
Fish will be anesthetized during tagging and all other samples required (a c 2 mm clip of the adipose fin) is minimally invasive, nonlethal, and routinely carried out on salmonids.
12. How will you dispose of carcasses/animals (tick any that apply):
Landfill Sampled/analysis/other destruction of biomass Released Sent live to external organisation DECLARATION I certify that the answers to the questions given above are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief and I take full responsibility for it. I also conform that I have read the University’s Policy Framework on Research Ethics & Governance and will abide by its ethical guidelines, as well as the ethical principles underlying good practice appropriate to my discipline
College Ethics Committee/AWERB Group DECISION on Ethical Review Having examined the information included in the above application with Reference No. STU_BIOL_82472_2610171111382, this Committee has decided to: Approve this application With the following reputation risk to the university Low risk Moderate Risk High Risk
Comments: The CoS Ethics Committee approves this application but recommends that the following points are considered R1 - given that the invasive procedures will be carried out by non-Swansea researchers, under non- UK licences, I understand we will not require an AWERB submission. Conditional on this being correct, the procedures appear to me to be fairly standard and acceptable and the supervisor involved certainly has the necessary knowledge and experience to train the student. Overall the question addressed is important, especially from a conservation/management point, hence the data that will be collected justify the procedures involved. Green light from my part. R2 - I agree with R1 that this is important work and the supervisor is clearly experienced. My understanding is that we still need institutional oversight, however, and that this still needs to be reviewed through AWERB.
SECTION 7 – PLEASE STATE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF EACH MEMBER OF THE RESEARCH TEAM (please also attach relevant CVs of the research team)
Name – surname Qualifications Jessica Minett BSc, MRes Carlos Garcia de Leaniz BSc, PhD, Prof Sonia Consuegra BSc, PhD, Prof Paul Brickle BSc, MSc, PhD Alexander Arkhipkin PhD
SECTION 8 – DATE OF THE FIELD WORK
From To 1st March 2018 Dec 2020
SECTION 9 – LOCATION OF THE FIELD WORK
All over East and West Falkland, in particular: Port Howard Chartres Port San Carlos Fitzroy River Swan Inlet Mt Donald Pond Lake Sullivan Fox Bay Stanley Quarry Elephant Beach Pond Colorado Pond Green Pond Congo Ponds Area These locations are subject to change. Back-up locations – fox bay, port stephens, red pond, doyle river, lake Sullivan north, north arm and head of the bay.
SECTION 10 – LANDOWNER PERMISSION OBTAINED (please cross)
YES NO
SECTION 11 – INSURANCES (please cross if you have any of the following types) All people entering the Falkland Islands must have medical insurance that covers medical evacuation.
Type All individuals Group
Medical
Personal Accident
Public liability
Professional indemnity
Travel
SECTION 12 – PROTECTED WILDLIFE RESEARCH LICENCE REQUEST (Species protected under the Conservation of Nature and Wildlife Ordinance, see Appendix 1 of the researchers’ guideline)
SECTION 12.1 PURPOSE OF RESEARCH
This project will provide information on how invasive brown trout are effecting native species in the Falkland’s, we will determine the abundance of brown trout and native galaxiids in different catchments, how they are interacting and what effect brown trout have on native species. We will also determine if there are any refugia for native species and provide information on possible ways to prevent the spread on invasive brown trout.
SECTION 12.2 PRINCIPAL FIELD WORKERS LIST
Jessica Minett, SAERI Staff, Fisheries staff, Fishermen and any volunteers.
SECTION 12.3 PRECAUTIONS AND MITIGATIONS
All of Swansea University health and safety and SAERI’s field work procedures will be followed, these can be provided if requested.
