DOCSLIB.ORG

REVIEW of METHODS USED to REDUCE RISKS of CETACEAN BYCATCH and ENTANGLEMENTS N CMS Technical Series Publication No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
REVIEW of METHODS USED to REDUCE RISKS of CETACEAN BYCATCH and ENTANGLEMENTS N CMS Technical Series Publication No REVIEW OF METHODS USED TO REDUCE RISKS OF CETACEAN BYCATCH AND ENTANGLEMENTS N CMS Technical Series Publication No. 38 W E Published by the Secretariat of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals Recommended Russell Leaper and Susannah Calderan (2018). Review of methods used to reduce risks of citation: cetacean bycatch and entanglements. UNEP/CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 76 pages. CMS Technical Series No. 38 Prepared by: UNEP/CMS Secretariat Editors: Aimée Leslie WWF & Leigh Henry WWF-US Authors: Russell Leaper1 Susannah Calderan2 1 University of Aberdeen, School of Biological Sciences, Tillydrone Ave, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ [email protected] 2 Canal House, Banavie, Fort William, PH33 7LY [email protected] Coordination: Heidrun Frisch-Nwakanma Front Cover © Chris Johnson Photograph: Back Cover © Chris Johnson Photograph: Cover Design: Karina Waedt, www.karinadesign.de Inside Design and Agenda28 www.agenda28.com Layout: © 2018 UNEP/CMS & WWF. This publication, except the cover photograph, may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational and other non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The UNEP/CMS Secretariat would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purposes whatsoever without prior permission from the United Nations Environmental Programme. Disclaimer: The contents of this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of UNEP/CMS or contributory organisations. The designations employed and the presentation do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP/CMS or contributory organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area in its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Copies of this publication are available from the UNEP/CMS Secretariat website: http://www. cms.int UNEP/CMS Secretariat UN Campus Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1 D-53111 Bonn, Germany Tel.: (+49 228) 815 24 01/02 Fax: (+49 228) 815 24 49 E-mail: [email protected] www.cms.int ISBN: 978-3-937429-26-7 Review of methods used to reduce risks 3 WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This review was funded by WWF. An earlier review of methods for reducing large whale entanglement on which some of this material was based was funded by Humane Society International. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the following reviewers who greatly improved earlier drafts of this review: Sarah Dolman, Aimée Leslie, Stephan Lutter, Gianna Minton, Vassili Papastavrou, Somany Phay, Randy Reeves, Fabian Ritter, Gerry Ryan, Meike Schei- dat, Umair Shahid, Mark Simmonds. spinner dolphins (Stenella longirostris ) New Britain, Papua New Guinea. © Jürgen Freund / WWF © JürgenFreund Review of methods used to reduce risks 5 WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements Bycatch is the ‘biggest threat to marine mammals worldwide... killing hundreds of thousands of them each year’ (U S Commission on Ocean Policy 2004, Read et al. 2006). Review of methods used to reduce risks WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements CONTENTS ABSTRACT 01 1. 2. INTRODUCTION 03 MEASURES TO REDUCE RISK OF CONTACT 11 1.1 International agreements and efforts on mitigation 04 2.1 Reduce fishing effort 11 1.2 Terminology 05 2.2 Closed areas/fishing bans 12 1.3 Evaluation of the effectiveness of 2.2.1 High Seas and European Union mitigation 06 (EU) Driftnet bans 12 1.4 Mitigation strategies and 2.2.2 harbor porpoise Take stakeholder involvement 08 Reduction Plan, Northeast US 14 1.5 Categories of mitigation methods 09 2.2.3 bottlenose dolphin Take Reduction Plan, western North Atlantic 16 2.2.4 false killer whale Take Reduction Plan, Hawaii 17 2.2.5 Dolphin Protection and Management Zones, Mekong (irrawaddy dolphin) 18 2.2.6 Fishing restrictions, Gulf of California (vaquita) 20 2.2.7 Area fishing restrictions, New Zealand (hector’s dolphin) 22 2.2.8 Gillnet restrictions, South America (franciscana) 24 2.2.9 Time-area closures, US and Australia (large whales) 25 Review of methods used to reduce risks WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements 2. 