DOCSLIB.ORG

Wgftfb 2017 Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wgftfb 2017 Report ICES WGFTFB 2017 REPORT STEERING GROUP ON INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEM OBSERVATION AND MONITORING ICES CM 2017/SSGIEOM:13 REF ACOM AND SCICOM Interim Report of the ICES-FAO Working Group on Fishing Technology and Fish Behaviour (WGFTFB) 4-7 April 2017 Nelson, New Zealand International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer H. C. Andersens Boulevard 44–46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected] Recommended format for purposes of citation: ICES. 2017. Interim Report of the ICES-FAO Working Group on Fishing Technology and Fish Behaviour (WGFTFB). ICES WGFTFB 2017 REPORT 4-7 April 2017. Nelson, New Zealand. ICES CM 2017/SSGIEOM:13. 194 pp. The material in this report may be reused using the recommended citation. ICES may only grant usage rights of information, data, images, graphs, etc. of which it has own- ership. For other third-party material cited in this report, you must contact the original copyright holder for permission. For citation of datasets or use of data to be included in other databases, please refer to the latest ICES data policy on the ICES website. All extracts must be acknowledged. For other reproduction requests please contact the General Secretary. This document is the product of an Expert Group under the auspices of the Interna- tional Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the view of the Council. © 2017 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 1 1 Administrative details .................................................................................................. 2 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3 3 Term of Reference .......................................................................................................... 4 4 Participants and Meeting Agenda .............................................................................. 6 5 Explanatory Note on Meeting and Report Structure ............................................... 7 6 Opening of the meeting ................................................................................................ 8 7 Open Session Presentations ......................................................................................... 9 7.1 FAO briefing on relevant activities ................................................................... 9 7.2 Facilitating change in commercial fisheries: Successes, challenges, and human behaviour ....................................................................................... 12 7.3 New Zealand Bycatch issues ............................................................................ 15 7.4 Gear development ............................................................................................. 18 7.5 Technology for efficient and selective harvesting of crustaceans ............... 20 7.6 Means and methods to mitigate bycatch, discards, and seabed impact .................................................................................................................. 24 7.7 Topic group meetings ....................................................................................... 27 7.8 Fisheries and gear technology in Kenya and Tuna fishery .......................... 29 8 Topic Group: Change Management in Fisheries (Change) .................................. 31 8.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 31 8.2 Participants and Meeting Summaries ............................................................. 33 8.3 Results and Discussion ..................................................................................... 36 8.4 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 45 8.5 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 47 8.6 Appendices ......................................................................................................... 47 9 Topic Group: Evaluation of trawl groundgear for efficiency, bycatch and impact on the seabed (Groundgear) ......................................................................... 83 9.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 83 9.2 Participants ......................................................................................................... 84 9.3 The accomplishment ......................................................................................... 84 9.4 The Work Plan.................................................................................................... 85 10 Topic group: Assessment on energy use and fuel consumption in fisheries (Energy) ......................................................................................................... 87 10.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 87 10.2 General Overview .............................................................................................. 87 10.3 Terms of Reference ............................................................................................ 87 10.4 List of Participants ............................................................................................. 88 10.5 Discussion ........................................................................................................... 88 10.6 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 92 10.7 References ........................................................................................................... 93 11 National Reports .......................................................................................................... 94 11.1 General Overview .............................................................................................. 94 11.2 Belgium ............................................................................................................... 95 11.3 France ................................................................................................................ 102 11.4 Germany ........................................................................................................... 109 11.5 Spain .................................................................................................................. 114 11.6 United States of America ................................................................................ 117 11.7 Denmark ........................................................................................................... 126 11.8 Sweden .............................................................................................................. 130 11.9 Ireland ............................................................................................................... 131 11.10 Netherlands ...................................................................................................... 132 11.11 Iceland ............................................................................................................... 145 11.12 Scotland ............................................................................................................. 146 11.13 Norway ............................................................................................................. 