SECTION 13 RESEARCH TOPIC CATEGORY (indicate the main category your research falls in)
Flora and fauna in natural environment Climatology-meteorology-atmosphere Economy Earth science Hydrography Oceanography Society and culture Environmental resources and conservation Other (specify the topic below)
SECTION 14 PROPOSED TIME REQUIRED BEFORE SENDING COPY OF THE DATA COLLECTED IN THE CURRENT RESEARCH TO THE FALKLAND ISLANDS GOVERNMENT (notice that the maximum time is within 2 years from data collection and researchers should send only quality checked data)
SECTION 15 FEES (If your research is subject to a fee indicate if you agree to pay this by cheque)
I, the undersigned, am applying to the Falkland Islands Government for a permit to carry out the
research detailed within this application. By signing the application form I agree with the terms and conditions stated by the Research Licence Agreement guidelines which include: returning to the IMS-GIS data centre data manager a complete metadata form and data submission agreement sending any subsequent scientific paper and/or report to the environmental planning department sending, within the agreed time, a copy of the data collected in the field (data should have been quality checked by the researcher) to the IMS-GIS data centre data manager
All the information provided is, to my knowledge, correct and is the planned course of research action. Should any changes be made to any of the information above I shall notify the Environmental Planning Officer accordingly.
Signed:
Date: 05/04/2018
SITE VISIT REPORT - Keppel Island
Spear Thistle Control: 28 November – 7 December 2017
Project Details Keppel Island Thistle Control Commissioned by Falkland Islands Government Environmental Planning Department (FIG EPD) Implemented by Island LandCare (ILC) Funded by FIG EPD Permission to visit was obtained from the landowner Lionel Fell.
Acknowledgements Our thanks to Dion Poncet and Juliette Hennequin for transport of the quad bike and motorbike to Keppel Island on MY Hans Hansson ; and to the Antarctic Research Trust for the loan of their quad bike.
Citation Poncet, S. and K. Passfield. 2017. Keppel Island Spear Thistle Control 28 November- 7 December 2017. Island LandCare report to FIG Environmental Planning Department.
Land/Farm Unit Keppel Island 51.33 S, 59. 95 W
Weed Management North Coast: Population 1, Population 3, Main Population, North Point Population Unit/s East Coast: Cove Hill Population Inland: Big Pond Population
Map of spear thistle distribution on Keppel Island November-December 2017. Red indicates areas of spear thistle infestation. Green lines indicate GPS track of search effort.
Date of visit 28 November- 7 December 2017
Personnel Sally Poncet, Ken Passfield
Reason for visit To remove spear thistles by foliar spraying.
Herbicide and Meturon (active ingredient -methyl @ 5g/10 litre) equipment Organosilicone and red dye Swisstex knapsack sprayer 15 litre capacity Quad bike (350c Suzuki) with rear water 80 l tank Motorbike (200 cc Suzuki)
1
Logistics FIGAS flights for 2 people from Stanley-Hill Cove (FIG EPD) on 28 November. Access to Keppel Island from Hill Cove and accommodation while at Keppel was on SV Porvenir. The quad bike (on loan from the Antarctic Research Trust) and the ILC motorbike were landed on Keppel Island by M.V. Hans Hansson in October. Access to work sites was by quad bike (on loan from the Antarctic Research Trust) and ILC motorbike. The daily quad bike commute between the settlement and the thistle populations took ca. 1 hour return. Thistle control was done by Ken while Sally did calafate control.
Biosecurity All gear checked and cleaned prior to leaving Stanley.
Recommendations Annual control (November/December) is recommended with a repeat control visit of 12 person days in late November/early December 2018 using the same method and equipment (ie quad bike and motorbike) and carried out in conjunction with the annual calafate control on Keppel. Allocate additional time to search the entire island for spear thistle outliers and to survey Pebble Islet to determine if spear thistles are present there. Daily Log
28/11/17 Hill Cove to Saunders Island on SV Porvenir to pick up 2 spray tanks for the quad bike; arrived Keppel anchorage mid-afternoon. Landed all equipment at the settlement
29/11/17 Ashore 0700; clear skies, calm, 18-20C. 9 hours on North Coast Main Population. Back on board 1830 and over to Dry Island for the night due to easterly winds.
30/11/17 0800 arrived back at Keppel; dry, calm - NW10 and warm (16-18C) all day. Ken started on the Main Population and also covered small pond area (Population 1) and an outlier population near Big Pond. Back on board at 1800.
01/12/17 Calm to SW 10, sunny and warm (16-18C). Ken continued on Main Population.
02/12/17 Ashore 0730, NW15-20, mostly sunny all day, 15-18C. Ken continued on Main Population. Back on board 1830.
03/12/17 Ashore 0730, part cloudy with fog patches, NW15-20, 12-16C. Ken continued with Main Population. Back on board 1830
04/12/17 Ken did 0.5 hours to finish the Main Population, then 7.5 hrs searching and spraying the North Point Population and Cove Hill Population.