3. MEASURES TO REDUCE MEASURES TO REDUCE RISK OF CONTACT RISK OF SERIOUS 2.3 Pingers/Acoustic alarms 26 OR FATAL INJURY IF ENTANGLEMENT DOES 2.3.1 General limitations of pingers 30 OCCUR 43 2.4 Gear modifications/alternative 3.1 Release programmes/training 43 gear 31 3.1.1 Pound nets (harbour porpoise) 44 2.4.1 Light trawls to replace gillnets 31 3.1.2 Herring weirs (harbour 2.4.2 Cod pots to replace gillnets 32 porpoise) 45 2.4.3 Stiffened and acoustically 3.1.3 Tuna gillnets (dolphin species) 46 reflective gillnets 32 3.1.4 Longlines (false killer whales) 47 2.4.4 Exclusion grids on trawls 33 3.1.5 Purse seines (dolphin species) 48 2.4.5 Excluding devices on stownets 34 3.1.6 Large whale disentanglement 50 2.4.6 Longline modifications 34 3.2 Weak links and line strength 51 2.4.7 Gear modifications to creel/ pot/trap fisheries to reduce risk of contact with large whales 36 2.4.7.1 Reducing vertical line 38 4. 2.4.7.2 Sinking ground line 39 DISCUSSION 53 2.5 Reducing gear loss 40 2.6 Addressing issues of wet 5. storage/setting gear to preserve use of an area 41 REFERENCES 57 Review of methods used to reduce risks WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements Mr Sor Chamraon, a river guard on the Mekong river, shows a recently confiscated illegal net, Kampi, Kratie, Cambodia. a river guard on the Mekong river, shows recently confiscated illegal net, Kampi, Kratie, Mr Sor Chamraon, © Thomas Cristofoletti / WWF-UK Review of methods used to reduce risks 01 WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements ABSTRACT Fisheries bycatch is considered to be the ses on specific technical measures but the- greatest threat to cetaceans globally. From se need to be considered as part of overall coastal artisanal fisheries to deep-sea in- strategies involving all stakeholders. There dustrial operations, incidental capture of are rather few examples of implemented mi- whales, dolphins and porpoises in a range of tigation measures substantially reducing ce- fishing gear has resulted in serious welfare tacean bycatch. Enforcement and complian- and conservation issues for many cetacean ce are key to the success of any measures, species, sometimes to the point of regional and the lack thereof has been the cause extinction. Whilst there has been concern of many mitigation programmes’ failure to about bycatch for several decades and at- meet their objectives. Generally, mitigating tempts to find solutions, progress has been cetacean bycatch has not been viewed as in- limited. Through the use of case studies, this trinsic to successful fisheries management, report summarises the mitigation methods but rather as a separate management issue. that have been undertaken with the objecti- However, where reductions in bycatch have ve of reducing cetacean bycatch, and asses- occurred, a feature of these situations has ses their efficacy and future potential. These often been that a systemic change in the include methods for reducing risk of contact fishery itself has resulted in reduced ceta- between cetaceans and fishing gear, such as cean bycatch, rather than the success of any effort reduction, fishing bans and gear mo- mitigation measures specifically imposed difications, together with methods for redu- for cetaceans. Given the pressing need for cing harm should entanglement occur. This improvements in fisheries management glo- review is intended to support initiatives to bally, reduction of cetacean bycatch should address cetacean bycatch, including those be seen as a key part of such initiatives. The by CMS, its associated regional agreements, most generally effective mitigation of ceta- ASCOBANS and ACCOBAMS, and the IWC, cean bycatch and entanglement is reduction by providing a summary of the current state in effort, starting with those fisheries that of mitigation techniques. The review focus- have the largest bycatch. Review of methods used to reduce risks WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements ) in West Papua, Indonesia ) in West Papua, Tursiops aduncus Tursiops Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin ( Indo-Pacific © Jürgen Freund / WWF Review of methods used to reduce risks 03 WWF | CMS of cetacean bycatch and entanglements 1. INTRODUCTION Cetacean bycatch