DOCSLIB.ORG

(Pollachius Virens) Fishery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(Pollachius Virens) Fishery MACALISTER ELLIOTT AND PARTNERS LTD Final Report UK Fisheries Ltd. / DFFU / Doggerbank saithe (Pollachius virens) fishery 22 NOVEMBER 2010 MacAlister Elliott and Partners Ltd 56 High Street, Lymington Hampshire SO41 9AH United Kingdom Tel: 01590 679016 Fax: 01590 671573 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.macalister-elliott.com 2187R01C Table of contents Contents Report summary .................................................................................................................. 5 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 General background .................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Client ......................................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Units of certification ................................................................................................. 7 1.4 Assessment team and peer reviewers ........................................................................ 7 1.5 Previous assessments by MEP .................................................................................. 8 1.6 Report structure ......................................................................................................... 8 2. Background to the fishery ............................................................................................... 9 2.1 Target species............................................................................................................ 9 2.2 Vessels, gear and fishing operations ......................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Vessels ............................................................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Gear and fishing operations ............................................................................. 10 2.2.3 Fishing grounds ................................................................................................ 11 2.3 Saithe catch ............................................................................................................. 15 2.4 Retained species, by-catch and interactions with ETP species ............................... 15 2.5 Ecosystem context .................................................................................................. 20 2.6 Interactions with other fisheries .............................................................................. 21 3. Management System ..................................................................................................... 22 3.1 Legislative context .................................................................................................. 22 3.2 Organisations involved in management .................................................................. 23 3.3 Harvest control rules and tools ............................................................................... 23 2187R01C 2 3.4 Management plan and objectives ............................................................................ 24 3.5 Regulation and enforcement ................................................................................... 25 4. Stock assessment ........................................................................................................... 26 4.1 Definition of stocks and management units ............................................................ 26 4.2 Monitoring and stock assessment system ............................................................... 27 4.3 Current status of stocks and recruitment ................................................................. 29 5. Fishery evaluation process ............................................................................................ 29 5.1 MSC standard and methodology ............................................................................. 29 5.2 Assessment process ................................................................................................. 33 5.3 Assessment of UK Fisheries Ltd. / DFFU / Doggerbank saithe fisheries .............. 34 5.4 Stakeholder consultations ....................................................................................... 34 6. Scoring .......................................................................................................................... 35 6.1 Scoring methodology .............................................................................................. 35 6.2 Weighting ................................................................................................................ 36 6.3 Harmonisation ......................................................................................................... 37 7. Assessment results ........................................................................................................ 40 7.1 Overall results ......................................................................................................... 40 7.2 Principle 1 ............................................................................................................... 40 7.3 Principle 2 ............................................................................................................... 41 7.4 Principle 3 ............................................................................................................... 42 8. Certification Recommendation ..................................................................................... 43 8.1 Recommendation .................................................................................................... 43 8.2 Conditions ............................................................................................................... 43 9. Chain of custody ........................................................................................................... 44 2187R01C 3 9.1 Determination of the point at which fish and fish products enter further Chain of Custody ......................................................................................................................... 44 9.2 Risk Assessment to the Chain of Custody .............................................................. 46 9.3 Chain of Custody Determination ............................................................................ 