05/12/17 Ashore at 0700; lovely sunny dry day. Sally and Ken working on calafate all day.
06/12/17 Windy and showery all day. Ashore 1800-2100 to pack up gear and drive bikes to Gascoigne Point for loading on Porvenir next day.
07/12/17 Loaded bikes at Gascoigne Point 0600, and offloaded bikes and gear at Saunders jetty ca.1000 in preparation for Saunders Island thistle control work period.
Fieldwork results
Control and search effort: Six person days (50 hours) were spent on thistle control, which was far less than the 14 person days anticipated. This was due firstly to the efficiency of using the quad bike with a mounted water tank and secondly to the extremely favourable weather conditions which meant that no time was lost due to bad weather. A total of about 100 km was logged while spraying and searching.
2 Weather: Conditions during the entire work period were exceptionally favourable for spraying, with light to moderate winds, sunshine, warm temperatures (12-20C) every day. Patchy fog on the 3 rd did not affect spraying efficiency.
Herbicide: Thistles were controlled using the selective herbicide Meturon which specifically targets thistles and does not affect grasses.
Equipment : The use of the quad bike spray-mounted rear tank (80 litre capacity) as a bowser was a break-through in time and effort: only one 80 litre spray mix was required per 8 hour day and having a mobile ready-mixed tank of spray mix on hand saves on the time required for re-filling knapsack sprayers. Water sources were plentiful in the thistle areas. The wand attached to the tank was not functioning so a knapsack sprayer was used instead; the latter was also easier to use on uneven terrain and where thistles were widely scattered.
Plants: Thistles were on both level ‘neutral grassland’ and in marram grass on sand dunes. The largest population was Main Population with an estimated surface area of 32 ha (calculated using GPS tracks and waypoints). Plants varied greatly in size and development, from two-leafed rosettes to the occasional one metre high plant with developing flower buds. The majority of plants were at the rosette stage with no flower buds. Rosettes in high nutrient soil next to jackass burrows showed an unusual growth form, having very large non-serrated leaves. Thistles did not appear to germinate easily in areas where the ground was covered with a carpet of long grass – probably due to being out- competed. Similarly, heavy spells of winter and spring rains may have also inhibited germination: few plants were seen on areas of wet well-vegetated ground where previously there had been many plants, as indicated by an abundance of dead leaves and stems.
Distribution: Although there has been no control carried out since 2013 (S. Browning 2013), thistles do not appear to have spread significantly beyond the areas first recorded in 2010 (R. Lewis 2010) and subsequently (L. Taylor 2011, S. Browning 2013, Poncet and Passfield 2017). Further searches are required on other parts of the island, and on the islands to the east, notably Pebble Islet and Pebble Island.
Spatial data: All available gpx data (KEW Brahms database records 2007-2014 and Island LandCare records June 2017) were used to locate known plants, with co-ordinates uploaded to hand-held GPS units. Adjacent areas were searched for additional unrecorded plants. The co-ordinates (WGS84) of plants treated and tracks data for the ground covered by the surveyor were recorded on a handheld GPS unit and saved as gpx files. Data are available on request from ILC.
Measuring progress : The surface area (hectares) of Main Population, the quantity (litres) of spray mix used and the effort required (in person hours) will be used to measure progress. Although thistles were far too numerous to count we estimated a minimum of 10,000 plants, based on a subsample from the North Point Population where 600 plants were sprayed with 20 litres of mix. This year, a total of 50 hours were spent searching and spraying, using 410 litres of mix. About 100 kilometres was logged by GPS during searching and spraying both on the quad bike and on foot.
References Browning S. 2013. Post-Visit Report for Keppel Island spear thistle trip February 2013. Unpublished report. Lewis R. 2010. Spear Thistle ( Cirsium vulgare ) on Keppel Island . Unpublished report. Poncet S. and Passfield P. 2017. Island LandCare Report for weed control 2016/17. Unpublished report. Taylor L. 2011. Invasive Spear Thistle ( Cirsium vulgare ) removal on Saunders Island 7-8 February 2011 and Keppel Island 9 February 2011. Unpublished report.