is characterised globally Large whales can become entangled in nets by a deficiency of data on fisheries effort, or just about any form of line in the water. abundance estimates and bycatch morta- This includes many types of fishing gear lity, and it is often not possible to assess but also some aquaculture and mooring li- the impact of bycatch-related mortality on nes. Large whale entanglements are rarely cetacean populations. However, wherever observed directly and entanglement events studies are conducted, large numbers of are considerably underreported for most po- small cetaceans are found to be affected by pulations and regions (IWC 2010). Neverthe- bycatch (Young and Iudicello 2007). Accor- less entanglement is known to be the major ding to the U.S. Ocean Commission, bycatch source of mortality for several populations is the ‘biggest threat to marine mammals (Thomas et al. 2016). worldwide . .[killing] hundreds of thousands Cetacean bycatch increased dramatically of them each year’ (U S Commission on with the proliferation of monofilament gill- Ocean Policy 2004, Read et al. 2006). 82% of nets in the late 1960s (e.g. Slooten (2013)). odontocete species have been recorded as Waugh et al. (2011) highlight how in the last bycatch since 1990; 75% have been caught two decades, the increasing use of outboard in gillnets (Reeves et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Evaluation of Cetacean Bycatch in UK Fisheries: Problems and Solutions
    AN EVALUATION OF CETACEAN BYCATCH IN UK FISHERIES: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS A report to WDC and HSI Russell Leaper | February 2021 1 SUMMARY Cetacean bycatch has been a serious and persistent welfare and conservation issue in UK waters for many years. The most recent estimates indicate that over 1000 cetaceans are killed each year in UK fisheries. The species most affected are harbour porpoise, common dolphin, minke and humpback whale, but all cetaceans in UK waters are vulnerable. The level of suffering for mammals that become entangled in fishing gear has been described as ‘one of the grossest abuses of wild animal sensibility in the modern world’. Although potential solutions exist, the mitigation efforts to date have only achieved small reductions in the numbers of animals that are killed. The Fisheries Act 2020 commits the UK to minimise and, where possible, eliminate bycatch of sensitive species. The Act does not include details of how to achieve this, but requires reconsideration of fisheries management and practices, the phasing out of some gears, and a change of approach from strategies previously pursued. While gill nets are recognised as the highest risk gear category globally for cetacean bycatch, there are also serious bycatch problems associated with trawl fisheries and with creel fisheries using pots and traps. The different characteristics of these gear types and the types and size of vessels involved, require different approaches to bycatch monitoring and mitigation. Acoustic deterrent devices (ADDs), such as ‘pingers’, have been shown to be effective at reducing harbour porpoise bycatch in gill nets, but the reduction achieved so far has been small, they may cause unwanted disturbance or displacement, and they may not be effective for other species.
    [Show full text]
  • Hauling up Solutions
    HAULING UP SOLUTIONS REDUCING CETACEAN BYCATCH IN UK FISHERIES WORKSHOP REPORT HAULING UP SOLUTIONS REPORT 1 CONTENTS CONTENTS 1 SECTION ONE: SUMMARY 2 SECTION TWO: BACKGROUND 6 SECTION THREE: INTRODUCTION TO THE ISSUE 10 SECTION FOUR: MONITORING 14 SECTION FIVE: MITIGATION 17 SECTION SIX: RECOMMENDATIONS 26 SECTION SEVEN: NEXT STEPS 28 SECTION EIGHT: STAY IN TOUCH & GLOSSARY 30 ANNEX: REFERENCES, WORKSHOP PRESENTERS REPORT CITATION Tindall, C., Hetherington, S., Bell, C., Deaville, R., Barker, J., Borrow, K., Oakley, M., Bendall, V., Engelhard, G. (Eds) (2019) Hauling Up Solutions: Reducing Cetacean Bycatch in UK Fisheries. Final Workshop Report. 