148 11.14 Canada .............................................................................................................. 161 11.15 Italy .................................................................................................................... 164 11.16 Japan .................................................................................................................. 171 11.17 Korea ................................................................................................................. 173 12 Other Business............................................................................................................ 176 12.1 Date and Venue for the 2018 WGFTFB Meeting ......................................... 176 12.2 Requests from other ICES Working Groups to WGFTFB .......................... 176 12.3 Discussion about JFATB ................................................................................. 177 12.4 The manual for measuring the Selectivity.................................................... 177 12.5 E-mail groups ................................................................................................... 177 12.6 Recommendations for workshop .................................................................. 178 12.7 Chair from FAO ............................................................................................... 178 12.8 Topic Groups for the 2018 WGFTFB Meeting .............................................. 179 Annex 1: List of participants ........................................................................................... 182 Annex 2: Agenda ............................................................................................................... 186 Annex 3:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rare Birds in Iran in the Late 1960S and 1970S
    Podoces, 2008, 3(1/2): 1–30 Rare Birds in Iran in the Late 1960s and 1970s DEREK A. SCOTT Castletownbere Post Office, Castletownbere, Co. Cork, Ireland. Email: [email protected] Received 26 July 2008; accepted 14 September 2008 Abstract: The 12-year period from 1967 to 1978 was a period of intense ornithological activity in Iran. The Ornithology Unit in the Department of the Environment carried out numerous surveys throughout the country; several important international ornithological expeditions visited Iran and subsequently published their findings, and a number of resident and visiting bird-watchers kept detailed records of their observations and submitted these to the Ornithology Unit. These activities added greatly to our knowledge of the status and distribution of birds in Iran, and produced many records of birds which had rarely if ever been recorded in Iran before. This paper gives details of all records known to the author of 92 species that were recorded as rarities in Iran during the 12-year period under review. These include 18 species that had not previously been recorded in Iran, a further 67 species that were recorded on fewer than 13 occasions, and seven slightly commoner species for which there were very few records prior to 1967. All records of four distinctive subspecies are also included. The 29 species that were known from Iran prior to 1967 but not recorded during the period under review are listed in an Appendix. Keywords: Rare birds, rarities, 1970s, status, distribution, Iran. INTRODUCTION Eftekhar, E. Kahrom and J. Mansoori, several of whom quickly became keen ornithologists.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Caspian Sea Level Rise on the Environment of the Sand Dunes of Mazandaran, Iran
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COASTAL & OFFSHORE ENGINEERING IJCOE Vol.4/No. 3/Fall 2020 (23-33) Available online at: www. Ijcoe.org The effect of Caspian Sea level rise on the environment of the sand dunes of Mazandaran, Iran Homayoun Khoshravan 1, Tahereh Alinejadtabrizi 2*, Alireza Naqinezhad 3, Samereh 4 Tirgan 1 Water research institute, ministry of Energy; [email protected] 2*Department of Environmental Engineering, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran; [email protected] 3Department of Biology, Faculty of Basic Sciences, University of Mazandaran; [email protected] 4Department of Biology, Faculty of Basic Sciences, University of Mazandaran; [email protected] ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article History: Sand dunes are crucial factors related to stability of the coasts, and vegetation plays Received: 01 Dec. 2020 a decisive role in their creation. In this research paper, analyzing the effects of the Accepted: 24 Jan. 2021 Caspian Sea level fluctuations and human intervention on transformation of habitats Keywords: and biodiversity of coastal plants on sand dunes is assumed as the main goal. The Caspian Sea morphological structure of coastal sand dunes and the biodiversity of their plant sand dunes species were investigated by selecting 11 transects in the eastern coast of the central fluctuation erosion Mazandaran (Babolsar-Amirabad), also the major changes of the sand dunes in environment coastal lands were evaluated during the period of the Caspian Sea water level rise, 1978-1995, using the remote sensing. The results showed that coastal dunes in the southern coasts of the Caspian Sea are divided into three groups, intact or healthy, semi-healthy and completely destructed.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Fish-Eating Birds of Northern Wetlands of Iran
    Identification of Fish-eating Birds of Northern Wetlands of Iran By Dr. Behrouz Behrouzirad Academic Staff of Azad University, Science and Research Campus, Ahwaz. E-Mail: [email protected] Phone No. 09121325838 Abstract There are 61 species in 14 families of fish-eating birds in Iran. The fish-eating birds of the north of Iran belong to 41 species in 10 families which include 67.2 percent of total fish eating bird species and 71% of fish-eating bird's family of Iran. Resident birds constitute 13% of the fish-eating birds of the Caspian Sea coasts and the rest are migratory in autumn and winter. There exist 3 globally threatened species of fish-eating birds of the world at the north of Iran, which are Oxyura leucocephala, Phalacrocorax pygmeus, and Pelecanus crispus wintering in the south coast wetlands of the region. Seventeen percent of the fish-eating birds of the north of Iran are aquatic, 5% terrestrial and 78 % wadding. The Phalacrocorax carbo and Phalacrocorax pygmeus are wintering and breeding migratory in the wetlands of the region, which feed in the fish ponds and wetlands. The main habitats of fish-eating birds are Miankaleh and Amirkelayeh wildlife refuge, Anzaly marsh and Gomishan Ramsar Sites. Oxyura lecucephala, Phalacrocorax pygmeus and Pelecanus crispus are protected species and the rest are not allowed to be eaten by Islamic rule, for the same reason they are not being threatened by Muslim men. Key words: Fish-eating bird, Caspian Sea, Wetlands, Wintering, Breeding, Iran. Introduction The study area is wetlands and coasts of Caspian Sea in north of Iran ( Gilan, Mazandaran and Golestan provinces).