3 Keppel Island Spear Thistle Control Record Form
Date: 29 November - 4 December 2017 Treatment: Foliar spraying Quantity
Operator: Ken Passfield Herbicide: AgPro Meturon (active ingredient metsulfuron- 205 g methyl @ 5g/10 litres) Implemented by: Island LandCare Wetting Ravensdown organosilicone (5 ml/10 litres) 205 ml agent: Commissioned by: FIG EPD Dye: Ravensdown “Assist Easy Red” (8 ml/10 litres) 328 ml
Water: 410 litres Hours Hours Number of plants travel Date Name control/ to/from Main Population Big Population North Cove Litres of search site Population 1 Pond 3 Point Hill water 29 Nov K Passfield 1 9 >1,000 80 30 Nov K Passfield 1 8 >1,000 65 2 80 1 Dec K Passfield 1 8 >1,000 80 2 Dec K Passfield 1 8 >1,000 70 3 Dec K Passfield 1 9 >1,000 150 80 4 Dec K Passfield 1 8 100 600 1 20
TOTAL 6 50 >10,000 65 2 150 600 1 410
4
5 SITE VISIT REPORT – Saunders Island
Spear Thistle Control – 7-11 December 2017
Project Details Saunders Island Thistle Control (Year 3 of 3) Commissioned by FIG EPD Implemented by Island LandCare (ILC) Funded by FIG EPD Herbicide from FIG EPD & DOA In kind support from David and Suzan Pole-Evans of Saunders Island Farm
Acknowledgements Our thanks to the Antarctic Research Trust for the loan of their quad bike; and to David and Suzan Pole-Evans on Saunders for accommodation, petrol, food, use of a vehicle and technical assistance.
Citation Poncet, S. and K. Passfield. 2017. Saunders Island Spear Thistle Control 7-11 December 2017. Island LandCare report to FIG Environmental Planning Department.
Land/Farm Unit Saunders Island, 51.268 S, 60. 278 W
Weed Management Units Elephant Point: core area, north area, east area and islands Sugarloaf: south and north
Figure 1. Map of spear thistle distribution on Saunders Island, 2017
Date of visit 7-11 December 2017
Personnel Sally Poncet, Ken Passfield
Reason for visit To continue foliar spraying of spear thistles at Elephant Point and Sugarloaf. To assess the results of the 3 year programme of spear thistle control.
Herbicide and equipment The selective herbicide Meturon (active ingredient metsulfuron @ 5g/10 litre) was used as it specifically targets thistles and does not affect grasses. It was applied using 2 Swisstex knapsack sprayers of 15 litre capacity. Water for the spray mix was obtained from Big Pond at Elephant Point.
Logistics Access to Saunders Island was on SV Porvenir. Accommodation was provided by David and Suzan Pole-Evans on Saunders at the settlement. Travel between the Neck and thistle sites at Elephant Point, and between the settlement and Sugarloaf was with a 200 cc Suzuki motorbike (on loan from Island LandCare) and a 300 cc quadbike (on loan from the Antarctic Research Trust). David
1 and Suzan provided accommodation at the settlement and a farm Rover for travel between the settlement and the Neck each day. Stores were purchased from the Saunders Island store; fresh produce was supplied by the farm.
Biosecurity All gear checked and cleaned prior to leaving Stanley. All equipment was thoroughly cleaned at the settlement on completion of spraying, and the two bikes cleaned with the farm’s pressure washer.
Spatial data Using GPS units, the co-ordinates of every plant sprayed was recorded in order to provide a spatial record of distribution. Waypoints were downloaded and saved as gpx files, then entered in the thistle Excel spreadsheet. Each operator kept a daily record of the search and spray effort; a summarised version is in the Appendix. The positions of plants from last year (December 2016) were uploaded to a spare (third) GPS and often proved useful for locating rosettes at those sites where no tall plants were present.
Weather Conditions during most of the work period were favourable for spraying, with generally light to moderate winds, sunshine, warm temperatures (12-18C) except on the day of arrival which was too wet and windy for spraying.
Daily Log
07/12/17 Loaded bikes on to SV Porvenir at Gascoigne Point 0600, offloaded bikes and gear at Saunders jetty ca.1000. Porvenir at anchor while we stayed in the settlement (stone house); wet and windy all day.
08/12/17 0700 to Elephant Point on quadbike and motorbike; mostly sunny, W10, dry; David brought out the Rover (plus a can of petrol) which we drove back to settlement, leaving bikes at the Neck at the end of the day. Both worked core area all day, and Sally did some of north area.