31 pp. www.cefas.co.uk/cetacean-by-catch-workshop. CHATHAM HOUSE RULE This report gives a summary of a participatory workshop on cetacean bycatch held at the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) on 12-13 March 2019 held under the Chatham House Rule. As a result, no comments are affiliated to any individual or organisation apart from direct quotes, for which permission was sought. i HAULING UP SOLUTIONS REPORT SECTION ONE SUMMARY Accidental capture in fishing gear (bycatch) is one of the greatest threats faced globally by cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) and has contributed to the decline and extinction of some populations and species1. Cetacean bycatch is problematic as it represents a welfare issue for individuals caught which is of public concern; an economic cost to fishermen owing to the time taken to clear and repair damaged gear, and the subsequent lost catch; an issue of safety for fishermen when clearing nets; as well as a potential conservation concern for some species or populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Meetings and Announcements
    3. the prohibition of painful sur­ b. inspect and report to the Board on gical procedures without the use of a the treatment of animals in commer­ properly administered anesthesia; cial farming; MEETINGS !!!!! and c. investigate all complaints and alle­ ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. provisions for a licensing system gations of unfair treatment of for all farms. Such system shall in­ animals; clude, but shall not be limited to, the d. issue in writing, without prior hear­ following requirements: ing, a cease and desist order to any i. all farms shall b'e inspected person if the Commission has reason prior to the issuance of a I icense. to believe that that person is causing, ii. farms shall thereafter be in­ engaging in, or maintaining any spected at least once a year. condition or activity which, in the iii. minimum requirements shall Director's judgment, will result in or be provided to insure a healthy is likely to result in irreversible or ir­ life for every farm animal. These reparable damage to an animal or its requirements shall include, but environment, and it appears prejudi­ not be limited to: cial to the interests of the [State] a. proper space allowances; {United States] to delay action until b. proper nutrition; an opportunity for a hearing can be c. proper care and treatment provided. The order shall direct such of animals; and person to discontinue, abate or allevi­ d. proper medical care. .ate such condition, activity, or viola­ f. The Board may enter into contract tion. A hearing shall be provided with with any person, firm, corporation or ____ days to allow the person to FORTHCOMING association to handle things neces­ show that each condition, activity or MEETINGS sary or convenient in carrying out the violation does not exist; and functions, powers and duties of the e.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Oceanographic Study on the Baleen Whaling Grounds
    FISHERY OCEANOGRAPHIC STUDY ON THE BALEEN WHALING GROUNDS KEIJI NASU INTRODUCTION A Fishery oceanographic study of the whaling grounds seeks to find the factors control­ ling the abundance of whales in the waters and in general has been a subject of interest to whalers. In the previous paper (Nasu 1963), the author discussed the oceanography and baleen whaling grounds in the subarctic Pacific Ocean. In this paper, the oceanographic environment of the baleen whaling grounds in the coastal region ofJapan, subarctic Pacific Ocean, and Antarctic Ocean are discussed. J apa­ nese oceanographic observations in the whaling grounds mainly have been carried on by the whaling factory ships and whale making research boats using bathyther­ mographs and reversing thermomenters. Most observations were made at surface. From the results of the biological studies on the whaling grounds by Marr ( 1956, 1962) and Nemoto (1959) the author presumed that the feeding depth is less than about 50 m. Therefore, this study was made mainly on the oceanographic environ­ ment of the surface layer of the whaling grounds. In the coastal region of Japan Uda (1953, 1954) plotted the maps of annual whaling grounds for each 10 days and analyzed the relation between the whaling grounds and the hydrographic condition based on data of the daily whaling reports during 1910-1951. A study of the subarctic Pacific Ocean whaling grounds in relation to meteorological and oceanographic conditions was made by U da and Nasu (1956) and Nasu (1957, 1960, 1963). Nemoto (1957, 1959) also had reported in detail on the subject from the point of the food of baleen whales and the ecology of plankton.