47 9.4 Target eligibility date .............................................................................................. 47 10. Client Action Plan (response to conditions) ............................................................... 48 10.1 Client Action Plan from UK Fisheries Ltd. .......................................................... 48 10.2 Client Action Plan from DFFU and Doggerbank ................................................. 50 Annex 1 – Assessment tree ............................................................................................... 52 Annex 2 – References ..................................................................................................... 120 Annex 3 – Summary of stakeholder comments received during information gathering 126 Annex 4 – Peer reviewer reports with MEP responses ................................................... 128 Annex 5 – Stakeholder comments on the PCDR with MEP responses .......................... 149 2187R01C 4 Report summary This report is the final report of an MSC assessment of the fisheries for saithe by the UK fishing company UK Fisheries Ltd. and the German fishing companies Deutsche Fischfang Union GmbH (DFFU) and Doggerbank GmbH. These companies are linked because they are all part of a single larger group (a consortium of the Dutch company Parlevliet & van der Blas B.V. and the Icelandic company Samherji HF). DFFU and Doggerbank operate together as a single operational unit, while UK Fisheries operate separately. The fishing companies both target saithe but have different strategies. UK Fisheries Ltd. has one vessel that targets saithe (the Farnella) and she fishes exclusively (at present) in the North Sea, in both EU and Norwegian waters. DFFU has three vessels in the Unit of Assessment (all German registered), while Doggerbank has two German registered vessels and one which is a joint venture with a Polish company (Arctic Navigation – also under the umbrella of the same larger group) and is Polish registered. All these vessels operate in the same way (as regards saithe) – fishing mainly in the NE Arctic area (North Norway and Spitzbergen), with small amount of catch in the North Sea. Overall, the evaluation was positive and MEP’s recommendation is that both fisheries should be certified to the MSC standard. However, MEP proposes that conditions be placed on this certification for both fisheries. MEP also notes that the average score for both fisheries for Principle 2 was close to the minimum possible for certification (80) and therefore recommends more generally that each fishery conducts a general review of its activities in relation to the requirements of Principle 2. For both fisheries, the average score for Principle 1 was 90.6. For Principle 2 the average score was 80.3. For Principle 3 the average score was 89. Three conditions are proposed for UK Fisheries Ltd. and four for DFFU / Doggerbank, all relating to Principle 2. Three of the proposed conditions apply to the interactions of the fishery with the protected species common skate Dipturus batis. The team
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Published Estimates of Life History Traits for 84 Populations of Teleost
    Summary of data on fishing pressure group (G), age at maturity (Tm, years), length at maturity (Lm, cm), length-at-5%-survival (L.05, cm), time-to-5%-survival 3 (T.05, years), slope of the log-log fecundity-length relationship (Fb), fecundity the year of maturity (Fm), and egg volume (Egg, mm ) for the populations listed in the first three columns. Period is the period of field data collection. Species Zone Period G Tm Lm L.05 T.05 Fb Fm Egg Data sources (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Clupeiformes Engraulis capensis S. Africa 71-74 2 1 9.5 11.8 1.8 3.411 4.856E+04 0.988 118 119 137 118 138 Engraulis encrasicholus B. Biscay 87-92 2 1 11.5 14 1.4 3.997 9.100E+04 1.462 125 30, 188 170, 169 133, 23 145 Medit. S. 84-90 1 1 12.5 13.4 2.3 4.558 9.738E+04 0.668 161 161 160 161, 120 120 Sprattus sprattus Baltic S. 85-91 1 2 12 13.8 6.2 2.84 2.428E+05 1.122 15 19 26 184, 5 146 North S. 73-77 1 2 11.5 14.3 3 4.673 8.848E+03 0.393 8 107 106 33 169 Clupea harengus Baltic S. 75-82 1 3 16 24 4.9 3.206 4.168E+04 0.679 116 191 191 116 169 North S. 60-69 3 3 22 26.9 2.7 4.61 2.040E+04 0.679 52 53, 7 52 39 169 Baltic S.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Systematics of Gadid Fishes: Implications for the Biogeographic Origins of Pacific Species
    Color profile: Disabled Composite Default screen 19 Molecular systematics of gadid fishes: implications for the biogeographic origins of Pacific species Steven M. Carr, David S. Kivlichan, Pierre Pepin, and Dorothy C. Crutcher Abstract: Phylogenetic relationships among 14 species of gadid fishes were investigated with portions of two mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) genes, a 401 base pair (bp) segment of the cytochrome b gene, and a 495 bp segment of the cytochrome oxidase I gene. The molecular data indicate that the three species of gadids endemic to the Pacific Basin represent simultaneous invasions by separate phylogenetic lineages. The Alaskan or walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) is about as closely related to the Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) as is the Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus), which suggests that T. chalcogramma and G. macrocephalus represent separate invasions of the Pacific Basin. The Pacific tomcod (Microgadus proximus) is more closely related to the Barents Sea navaga (Eleginus navaga) than to the congeneric Atlantic tomcod (Microgadus tomcod), which suggests that the Pacific species is derived from the Eleginus lineage and that Eleginus should be synonymized with Microgadus. Molecular divergences between each of the three endemic Pacific species and their respective closest relatives are similar and consistent with contemporaneous speciation events following the reopening of the Bering Strait ca. 3.0–3.5 million years BP. In contrast, the Greenland cod (Gadus ogac) and the Pacific cod have essentially identical mtDNA sequences; differences between them are less than those found within G. morhua. The Greenland cod appears to represent a contemporary northward and eastward range extension of the Pacific cod, and should be synonymized with it as G.