09/12/17 0700 to the Neck in Rover; SW20 and part sunny, dry all day. Ken did the east area on foot starting below Swiss Hotel. Sally finished the north area on the quad bike. Back to settlement in Rover by 1900. Heavy rain overnight.
10/12/17 0800 to the Neck in Rover then on bikes to Elephant Point; sunny, dry. Ken did ponds then both did outliers in north area on bikes. Brought bikes back to settlement and moved back on board Porvenir .
11/12/17 0800-1000 to Sugarloaf, dry windy SW25; pressure-washed bikes and cleaned equipment (left bikes on Saunders), departed Saunders 1530 for Stanley with overnight at Ship Harbour anchorage (Pebble).
12/12/17 Arrived Stanley 2200
Fieldwork Results
Control and search effort : Over 2,400 thistles were sprayed with 58 litres of spray mix applied by two people working a total of 52 hours in the field over a period of 4 days and covering over 160 km on quadbike and bike (not including transit distances between the settlement and the Neck). Overall, plant distribution, including that of outliers, across all sites remained unchanged, with plants located at precisely the same locations as in 2015 and 2016, at both sites (Elephant Point and Sugarloaf) (Figs 1 and 2). No new areas of infestation were recorded.
Plants: ranged in size from seedlings (which were most numerous) to rosettes to larger plants of which the tallest were about 50 cm high. Many of the larger plants had several very young flower buds, but no opening purple flower petals were found.
2
Figure 2. Distribution of spear thistles in the North Area, East Area and Core Area at Elephant Point, showing the location of seedling hotspots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Measuring progress: When assessing the long-term effectiveness of this spear thistle control programme each year, it is important to take into account the following factors which may mask the apparent overall long-term effectiveness of the programme:
• Consistency of search effort • Longevity of the seedbank • Seasonal variations in weather
The first can be addressed by ensuring that a systematic search is carried out with sufficient time to cover the entire area (use of quad bike and motorbike hugely increases the efficiency of any search effort) and that the same amount of time is available each year. Seedbank longevity of Falklands spear thistles is unknown as is the impact of seasonal weather variations on spear thistle growth. Depending on the growing or germinating conditions, thistle populations may show inter-annual fluctuations in population size and distribution that overshadow the long-term effectiveness of the control programme. This situation may have occurred this year; the observed increase in thistle numbers may be due to exceptionally favourable growing conditions the early spring which resulted in greener and longer grass than last year, and possibly higher seed germination and seedling survival than usual. A higher number of thistles were sprayed (around 2,400) than in 2016 (Table 1 and Fig. 3), although this year’s total is still significantly less than in 2015.
Number of plants
Date Total Core Big Core North East Sugar Sugar- Spray Spray Area Pond Area trial Area Area -loaf loaf mix time 35ha islands plots 300 108 North South (litres) (hours) <1 ha n/a ha ha < 1ha <1 ha Nov 4170 3430 24 128 104 396 34 54 122.5 95 2015 Dec 1772 910 56 17 348 382 26 33 96 49 2016 Dec 2423 1424 11 (included 684 245 20 37 58 52 2017 in North Area) Table 1. Comparison of number of plants treated in 2015, 2016 and 2017, time required for spraying and quantity of spray mix used.
3
Figure 3. Comparison of number of plants treated in 2015 (blue), 2016 (brown) and 2017(green).
Specifically, increases were recorded for the Elephant Point Core Area and the North Area, while Big Pond islands and the East Area showed decreases and numbers at Sugarloaf North and South were roughly the same. Thistles were particularly abundant at hotspot 1 in the North Area and hotspot 4 in the Core Area (in dry short grass in the vicinity of the gentoo penguin colony) (Figure 2). The hotspots contained an abundance of seedlings, most of which were 2- to 4-leafed rosettes. Two years ago, seedlings were abundant throughout the eastern half of the Core Area, particularly at hotspot 2; they were less widespread in 2016 and this year were found mainly at hotspot 4, with very few seen at hotspot 2 or the North Area hotspot 3. Another seedling hotspot appeared for the first time in the East Area (hotspot 5). These concentrations of seedlings may be a product of a long-term seedbank at these particular sites.