    [Show full text]
  • Cetacean Rapid Assessment: an Approach to Fill Knowledge Gaps and Target Conservation Across Large Data Deficient Areas
    Received: 9 January 2017 Revised: 19 June 2017 Accepted: 17 July 2017 DOI: 10.1002/aqc.2833 RESEARCH ARTICLE Cetacean rapid assessment: An approach to fill knowledge gaps and target conservation across large data deficient areas Gill T. Braulik1,2 | Magreth Kasuga1 | Anja Wittich3 | Jeremy J. Kiszka4 | Jamie MacCaulay2 | Doug Gillespie2 | Jonathan Gordon2 | Said Shaib Said5 | Philip S. Hammond2 1 Wildlife Conservation Society Tanzania Program, Tanzania Abstract 2 Sea Mammal Research Unit, Scottish Oceans 1. Many species and populations of marine megafauna are undergoing substantial declines, while Institute, University of St Andrews, St many are also very poorly understood. Even basic information on species presence is unknown Andrews, Fife, UK for tens of thousands of kilometres of coastline, particularly in the developing world, which is a 3 23 Adamson Terrace, Leven, Fife, UK major hurdle to their conservation. 4 Department of Biological Sciences, Florida 2. Rapid ecological assessment is a valuable tool used to identify and prioritize areas for International University, North Miami, FL, USA conservation; however, this approach has never been clearly applied to marine cetaceans. Here 5 Institute of Marine Science, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania a rapid assessment protocol is outlined that will generate broad‐scale, quantitative, baseline Correspondence data on cetacean communities and potential threats, that can be conducted rapidly and cost‐ Gill T. Braulik, Wildlife Conservation Society effectively across whole countries, or regions. Tanzania Program, Zanzibar, Tanzania. Email: [email protected] 3. The rapid assessment was conducted in Tanzania, East Africa, and integrated collection of data on cetaceans from visual, acoustic, and interview surveys with existing information from multiple Funding information sources, to provide low resolution data on cetacean community relative abundance, diversity, and Pew Marine Fellows, Grant/Award Number: threats.
    [Show full text]
  • SOLUTION: Gathering and Sonic Blasts for Oil Exploration Because These Practices Can Harm and Kill Whales
    ENDANGEREDWHALES © Nolan/Greenpeace WE HAVE A PROBLEM: WHAT YOU CAN DO: • Many whale species still face extinction. • Tell the Bush administration to strongly support whale protection so whaling countries get the • Blue whales, the largest animals ever, may now number as message. few as 400.1 • Ask elected officials to press Iceland, Japan • Rogue nations Japan, Norway and Iceland flout the and Norway to respect the commercial whaling international ban on commercial whaling. moratorium. • Other threats facing whales include global warming, toxic • Demand that the U.S. curb global warming pollution dumping, noise pollution and lethal “bycatch” from fishing. and sign the Stockholm Convention, which bans the most harmful chemicals on the planet. • Tell Congress that you oppose sonar intelligence SOLUTION: gathering and sonic blasts for oil exploration because these practices can harm and kill whales. • Japan, Norway and Iceland must join the rest of the world and respect the moratorium on commercial whaling. • The loophole Japan exploits to carry out whaling for “Tomostpeople,whalingisallnineteenth- “scientific” research should be closed. centurystuff.Theyhavenoideaabout • Fishing operations causing large numbers of whale hugefloatingslaughterhouses,steel-hulled bycatch deaths must be cleaned up or stopped. chaserboatswithsonartostalkwhales, • Concerted international action must be taken to stop andharpoonsfiredfromcannons.” other threats to whales including global warming, noise Bob Hunter, pollution, ship strikes and toxic contamination.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Effects of Fishing and Whaling in the North Pacific And
    TWENTY-SIX Ecosystem Effects of Fishing and Whaling in the North Pacific and Atlantic Oceans BORIS WORM, HEIKE K. LOTZE, RANSOM A. MYERS Human alterations of marine ecosystems have occurred about the role of whales in the food web and (2) what has throughout history, but only over the last century have these been observed in other species playing a similar role. Then we reached global proportions. Three major types of changes may explore whether the available evidence supports these have been described: (1) the changing of nutrient cycles and hypotheses. Experiments and detailed observations in lakes, climate, which may affect ecosystem structure from the bot- streams, and coastal and shelf ecosystems have shown that tom up, (2) fishing, which may affect ecosystems from the the removal of large