    [Show full text]
  • Geography, M.V
    RUSSIAN GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY FACULTY OF GEOGRAPHY, M.V. LOMONOSOV MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF GEOGRAPHY, RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES No. 04 [v. 03] 2010 GEOGRAPHY ENVIRONMENT SUSTAINABILITY ggi410.inddi410.indd 1 006.06.20116.06.2011 112:17:342:17:34 EDITORIAL BOARD EDITORS-IN-CHIEF: Kasimov Nikolay S. Kotlyakov Vladimir M. Vandermotten Christian M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State Russian Academy of Sciences Université Libre de Bruxelles 04|2010 University, Faculty of Geography Institute of Geography Belgique Russia Russia 2 GES Tikunov Vladimir S. (Secretary-General) Kroonenberg Salomon, M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Delft University of Technology Faculty of Geography, Russia. Department of Applied Earth Sciences, Babaev Agadzhan G. The Netherlands Turkmenistan Academy of Sciences, O’Loughlin John Institute of deserts, Turkmenistan University of Colorado at Boulder, Baklanov Petr Ya. Institute of Behavioral Sciences, USA Russian Academy of Sciences, Malkhazova Svetlana M. Pacific Institute of Geography, Russia M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Baume Otfried, Faculty of Geography, Russia Ludwig Maximilians Universitat Munchen, Mamedov Ramiz Insitut fur geographie, Germany Baku State University, Chalkley Brian Faculty of Geography, Azerbaijan University of Plymouth, UK Mironenko Nikolay S. Dmitriev Vasily V. M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Sankt-Petersburg State University, Faculty of Faculty of Geography, Russia. Geography and Geoecology, Russia Palacio-Prieto Jose Dobrolubov Sergey A. National Autonomous University of Mexico, M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Institute of Geography, Mexico Faculty of Geography, Russia Palagiano Cosimo, D’yakonov Kirill N. Universita degli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza”, M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Instituto di Geografia, Italy Faculty of Geography, Russia Richling Andrzej Gritsay Olga V.
    [Show full text]
  • Biosphere Reserve of IRAN
    Biosphere Reserve of IRAN Mehrasa Mehrdadi Department of Environment of IRAN Biodiversity in Iran Comprises a land area of 1.64 million km² The average altitude is over 1200 m, Is bordered by Turkmenistan, the Caspian sea (over 900 km of coastline), Azerbaijan, and Armenia in the north, Afghanistan and Pakistan in the east, the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman in the south, and Iraq and Turkey in the west The habitat supports over: 8,000 recorded species of plant (almost 2,500 are endemic), 502 species of birds, 164 mammals, 209 reptiles, 375 species of butterflies. Protected Areas of Iran=278 29 National Park 37 National Natural 24 Ramsar Site Monument Wetland 44 Wildlife Refuge 11 Biosphere Reserve 168 Protected Area Last update: November 2015 Biosphere Reserves of Iran Biosphere Reserves of Iran No Name Year of Designation First Periodic Review Second Periodic Review 1 Arasbaran 1976 2002 2013 2 Arjan -Parishan 1976 2002 2013 3 Geno 1976 2002 2013 4 Golestan 1976 2002 2013 5 Harra 1976 2002 2013 6 Kavir 1976 2002 2013 7 Lake Urmia 1976 2002 2013 8 Miankaleh 1976 2002 2013 9 Touran 1976 2002 2013 10 Dena 2010 --- --- 11 Tange Sayyad & Sabz 2014 --- --- Kooh BRs Periodic Review Report • Iran has been carried out 9 biosphere reserves periodic review in 2013. • Establishing the Biosphere Reserve Periodic Review Expert Committee which includes managers of Biosphere Reserve, BR Coordinators, GIS expert, Head of PA management plan section, Deputy of the Habitats and Protected Areas Bureau, • BRs Periodic Review Forms were translated to Persian and sent to the BR managers, • BR managers/ coordinators filled in the forms through theirs local committee, BRs Periodic Review Report… • BR managers/ coordinators presented the report in the meeting of BRPR committee, • Completed forms sent to MAB National Committee for reviewing and final comment, • Translated report sent to the BR managers/ coordinators and MAB national committee for last editing, • Sending 9 BRPR reports to the MAB bureau.