Interestingly, the amount of spray mix used this year was only 58 litres (0.02 litres per plant) compared with 96 litres last year (0.3 litres per plant). The lower volume may have been due to some extent to the calmer weather conditions this year: in windy conditions, more spray may be required to counter the effect of ‘drift’ as spray is blown off target. It may also be due to the proportionally higher number of seedlings which require less volume of spray mix than large plants.
Summary Most encouragingly, no dead thistle plants from last year were found, indicating that very few plants if any were missed, that there was very little seed production and that the current control programme (spraying in December and chisel hoeing in February) is successful in preventing new plants from setting seed.
After three consecutive seasons of systematic spear thistle control by foliar spraying in December (Poncet and Passfield 2016a; 2016b) combined with chisel hoeing in February (Peck 2016, Ross 2017), it is apparent that the current control programme is making progress, building on the early foliar spraying efforts of Aidan Kerr in 2000 (Kerr 2000), and Brian Summers and colleagues between 2008 and 2012 (Summers 2008; 2010; 2011). At this time, several valleys at Elephant Point were virtually impassable due to dense concentrations of spear thistles over one metre high and plants were scattered across an infested area of approximately 400 ha. Today, these areas have only a very sparse scattering of thistles.
Nonetheless, the entire 400 hectares will require on-going annual searching and control. This takes 5 days for 2 people spraying in December and about 2 days for 6 people chisel hoeing in February (excluding travel to and from Saunders). This level of effort and commitment are essential if we are to succeed in effective long-term
4 control of this weed species and to prevent an otherwise inevitable re-invasion of thistles across 400 ha of productive pasture land and subsequent dispersal to new areas.
Follow up : Falklands Conservation have made arrangements for their annual volunteer chisel-hoeing at Elephant Point in February 2018.
Island LandCare, in collaboration with the landowners David and Suzan Pole-Evans, intend to continue annual follow-up foliar spraying at the Elephant Point and Sugarloaf weed units in November/December 2018, pending availability of funding.
References Kerr, A. 2000. Experimental thistle control on Saunders Island. The Wool Press April 2000. Peck, J. 2016. Saunders Island Spear Thistle Control Trip January 2016. Falklands Conservation unpublished report. Poncet S and Passfield K. 2016a. Spear Thistle Control and Mapping Project 2015. Island LandCare Report to the Antarctic Research Trust. Poncet S and Passfield K. 2016b. Saunders Island Spear Thistle Control Visit December 2016: Island LandCare Report to FIG EPD. Ross. F. 2017. Falklands Conservation Thistle Hoeing Report, Saunders Island, February 2017. Unpublished report. Summers, B. 2008. Spear Thistle Control at Elephant Point, December 2008. Unpublished report. Summers, B. 2010. Spear Thistle Control at Elephant Point, 2009/2010 season. Unpublished report. Summers, B. 2011. Spear Thistle Control at Elephant Point, October 2011. Unpublished report. Summers, B. 2012. Spear Thistle Control at Elephant Point, September 2012. Unpublished report.
5
Saunders Island Thistle Control Log Dates: 8 - 11 December 2017 Herbicide usage: 48g of AgPro Meturon 5g/10 litres) Co-ordinator: Sally Poncet, Island LandCare Wetting agent: 48 ml of Ravensdown organosilicone (5 ml/10 litres) Operators: Sally Poncet, Ken Passfield Red dye: 76.8 ml of Ravensdown “Easy Assist” (8ml/10 litres) Water: 58 litres from Big Pond at Elephant Point
Hours Km Hours Number of plants Litres of travel Date Name control/s control/s spray mix to/from earch earch Sugarloaf Sugarloaf site Core area North area East area Islands north south 8 Dec K Passfield 3 25 8 836 11 Hotspot 2: 200 Hotspot 1: 65 2 8 Dec S Poncet 3 30 8 388 11 Hotspot 3: 14 16 Hotspot 1: 413 32 1 9 Dec K Passfield 3 15 8.5 169 3 9 Dec S Poncet 3 25 8.5 26 1 Hotspot 5: 50 Hotspot 1: 97 6 46 3 10 Dec K Passfield 4 30 7 11 0.5 6 0.5
10 Dec S Poncet 4 20 7 12 1 11 Dec K Passfield 1 10 2.5 14 13 1 11 Dec S Poncet 1 10 2.5 6 24 1
TOTAL 22 165 52 1424 685 246 11 20 37 58 Total 2423 plants
Table 2. Control log showing hours spent spraying, distance covered while searching, herbicide usage, quantity of spray mix and number of plants sprayed 8-11 December 2017 on Saunders Island.