predatory fishes or marine mammals top down, and (3) habitat alteration and pollution, which almost always causes release of prey populations, which often affect all trophic levels and therefore were recently termed set off ecological chain reactions such as trophic cascades side-in impacts (Lotze and Milewski 2004). Although the (Estes and Duggins 1995; Micheli 1999; Pace et al. 1999; large-scale consequences of these changes for marine food Shurin et al. 2002; Worm and Myers 2003). Another impor- webs and ecosystems are only beginning to be understood tant interaction is competitive release, in which formerly (Pauly et al. 1998; Micheli 1999; Jackson et al. 2001; suppressed species replace formerly dominant ones that were Beaugrand et al. 2002; Worm et al. 2002; Worm and Myers reduced by fishing (Fogarty and Murawski 1998; Myers and 2003; Lotze and Milewski 2004), the implications for man- Worm 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • STATUS and CONSERVATION of FRESHWATER POPULATIONS of IRRAWADDY DOLPHINS Edited by Brian D
    WORKING PAPER NO. 31 MAY 2007 STATUS AND CONSERVATION OF FRESHWATER POPULATIONS OF IRRAWADDY DOLPHINS Edited by Brian D. Smith, Robert G. Shore and Alvin Lopez WORKING PAPER NO. 31 MAY 2007 sTATUS AND CONSERVATION OF FRESHWATER POPULATIONS OF IRRAWADDY DOLPHINS Edited by Brian D. Smith, Robert G. Shore and Alvin Lopez WCS Working Papers: ISSN 1530-4426 Copies of the WCS Working Papers are available at http://www.wcs.org/science Cover photographs by: Isabel Beasley (top, Mekong), Danielle Kreb (middle, Mahakam), Brian D. Smith (bottom, Ayeyarwady) Copyright: The contents of this paper are the sole property of the authors and cannot be reproduced without permission of the authors. The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) saves wildlife and wild lands around the world. We do this through science, conservation, education, and the man- agement of the world's largest system of urban wildlife parks, led by the flag- ship Bronx Zoo. Together, these activities inspire people to imagine wildlife and humans living together sustainably. WCS believes that this work is essential to the integrity of life on earth. Over the past century, WCS has grown and diversified to include four zoos, an aquarium, over 100 field conservation projects, local and international educa- tion programs, and a wildlife health program. To amplify this dispersed con- servation knowledge, the WCS Institute was established as an internal “think tank” to coordinate WCS expertise for specific conservation opportunities and to analyze conservation and academic trends that provide opportunities to fur- ther conservation effectiveness. The Institute disseminates WCS' conservation work via papers and workshops, adding value to WCS' discoveries and experi- ence by sharing them with partner organizations, policy-makers, and the pub- lic.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status and the Use of Irrawaddy Dolphins As a Flagship
    Conservation status and the use of Irrawaddy dolphins as a flagship species for climate adaptation in the Peam Krasop Wildlife Sanctuary, Cambodia Building Resilience to Climate Change Impacts in Coastal Southeast Asia (BCR) Brian Smith, Sun Kong and Lieng Saroeun INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE The designation of geographical entities in this Citation: Smith, B., Kong, S., and Saroeun, L. book, and the presentation of the material, do not (2014). Conservation status and the use of imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on Irrawaddy dolphins as a flagship species for climate adaptation in the Peam Krasop Wildlife the part of IUCN or the European Union concerning Sanctuary, Cambodia. Thailand: IUCN. 80pp. the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its Cover photo: Dolphins in Koh Kong Province, frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this Cambodia © IUCN Cambodia/Sun Kong publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN, the European Union or any other participating Layout by: Ria Sen organizations. Produced by: IUCN Southeast Asia Group This publication has been made possible by funding from the European Union. Available from: IUCN Asia Regional Office Published by: IUCN Asia in Bangkok, Thailand 63 Soi Prompong, Sukhumvit 39, Wattana 10110 Bangkok, Thailand Copyright: © 2014 IUCN, International Union for Tel: +66 2 662 4029 Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources IUCN Cambodia Reproduction of this publication for educational or #6B, St. 368, Boeng Keng Kang III, other non-commercial purposes is authorized Chamkarmon, PO Box 1504, Phnom Penh, without prior written permission from the copyright Cambodia holder provided the source is fully acknowledgeRia d.