    [Show full text]
  • Scenario Calculations of Mercury Exposure
    VKM Report 2019:3 Scenario calculations of mercury exposure from fish and overview of species with high mercury concentrations Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment Report from the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (VKM) 2019:3 Scenario calculations of mercury exposure from fish and overview of species with high mercury concentrations Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment 05.04.2019 ISBN: 978-82-8259-319-9 ISSN: 2535-4019 Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (VKM) Po 4404 Nydalen N – 0403 Oslo Norway Phone: +47 21 62 28 00 Email: [email protected] vkm.no vkm.no/english Cover photo: Colourbox Suggested citation: VKM, Heidi Amlund, Kirsten Eline Rakkestad, Anders Ruus, Jostein Starrfelt, Jonny Beyer, Anne Lise Brantsæter, Sara Bremer, Gunnar Sundstøl Eriksen, Espen Mariussen, Ingunn Anita Samdal, Cathrine Thomsen and Helle Katrine Knutsen (2019). Scenario calculations of mercury exposure from fish and overview of species with high mercury concentrations. Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment. VKM report 2019:3, ISBN: 978-82-8259-319-9, ISSN: 2535-4019. Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (VKM), Oslo, Norway. Scenario calculations of mercury exposure from fish and overview of species with high mercury concentrations Preparation of the opinion The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (Vitenskapskomiteen for mat og miljø, VKM) appointed a project group to answer the request from the Norwegian Food Safety Authority. The project group consisted of three VKM-members, and three employees, including a project leader, from the VKM secretariat.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 3 FISH and CRUSTACEANS, MOLLUSCS and OTHER AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES I 3-L Note
    )&f1y3X CHAPTER 3 FISH AND CRUSTACEANS, MOLLUSCS AND OTHER AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES I 3-l Note 1. This chapter does not cover: (a) Marine mammals (heading 0106) or meat thereof (heading 0208 or 0210); (b) Fish (including livers and roes thereof) or crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates, dead and unfit or unsuitable for human consumption by reason of either their species or their condition (chapter 5); flours, meals or pellets of fish or of crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates, unfit for human consumption (heading 2301); or (c) Caviar or caviar substitutes prepared from fish eggs (heading 1604). 2. In this chapter the term "pellets" means products which have been agglomerated either directly by compression or by the addition of a small quantity of binder. Additional U.S. Note 1. Certain fish, crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates are provided for in chapter 98. )&f2y3X I 3-2 0301 Live fish: 0301.10.00 00 Ornamental fish............................... X....... Free Free Other live fish: 0301.91.00 00 Trout (Salmo trutta, Salmo gairdneri, Salmo clarki, Salmo aguabonita, Salmo gilae)................................... X....... Free Free 0301.92.00 00 Eels (Anguilla spp.)..................... kg...... Free Free 0301.93.00 00 Carp..................................... X....... Free Free 0301.99.00 00 Other.................................... X....... Free Free 0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of heading 0304: Salmonidae, excluding livers and roes: 0302.11.00 Trout (Salmo trutta, Salmo gairdneri, Salmo clarki, Salmo aguabonita, Salmo gilae)................................... ........ Free 2.2¢/kg 10 Rainbow trout (Salmo gairnderi), farmed.............................. kg 90 Other............................... kg 0302.12.00 Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and Danube salmon (Hucho hucho).............
    [Show full text]
  • Pollachius Virens
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published October 5 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Use of rocky intertidal habitats by juvenile pollock Pollachius virens Robert W. Rangeley*, Donald L. Kramer Department of Biology, McGill University, 1205 Docteur Penfield Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1B1 ABSTRACT: We ~nvestigatedpatterns of distribution and foraging by young-of-the-year pollock Pol- lachius virens in the rocky intertidal zone. Pollock were sampled by beach seine in fucoid macroalgae and in open habitats at all stages of the tide, day and night throughout the summer. Their presence in shallow water at the high tidal stages indicated that at least part of the pollock population migrated across the full width of the intertidal zone (150 m) each tide. Densities in shallow water were much higher at low than at high tidal stages suggesting that a large influx of pollock moved in from the sub- tidal zone at low tidal stages and then dispersed into intertidal habitats at high tidal stages. There were few differences in pollock densit~esbetween algal and open habitats but abundances likely increased in the algal habitat at higher tidal stages when changes in habitat availability are taken Into account. Densities were higher at night and there was an order of magnitude decline in pollock densities from early to late summer. In another study we showed that piscivorous birds are a probable cause of pollock summer mortality. Pollock fed on invertebrates from intertidal algae relatively continuously. The tidal migrations of juvenile pollock observed in this study and their use of macroalgae as a foraging and possibly a refuging habitat strongly suggests that the rocky intertidal zone may be an important fish nursery area.