6
7
Spiders of the endemic Genus Falklandoglenes
A report to Falkland Islands Government and Falklands Conservation on spiders from Steeple Jason Island, November 2017 to January 2018.
Genetalia of Falklandoglenes iosonum prepared for proposed description.
Alastair Lavery Senior Associate Research Fellow, SAERI
Burach Carnbo Kinross KY13 0NX UK [email protected]
FIG Research Licence No: R14/2017
Introduction
Falklandoglenes is a genus of spiders only known from the Falkland Islands. It has 1 established species and 3 new species in the process of description (Lavery, 2017). Though the new species are given full specific names for convenience in this report, formally they should be referred to as Falklandoglenes New Species A, B and C as in Lavery 2017.
• Falklandoglenes hadassa (new species A) is found on East Falkland, Weddell, Keppel and West Point Islands. It is known from a large number of specimens. • Falklandoglenes weddelli (new species B) is known only from Weddell Island and is known from a sufficient number of specimens. This species may well be on neighbouring islands. • Falklandoglenes iosonum (new species C) is from Steeple Jason and West Point Islands and is known only from 1 male (from Steeple Jason) and 3 females, 2 of these from West Point. The Steeple Jason samples were collected by Alex Jones and the West Point ones by Robin Woods. No other collections from these islands are known other than one on West Point in 1971/2. • Falklandoglenes spinosa (Usher, 1983) was found on Beauchêne in 1980 and has not been found again anywhere since. Only 1 adult male and 1 female are known, now in the Natural History Museum in London. The only known collection on Beauchêne since 1980 was by Falklands Conservation in 2011. Three species out of 6 recorded from Beauchêne were found, but not F. spinosa.
The 2 species of concern are Falklandoglenes spinosa and iosonum. They are very similar but there aren’t enough specimens to be certain of how much they vary – they may in fact be two populations of the same species.
The primary purpose of the project is to collect further specimens of 2 species, Falklandoglenes iosonum (new species) from Steeple Jason and Falklandoglenes spinosa from Beauchêne. Spiders will be collected by hand during planned monitoring visits by Falkland Conservation staff to Steeple Jason and Beauchêne Islands. The spiders will be preserved in ethanol and sent to Alastair Lavery in the UK for identification.
Since the spiders are small (c2-4mm body length) and because the spider communities of both islands are poorly known, all spider specimens found will be collected.
Results.
Spiders were collected by hand by Falklands Conservation staff on two monitoring visits to Steeple Jason, in November 2017 and January 2018. Seven sites were sampled and 120 specimens found. These are summarised in Table 1. The sample site locations are shown on Figure 1. Note that the sites are not points but larger search areas, Site 2 in particular covers specimens found in dwarf shrub heath over an area approximately 1700m by 400m. The other sites have search areas approximately 100m by 100m.
No visits were made in summer 2017-18 to Beauchêne Island.
Falklandoglenes.
Eight adult male and 16 adult female Falklandoglenes iosonum were found, as well as 28 immature specimens. This will be sufficient material to describe Falklandoglenes iosonum as a full species in a publication planned for 2018 or 2019, provisionally titled Lavery and Snazell (date to be determined). The Spiders of the Falkland Islands 2: Linyphiinae (Araneae, Linyphiidae). Table 1 shows the status of all Falklandoglenes species.
Known specimens Known specimens 2016 2018 Falklandoglenes hadassa 23♂ 45♀ 23♂ 45♀ Falklandoglenes weddelli 5♂ 8♀ 5♂ 8♀ Falklandoglenes iosonum 1♂ 3♀ 9♂ 19♀ Falklandoglenes spinosa 1♂ 1♀ 1♂ 1♀ Table 1. Known specimens of Falklandoglenes.
Spiders on Steeple Jason Island.
Table 2 shows the spider and harvestman species found on Steeple Jason Island.