    [Show full text]
  • American Perceptions of Marine Mammals and Their Management, by Stephen R
    American Perceptions of Marine Mammals and Their Management Stephen R. Kellert Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies May 1999 CHAPTER ONE: Introduction and Research Methodology Most Americans associate marine mammals with two orders of animals-the ceteceans, including the whales and dolphins, and the pinnipeds, consisting of the seals, sea lions, and walrus. The more informed recognize another marine mammal order, the sirenians, represented in the United States by one species, the manatee, mainly found along the Florida peninsula. Less widely recognized as marine mammals, but still officially classified as marine mammals, include one ursine species, the polar bear, and a mustelid, the sea otter. This report will examine American views of all marine mammals and their management, although mostly focusing on, for reasons of greater significance and familiarity, the cetaceans and pinnipeds. Marine mammals are among the most privileged yet beleaguered of creatures in America today. Many marine mammals enjoy unusually strong public interest and support, their popularity having expanded enormously during the past half-century. Marine mammals are also relatively unique among wildlife in America in having been the recipients of legislation dedicated exclusively to their protection, management, and conservation. This law - the Marine Mammal Protection Act - is one of the most ambitious, comprehensive, and progressive environmental laws ever enacted. More problematically, various marine mammal species have been the source of considerable policy conflict and management controversy, both domestically and internationally, and an associated array of challenges to their well-being and, in some cases, future survival. Over-exploitation (e.g., commercial whaling) was the most prominent cause of marine mammal decline historically, although this threat has greatly diminished.
    [Show full text]
  • Translocation of Trapped Bolivian River Dolphins (Inia Boliviensis)
    J. CETACEAN RES. MANAGE. 21: 17–23, 2020 17 Translocation of trapped Bolivian river dolphins (Inia boliviensis) ENZO ALIAGA-ROSSEL1,3AND MARIANA ESCOBAR-WW2 Contact e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The Bolivian river dolphin, locally known as the bufeo, is the only cetacean in land-locked Bolivia. Knowledge about its conservation status and vulnerability to anthropogenic actions is extremely deficient. We report on the rescue and translocation of 26 Bolivian river dolphins trapped in a shrinking segment of the Pailas River, Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Several institutions, authorities and volunteers collaborated to translocate the dolphins, which included calves, juveniles, and pregnant females. The dolphins were successfully released into the Río Grande. Each dolphin was accompanied by biologists who assured their welfare. No detectable injuries occurred and none of the dolphins died during this process. If habitat degradation continues, it is likely that events in which river dolphins become trapped in South America may happen more frequently in the future. KEYWORDS: BOLIVIAN RIVER DOLPHIN; HABITAT DEGRADATION; CONSERVATION; STRANDINGS; TRANSLOCATION; SOUTH AMERICA INTRODUCTION distinct species, geographically isolated from the boto or Small cetaceans are facing several threats from direct or Amazon River dolphin (I. geoffrensis) (Gravena et al., 2014; indirect human impacts (Reeves et al., 2000). The pressure Ruiz-Garcia et al., 2008). This species has been categorised on South American and Asian river dolphins is increasing; by the Red Book of Wildlife Vertebrates of Bolivia as evidently, different river systems have very different problems. Vulnerable (VU), highlighting the need to conserve and Habitat degradation, dam construction, modification of river protect them from existing threats (Aguirre et al., 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item 7.1 Cooperation with Other Bodies Report by The
    25th Meeting of the Advisory Committee ASCOBANS/AC25/Inf.7.1a Stralsund, Germany, 17-19 September 2019 Dist.16 August 2019 Agenda Item 7.1 Cooperation with other Bodies Report by the Secretariat, Parties and Partners Information Document 7.1a Report of the IWC Workshop on Bycatch Opportunities in the Western Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea Action Requested Take Note Submitted by International Whaling Commission Note: Delegates are kindly reminded to bring their own document copies to the meeting, if needed. Report of the IWC Workshop on Bycatch Mitigation Opportunities in the Western Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea 8-9th May, 2019, Nairobi, Kenya Participants at the IWC Workshop on Bycatch Mitigation Opportunities in the Western Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea 1 Table of Contents Acronyms and definitions ....................................................................................................................... 5 Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 6 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 12 1.1 Introductory items ...................................................................................................................... 12 1.2 Opening remarks ......................................................................................................................... 12 1.3 Introduction to the Bycatch Mitigation
    [Show full text]