    [Show full text]
  • 9.2 Greater North Sea Ecoregion – Fisheries Overview
    ICES Fisheries Overviews Greater North Sea Ecoregion Published 4 July 2017 DOI: 10.17895/ices.pub.3116 9.2 Greater North Sea Ecoregion – Fisheries overview Executive summary Around 6600 fishing vessels are active in the Greater North Sea. Total landings peaked in the 1970s at 4 million tonnes and have since declined to about 2 million tonnes. Total fishing effort has declined substantially since 2003. Pelagic fish landings are greater than demersal fish landings. Herring and mackerel, caught using pelagic trawls and seines, account for the largest portion of the pelagic landings, while sandeel and haddock, caught using otter trawls/seines, account for the largest fraction of the demersal landings. Catches are taken from more than 100 stocks. Discards are highest in the demersal and benthic fisheries. The spatial distribution of fishing gear varies across the Greater North Sea. Static gear is used most frequently in the English Channel, the eastern part of the Southern Bight, the Danish banks, and in the waters east of Shetland. Bottom trawls are used throughout the North Sea, with lower use in the shallower southern North Sea where beam trawls are most commonly used. Pelagic gears are used throughout the North Sea. In terms of tonnage of catch, most of the fish stocks harvested from the North Sea are being fished at levels consistent with achieving good environmental status (GES) under the EU’s Marine Strategy Framework Directive; however, the reproductive capacity of the stocks has not generally reached this level. Almost all the fisheries in the North Sea catch more than one species; controlling fishing on one species therefore affects other species as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic Pollock Pollachius Virens
    Atlantic Pollock Pollachius virens Description: Atlantic Pollock is a whitefish that resembles Cod. They NUTRITIONAL are members of the same family, except Pollock doesn’t INFORMATION have a barbel (whisker). Pollock range from olive green Per 3.5 ounce portion to brownish green dorsally and pale grey to yellow Calories 92 on its belly. Atlantic Pollock is found on both sides Saturated Fst 0.14 g Total Fat 0.98 g of the Atlantic. On the East Coast, it is sourced from Protein 19 g Newfoundland to New Jersey. Pollock has previously Sodium 86 mg been largely consumed as a versatile alternative to Cod Cholesterol 71 mg and Haddock. Eating Qualities: COOKING METHODS Pollock has a light flaky white flesh that can be Poach substituted for Cod or Haddock in most recipes. The Bake fish is very mild (although stronger than Cod), and Broil lean with a large flake. Atlantic Pollock is very low Fry in saturated fat and is a very good source of protein, Grill vitamin B12, phosphorus, and selenium. Sauté Fishing Methods: HANDLING Pollock are caught by a variety of gears but most Whole fish should be packed in commonly by bottom trawls and gillnets. Pollock are flaked ice. Whole fish and fillets well managed throughout their, range and there is little should be stored in a drain pan bycatch associated with Pollock fisheries. in the coldest part of the walk-in. Fillets should also be covered in ice although with a barrier, so the ice never touches the flesh. Fortune Fish & Gourmet Chicago Office: Minneapolis Office: (630) 860-7100 (612) 724-5911 (888) 803-2345 (866) 363-6063 www.fortunefishco.net.