Species First date First collection This collection Spiders (Araneae) Falklandia rumbolli 2005 A Jones Yes Osornolobus n. sp. A 2005 A Jones Selkirkiella ventrosus 2005 A Jones Yes Laminacauda fuegiana 2005 A Jones Laminacauda plagiata 2005 A Jones Notiomaso barbatus 2005 A Jones Notiomaso flavus 2005 A Jones Falklandoglenes iosonum 2005 A Jones Yes Alopecosa nigricans 2005 A Jones Hahnia michaelseni 2018 Falklands Conservation Yes Negayan paduana 2005 A Jones Yes Platnickia bergi 2018 Falklands Conservation Yes Petrichus niveus 2005 A Jones Yes Harvestmen (Opiliones) Haversia defensa 2007 Dept of Agriculture Table 2. Spider and Harvestman species known fo Steeple Jason Island.
Thirteen species of spider are now known from Steeple Jason, with one species of harvestman. This collection added 2 new species, Hahnia michaelseni and Platnickia bergi.
Hahnia michaelseni has a scattered distribution on the Falkland Islands and is scarce. Platnickia bergi is very rare and has a restricted distribution on the islands, having previously been found only on East Falkland, Kent Island (Golding Island group, West Falkland) and Whig Island South (Inner Choiseul Sound, East Falkland). The presence of these two species on Steeple Jason is a welcome extension to the range of both species.
No non-native species have been recorded on Steeple Jason.
Future Work.
While further sampling on Steeple Jason Island would be welcome to extend the knowledge of its spiders, the current collection has provided enough material to complete work on the status of Falklandoglenes iosonum.Further specimens of Falklandoglenes spinosa are required to determine its taxonomic status, but will be dependent on access to Beauchêne Island and further licensing.
Thanks.
Thanks to Falkland Island Government for licensing this survey and to the staff at Falklands Conservation for carrying out the work and delivering the specimens in good condition to me in the UK.
References
Lavery, A.H. 2017. Annotated checklist of the spiders, harvestmen and pseudoscorpions of the Falkland Islands and South Georgia. Arachnology 17: 210-228.
Upson R. and Lewis R. (2014). Updated Vascular plant checklist and atlas for the Falkland Islands. Report to Falklands Conservation. Royal Botanic Garden, Kew, London. 1-226.
Usher, M.B. 1983. Spiders from Beauchêne Island, Falkland Islands, South Atlantic. J.Zool. Lond 200, 571-882.
Site Site 1 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 3 Site 4a Site 4b Site 5 Site 5 Site 6 North North Steeple Steeple Jason North West North West South East Description House area House area House Steeple Steeple Jason Peak Peak Tussac Tussac Tussac Latitude -51.019671 -51.019671 -51.01967 -51.021455 -51.021455 -51.046611 -51.054176 -51.014 -51.01345 -51.04568 Longitude -61.233184 -61.233184 -61.23318 -61.234019 -61.234019 -61.200967 -61.180116 -61.25081 -61.25131 -61.20764 Altitude m 15 15 15 25-90 25-90 90 193 10 10 20 Dense Dense Dwarf Sparse Vegetation Tussac Tussac In house heath Dwarf heath Tussac Feldmark Dense Tussac Dense Tussac Dense Tussac Vegetation Class A1 A1 O2 C1 C1 A2 F2 A1 A1 A1 Date 07-11-17 10-11-17 31-10-17 03-11-17 05-11-17 06-11-17 21-01-18 05-11-17 17-20/1 2018 19-01-18
Falklandia rumbolli ♀ 1 Falklandia rumbolli imm 1 1 Selkirkiella ventrosus ♂ 2 2 Selkirkiella ventrosus ♀ 2 5 4 3 Selkirkiella ventrosus imm 1 1 13 Falklandoglenes iasonum ♂ 1 3 2 1 1 Falklandoglenes iasonum ♀ 6 1 3 6 F. iasonum immatures 4 2 1 9 12 Hahnia michaelseni ♂ 1 Negayan paduana ♀ 1 2 Negayan paduana imm 1 1 1 1 1 Petrichus niveus ♂ 2 11 4 Petrichus niveus imm 2 Platnickia bergi ♂ 1 Immature specimens Linyphiidae (Erigoninae) 1 Linyphiidae (Linyphiinae) 1 Theridiidae 1
Table 1. Spiders found on Steeple Jason Island, 2017-2018. Vegetation Classes from Upson and Lewis (2014).
Fig 1. Steeple Jason Sampling Sites, 2017-2018.