    [Show full text]
  • Assigning ID to Geomorphic Landforms As the Initial Stage of Geoconservation by Scientific Research Approach, Iran
    Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques 2015, Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages: 76-81 J. Environ. Treat. Tech. ISSN: 2309-1185 Journal weblink: http://www.jett.dormaj.com Assigning ID to Geomorphic Landforms as the Initial Stage of Geoconservation by Scientific Research Approach, Iran Vajihe Gholizade1, Ali Eshraghi2 1- MSc. in geomorphology, University of Applied Sciences Iranian heritage, Mashhad, IRAN 2- MSc. in geomorphology, Payamnoor University of Mashhad, Mashhad, IRAN Received: 22/01/2015 Accepted: 26/05/2015 Published: 30/06/2015 Abstract The initial stage of geo-conservation is assignment of ID to geomorphic landforms by scientific approach. There is a variety of important landforms in Iran. As national capital, they are used for economic purposes and also research and education aims. Some of the specific landforms are in danger of destruction due to excessive and inappropriate exploitations. If this type of operation continued ecological imbalance in the region will follow. Thus, protection of the geologic heritage for better protection of the environment and for scientific and educational applications seems necessary. Geo-conservation attempts to protect these features of the earth to avoid their decay. The purpose of this research is to conduct a hypothetical coding pattern for landforms of Iran. Identification, listing, programming, design of coding system, registration and definition of standards are performed to define buffer zones for the landforms. This ID assignment is to be suggested to the ministry of Science, Research, and Technology of Iran for implementation and further studies. With implementation of this coding system and access to a comprehensive database, execution of many plans can be performed with proper recognition of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Skua (Catharacta, Stercorarius) Occurrence in the OSME Region Skua (Catharacta, Stercorarius) Occurrence in the OSME Region
    SANDGROUSE - 29(2) DOC 1/8/07 11:04 am Page 183 Skua (Catharacta, Stercorarius) occurrence in the OSME Region Skua (Catharacta, Stercorarius) occurrence in the OSME Region VLADIMIR ARKHIPOV AND MICHAEL BLAIR Records of skua (Catharacta, Stercorarius) occurrence in the OSME Region come from a wide variety of sources. Those we found in the English language are diverse, but those in the languages of the Region have been difficult, if not impossible, to consult until recent years. The geographic definition of the OSME Region now includes the Caucasus and Central Asian Republics, the majority of whose sources and of those in neighbouring Russia and Ukraine have been published only in Cyrillic languages. Offshore observations have been of particular value in suggesting passage trends. Overland passage from skua breeding grounds seems well established, probably as minor migration routes, representing a strategy that would balance better migration conditions against probably uncertain food supplies en route, whereas migrants travelling solely over the sea face poorer migration conditions but may have a guaranteed food supply. Observation of overland migration is rendered more Figure 1. Map of the OSME Region difficult by the underlying trend of fluctuating skua numbers being in (as of 2007). delayed lockstep with lemming population cycles. Overland migration between the breeding grounds and the open waters of such as the Aegean, Black and Caspian Seas and of the Gulf through to the Indian Ocean is substantiated by records. Other overland movements, such as across Turkey or eastern Saudi Arabia probably occur, but remain largely undocumented because of low observer density.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Strategies of Nature Tourism in Biosphere Reserves: a Case Study of Miankaleh, Iran
    Available online a t www.pelagiaresearchlibrary.com Pelagia Research Library European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2013, 3(5):176-182 ISSN: 2248 –9215 CODEN (USA): EJEBAU Environmental strategies of nature tourism in biosphere reserves: A case study of Miankaleh, Iran Sara Ohadi 1, Mazdak Dorbeiki 2* and Hooman Bahmanpour 3 1Department of Environmental Engineering, Damavand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Damavand, Iran 2Department of Environmental Engineering, Qaemshahr branch, Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr, Iran 3Department of Environmental Engineering, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT In Biosphere Reserves of many countries, nature tourism is seen as a tool for sustainable development which naturally has its own environmental impacts. The application of strategic management methods such as SWOT can ensure long term viability of sensitive environments of Biosphere Reserve. The focuses of this study was the application of SWOT in identification of internal and external strategic factors and develop strategies for Miankaleh Biosphere Reserve in Iran. Thirty one factors of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats were identified using IFE and EFE matrices and 20 SO, ST, WO, and WT strategies were developed. These strategies can be used in present and future management and planning of nature tourism. For better results, all strategies should be reviewed periodically. Key words : Biosphere Reserve, Miankaleh, Nature tourism, Strategic planning, SWOT _____________________________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Biosphere reserves are designated and managed with the objective of promoting and combining biodiversity conservation with sustainable development based on community participation and science [1]. Today, in many areas tourism is seen as an answer to economic development, particularly areas of natural beauty [2].