    [Show full text]
  • Translation Series No. 681
    s. T . I . C1,N,\11% I E FISHEIiIES RESEARCH BOARD OF CANADA N,'.,f13NA P.i_S‘"-:.,1-■ ..11 Translation Series No. 681 OTTAWA CANADA Some aspects of the relationship between fat and water content, and fat distribution, in edible fishes By C.-H. Brandes and R. Dietrich FISHERIES RESBRCHEOf\RD OF CANADA Halifax Library I.REETe 1707 LOWE; , P. 0. ; ), ALIF NYAR., SCOTIA Original title: Betrachtungen über die Beziehungen zwischen dem Fett- und Wassergehalt und die Fettverteilung bei Konsumfischen From: Verbffentlichungen des Instituts für Meeresforschung in Bremerhaven, Vol. 5, pp. 299-305, 1958. Translated by M. Virjee, Bureau for Translations, Foreign Language Division, Department of the Secretary of State of Canada Fisheries Research Board of Canada Research Laboratory, Halifax, N.S. 1966 iegg 44 ce/ DEPARTMENIt OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE SECRÉTARIAT D'ÉTAT BUREAU FOR TRANSLATIONS BUREAU DES TRADUCTIONS FOREIGN LANGUAGES DIVISION DES LANGUES DIVISION CANADA ÉTRANGÈRES TRANSLATED FROM TRADUCTION DE mn) - À Germa.n English SUBJECT - SUJET Marine Research AUTHOR - AUTEUR C.H.Brandes and R.Dietrich TITLE IN E/yGLISH - TITRE ANGLAr Nweit-C-ee: ge-fleet-lana--en the relationship between t.w. fat and water contenta and the fat distribution in cemmem*eaa fishe e , gr , TITLE IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE - TITRE EN LANGUE éTRANCIèRE Betrachtungen über die Beziehungen zwischen dem Fett- und Wassergehalt und die Fettverteilung bei Konsumfischen. REFEREpCE - RgFÉRENCE INAME OF BOOK OR PUBLICATION - NOM DU LIVRE OU PUBLICATION; Veroffentlichungen des Instituts fur Meeresforschung PUBLISHER - éDITEUR Kommiasionsverlag Franz Leuwer CITY - VILLE DATE PAGES Bremen (10) 1958, V010/ 299.•305 REQUEST RECEIVED KAON OUR HUMBER REQUM PAR m.
    [Show full text]
  • Intrinsic Vulnerability in the Global Fish Catch
    The following appendix accompanies the article Intrinsic vulnerability in the global fish catch William W. L. Cheung1,*, Reg Watson1, Telmo Morato1,2, Tony J. Pitcher1, Daniel Pauly1 1Fisheries Centre, The University of British Columbia, Aquatic Ecosystems Research Laboratory (AERL), 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada 2Departamento de Oceanografia e Pescas, Universidade dos Açores, 9901-862 Horta, Portugal *Email: [email protected] Marine Ecology Progress Series 333:1–12 (2007) Appendix 1. Intrinsic vulnerability index of fish taxa represented in the global catch, based on the Sea Around Us database (www.seaaroundus.org) Taxonomic Intrinsic level Taxon Common name vulnerability Family Pristidae Sawfishes 88 Squatinidae Angel sharks 80 Anarhichadidae Wolffishes 78 Carcharhinidae Requiem sharks 77 Sphyrnidae Hammerhead, bonnethead, scoophead shark 77 Macrouridae Grenadiers or rattails 75 Rajidae Skates 72 Alepocephalidae Slickheads 71 Lophiidae Goosefishes 70 Torpedinidae Electric rays 68 Belonidae Needlefishes 67 Emmelichthyidae Rovers 66 Nototheniidae Cod icefishes 65 Ophidiidae Cusk-eels 65 Trachichthyidae Slimeheads 64 Channichthyidae Crocodile icefishes 63 Myliobatidae Eagle and manta rays 63 Squalidae Dogfish sharks 62 Congridae Conger and garden eels 60 Serranidae Sea basses: groupers and fairy basslets 60 Exocoetidae Flyingfishes 59 Malacanthidae Tilefishes 58 Scorpaenidae Scorpionfishes or rockfishes 58 Polynemidae Threadfins 56 Triakidae Houndsharks 56 Istiophoridae Billfishes 55 Petromyzontidae
    [Show full text]
  • FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Fisheries and for a world without hunger Aquaculture Department Species Fact Sheets Pollachius virens (Linnaeus, 1758) Pollachius virens: (click for more) Synonyms Gadus carbonarius Linnaeus, 1758 Gadus colinus Lacépède, 1800 FAO Names En - Saithe(=Pollock), Fr - Lieu noir, Sp - Carbonero(=Colín). 3Alpha Code: POK Taxonomic Code: 1480401501 Scientific Name with Original Description Gadus virens Linnaeus, 1758, Syst.Nat., ed. 10:254. Diagnostic Features A small barbel at tip of lower jaw. Lateral line smooth along its entire length. Colour: brownish-green dorsally, only slightly paler ventrally; fins coloured like the body, except for pelvics which are pale; lateral line pale. Geographical Distribution FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department Launch the Aquatic Species Distribution map viewer Barents Sea and Spitsbergen to Bay of Biscay, around Iceland, southwest Greenland, and in the western Atlantic from Hudson Strait to North Carolina, although rare at the extremes of the range. Habitat and Biology An active, gregarious, pelagic fishoccurring in inshore and offshore waters to about 200 m depth.Migrations are known to occur, especially for spawning, to coastal waters in spring and to deeper waters in winter. Also, long-distance north-south migrations are known, both for Europe and America. During their first 2-3 years of age, saithe remain in shallow coastal waters.Growth is rapid: at 1 year, ca. 20 cm, 2 years, 35 cm, 3 years, 50 cm, 5 years, 60-65 cm, 10 years, 94-97 cm, 15 years, 108 cm. Maximum age is 25 years. European saithe grow faster in the southern part of their range, but it is not known whether this also applies to the North American population.
    [Show full text]
  • Differences in Diet of Atlantic Bluefin Tuna
    16 8 Abstract–The stomachs of 819 Atlan­ Differences in diet of Atlantic bluefin tuna tic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) sampled from 1988 to 1992 were ana­ (Thunnus thynnus) at five seasonal feeding grounds lyzed to compare dietary differences among five feeding grounds on the on the New England continental shelf* New England continental shelf (Jef­ freys Ledge, Stellwagen Bank, Cape Bradford C. Chase Cod Bay, Great South Channel, and South of Martha’s Vineyard) where a Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries majority of the U.S. Atlantic commer­ 30 Emerson Avenue cial catch occurs. Spatial variation in Gloucester, Massachusetts 01930 prey was expected to be a primary E-mail address: [email protected] influence on bluefin tuna distribution during seasonal feeding migrations. Sand lance (Ammodytes spp.), Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus), squid (Cephalopoda), and bluefish (Pomato­ Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thyn- England continental shelf region, and mus saltatrix) were the top prey in terms of frequency of occurrence and nus) are widely distributed throughout as a baseline for bioenergetic analyses. percent prey weight for all areas com­ the Atlantic Ocean and have attracted Information on the feeding habits of bined. Prey composition was uncorre­ valuable commercial and recreational this economically valuable species and lated between study areas, with the fisheries in the western North Atlantic apex predator in the western North exception of a significant association during the latter half of the twentieth Atlantic Ocean is limited, and nearly between Stellwagen Bank and Great century. The western North Atlantic absent for the seasonal feeding grounds South Channel, where sand lance and population is considered overfished by where most U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • European Trawlers Are Destroying the Oceans
    EUROPEAN TRAWLERS ARE DESTROYING THE OCEANS Introduction Nearly 100,000 vessels make up the European Union fishing fleet. This includes boats that fish both in EU waters (the domestic fleet), in the waters of other countries and in international waters (the deep-sea fleet). In addition, there is an unknown number of vessels belonging to other European countries that are not members of the EU which could approach a figure half that of the EU fleet. The majority of these vessels sail under the flag of a European country but there are also boats, particularly those fishing on the high seas, which despite being managed, chartered or part owned by European companies, use the flag of the country where they catch their fish or sail under flags of convenience (FOCs). The Fisheries Commission has called for a reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) to achieve a reduction of 40% in the EU fishing capacity, as forecasts show that by simply following the approved multi-annual plans, barely 8.5% of vessels and 18% of gross tonnage would be decommissioned1; an achievement very distant from scientific recommendations. Moreover, from among these almost 100,000 vessels, the EU is home to a particularly damaging fleet: the 15,000 trawlers that operate in European waters, as well as those of third countries or those fishing on the high seas. These trawlers are overexploiting marine resources and irreversibly damaging some of the most productive and biodiverse ecosystems on the planet. The 40% reduction called for by the Commission could be easily achieved if the primary objective of this proposal was focused both on eliminating the most destructive fishing techniques and reducing fishing overcapacity.
    [Show full text]