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 Isbn 99940-58-55-X
    AN ECOREGIONAL CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE CAUCASUSAN ECOREGIONAL CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE CAUCASUS Second Edition May 2006 ISBN 99940-58-55-X Design and printing Contour Ltd 8, Kargareteli street, Tbilisi 0164, Georgia May, 2006 Coordinated by: In collaboration with: With the technical support of: Assisted by experts and contributors: ARMENIA MAMMEDOVA, S. NAKHUTSRISHVILI, G. POPOVICHEV, V. AGAMYAN, L. MUKHTAROV, I. NINUA, N. PTICHNIKOV, A. AGASYAN, A. NAJAFOV, A. SERGEEVA, J. BELANOVSKAYA, E. AKOPYAN, S. ORUJEV, Ad. SIKHARULIDZE, Z. SALPAGAROV, A. AMBARTSUMYAN, A. ORUJEV, Al. SOPADZE, G. SHESTAKOV, A ARZUMANYAN, G. RAKHMATULINA, I. TARKHNISHVILI, D. SKOROBOGACH, J. BALYAN, L. RZAEV, R. TOLORDAVA, K. SPIRIDONOV, V. DANYELYAN, T. SATTARZADE, R. TAMOV, M. DAVTYAN, R. SAFAROV, S. IRAN TUNIEV, B. GABRIELYAN, E. SHAMCHIYEV, T. AGHILI, A. VAISMAN, A. GLYCHIAN, D. SULEIMANOV, M. EVERETT, J. (Coordinator) BELIK, V. GRIGORYAN, E. SULTANOV, E. FARVAR, M.T. JENDEREDJIAN, K. TAGIEVA, E. JAZEBIZADEH, K. KAZARYAN, H. KAVOUSI, K. TURKEY KAZARYAN, M. GEORGIA MAHFOUZI, M. ALTINTAS, M. KHASABYAN, M. ARABULI, A. MANSURI, J. ATAY, S KHOROZYAN, I. ARABULI, G. NAGHIZADEH, N BIRSEL, A. MANVELYAN, K. (Coordinator) BERUCHASHVILI, G. NAJAFI, A. CAN, E. MARKARYAN, N. BERUCHASHVILI, N. ZIYAEE, H. CIFTCI, N. MURADYAN, S. BUKHNIKASHVILI, A. RAHMANIYAN, M. DOMAC, A. RUKHKYAN, L. BUTKHUZI, L. GURKAN, B. SHASHIKYAN, S. CHEKURISHVILI, Z. IPEK, A. TOVMASYAN, S. DIDEBULIDZE, A. RUSSIA KALEM, S. VANYAN, A. DZNELADZE, M. BIRYUKOV, N. KUCUK, M. VARDANYAN, J. EGIASHVILI, D. BLAGOVIDOV, A. KURDOGLU, O. VOSKANOV, M. GELASHVILI, A. BRATKOV, V. KURT, B. ZIROYAN, A. GOGICHAISHVILI, L. BUKREEV, S. LISE, Y. (Coordinator) ZORANYAN, V. GOKHELASHVILI, R. CHILIKIN, V. URAS, A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Man Who Made It Possible
    WWW.TEHRANTIMES.COM I N T E R N A T I O N A L D A I L Y 8 Pages Price 50,000 Rials 1.00 EURO 4.00 AED 42nd year No.13806 Thursday NOVEMBER 12, 2020 Aban 22, 1399 Rabi’ Al awwal 26, 1442 We will use every Komeil Ghasemi new Iran, Qatar to expand Qajar-era paintings by opportunity to lift U.S. gold medalist of co-op in electricity, water Suratgar added to National sanctions Page 2 2012 Olympics Page 3 sectors Page 4 Cultural Heritage list Page 8 Aluminum ingot output rises 69% in 7 months on year TEHRAN — Production of the aluminum The monthly aluminum ingot out- ingot in Iran rose 69 percent during the put has also risen 56 percent to stand at The man who made first seven months of the current Irani- 35,556 tons in the seventh month of the an calendar year (March 20-October 21) present year. compared to the same period of time in Production of the aluminum ingot the past year. in the country is planned to increase 63 The country’s aluminum ingot out- percent by the end of the current Iranian Page 3 put stood at 247,335 tons during the calendar year (March 20, 2021). it possible seven-month period of this year. Continued on page 4 Tehran voices indifference toward result of U.S. election TEHRAN — Deputy Foreign Minister through which the fake grandeur of the Abbas Araghchi has said Iran is neither United States’ democracy was broken in terrified of a second term of the Trump the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening Ties Despite Pressures Iran Chosen to Host FIVB
    WWW.TEHRANTIMES.COM I N T E R N A T I O N A L D A I L Y 8 Pages Price 50,000 Rials 1.00 EURO 4.00 AED 42nd year No.13785 Wednesday OCTOBER 14, 2020 Mehr 23, 1399 Safar 26, 1442 Iran urges world to hold Iran chosen to host Coronavirus didn’t halt Iranian ebook store offers Riyadh accountable for FIVB Boys’ U19 Iran’s oil production, publications for non- covert nuclear work 2 World C’ship 3 not even one day 4 native Persian learners 8 Iron ore concentrate output up 4% in H1 TEHRAN — Iran produced 24.6 million tons of the product in the sixth month Strengthening ties tons of iron ore concentrate during the of the present year, while the figure was first half of the current Iranian calendar 4.014 million tons in the same month of year (March 20-September 21), which the previous year. was four percent higher than the figure Iran’s iron ore concentrate produc- of the same period of time in the past year. tion capacity has increased by five million Also, the monthly iron ore concentrate tons to reach 62 million tons following output during the sixth month of this year the inauguration of the country’s biggest despite pressures has risen six percent on an annual basis. concentrate unit in northeastern Khorasan The country produced 4.248 million Razavi Province on June 11. See page 3 4 JCPOA parties must now formally announce lifting of UN arms embargo: senior MP TEHRAN – Remaining parties to a 2015 Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Benthic Macrofauna in Gorgan Bay, South Caspian Sea, Iran
    Spatial and temporal patterns of benthic macrofauna in Gorgan Bay, south Caspian Sea, Iran Item Type article Authors Ghorbanzadeh Zaferani, S.Gh.; Machinchian Moradi, A.; Mousavi Nadushan, R.; Sari, A.R.; Fatemi, S.M.R. Download date 01/10/2021 05:32:54 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/37805 Iranian Journal of Fisheries Sciences 16(1)252-274 2017 Spatial and temporal patterns of benthic macrofauna in Gorgan Bay, south Caspian Sea, Iran Ghorbanzadeh Zaferani S.Gh.1; Machinchian Moradi A.1; Mousavi Nadushan R.1*; Sari A.R.2 ; Fatemi S.M.R. 1 Received: January 2014 Accepted: December 2014 Abstract We quantified the distribution, abundance and assemblage structure of macrofauna at 22 stations in Gorgan bay, seasonally in 2012-2013. Also, depth, temperature, salinity, DO, TOM and sediment particle size were measured in each station. The highest concentration of TOM was measured near the western littoral zone (10.22) while the mouth part and north-eastern area was characterized by the lowest values (2.65 % and 4.69). A total of 31658 individuals belonging to 12 families and 14 species were identified. Polychaeta with 3 species was the most dominant group in terms of abundance. The four most abundant taxa making up 85% of all specimens were Streblospio gynobranchiata, Tubificidae, Hediste diversicolor and Abra segmentum. The maximum density (7,893 ind/m2) was obtained at station 1 while the minimum (1,777 ind/m2) was observed at station 16. The western area was characterized by the highest species diversity (H', 1.94) and the stations 10, 8 and 7 were characterized by the lowest diversity indices (H', 0.72, 0.77 and 0.87, respectively).
    [Show full text]