DOCSLIB.ORG

Cornish Hake Gill Net Fishery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cornish Hake Gill Net Fishery MSC SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES CERTIFICATION On-Site Surveillance Visit - Report for Cornish Hake Gill Net Fishery 2nd Surveillance Audit February 2018 Certificate Code F-ACO-0040 Prepared For: Cornish Fish Producers Organisation Ltd. Prepared By: Acoura Marine Authors: Jim Andrews and Mike Pawson BH (21/10/15) – Ref FCR 2.0/GCR/2.1 Acoura Marine Surveillance Report Cornish Hake Gill Net Assessment Data Sheet Fishery name Cornish Hake Gill Net Species and Stock Northern Hake (Merluccius merluccius) Stock Division 3a, sub- areas 4, 6 and 7, and Divisions 8a, b, d) Date certified 11th June 2015 Date of expiry 10th June 2020 Surveillance level and type Normal - Onsite Date of surveillance audit 7th November 2017 Surveillance stage (tick one) 1st Surveillance 2nd Surveillance ✓ 3rd Surveillance 4th Surveillance Other (expedited etc.) Surveillance team Lead assessor: Jim Andrews Assessor(s): Mike Pawson CAB name Acoura Marine CAB contact details Address 6 Redheughs Rigg Edinburgh EH12 9DQ Phone/Fax 0131 335 6662 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Louise Allan Client contact details Address Cornish Fish Producers Organisation 46 Fore Street Newlyn Cornwall, TR18 5JR Phone/Fax 01736 351050 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Paul Trebilcock Page 1 of 48 BH (21/10/15) – Ref FCR 2.0/GCR/2.1 Acoura Marine Surveillance Report Cornish Hake Gill Net Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Scope of Surveillance ............................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Aims of the Surveillance .......................................................................................................... 5 2 Background to the fishery ............................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Biology of the Target Species ................................................................................................. 6 2.2 History of the Fishery .............................................................................................................. 6 3 Surveillance Process .................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Findings of the original assessment ........................................................................................ 7 3.2 Surveillance Activity ................................................................................................................ 7 3.2.1 Surveillance team details ................................................................................................ 7 3.2.2 Date & Location of surveillance audit .............................................................................. 8 3.2.3 What was inspected ........................................................................................................ 8 3.2.4 Stakeholder Consultation & meetings ............................................................................. 8 3.3 Surveillance Standards ........................................................................................................... 8 3.3.1 MSC Standards, Requirements and Guidance used ...................................................... 8 3.3.2 Confirmation that destructive fishing practices or controversial unilateral exemptions have not been introduced ................................................................................................................ 8 3.3.3 Forced labour .................................................................................................................. 8 3.4 Harmonisation ......................................................................................................................... 9 4 Fishery .......................................................................................................................................... 10 5 Species ......................................................................................................................................... 10 6 Gear types .................................................................................................................................... 10 7 Locations ..................................................................................................................................... 10 8 MSC status ................................................................................................................................... 10 9 CAB ............................................................................................................................................... 10 10 Updated Fishery Background ................................................................................................ 11 10.1 Changes in fleet structure or operation ................................................................................. 11 10.2 Changes to scientific base of information including stock assessments .............................. 11 10.2.1 Harvest strategy ............................................................................................................ 13 10.4 Changes in ecosystem interaction or management .............................................................. 14 10.4.1 Non-target species ........................................................................................................ 14 10.4.1.1 New information ............................................................................................................ 14 10.4.1.2 Species status ............................................................................................................... 15 10.4.1.3 Summary ....................................................................................................................... 16 10.4.2 ETP species .................................................................................................................. 20 10.4.2.1 Definition of ETP species .............................................................................................. 20 10.4.2.2 Spurdog ......................................................................................................................... 20 10.4.2.3 Interactions with cetaceans ........................................................................................... 21 Page 2 of 48 BH (21/10/15) – Ref FCR 2.0/GCR/2.1 Acoura Marine Surveillance Report Cornish Hake Gill Net 10.5 Changes in the management system ................................................................................... 22 10.6 Changes in relevant regulations............................................................................................ 22 10.7 Changes to personnel involved in science, management or industry................................... 22 10.8 Any developments or changes within the fishery which impact traceability or the ability to segregate between fish from the Unit of Certification (UoC) and fish from outside the UoC (non- certified fish) ...................................................................................................................................... 22 10.9 Any complaints against the certified operation ..................................................................... 22 10.10 TAC and catch data .......................................................................................................... 23 10.11 Summary of Assessment Conditions ................................................................................ 23 11 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 24 11.1 Condition 1: Harvest Control Rules & Tools ......................................................................... 24 11.2 Condition 2: Bycatch species outcome ................................................................................. 26 11.3 Condition 3: Bycatch species - information ........................................................................... 29 11.4 Condition 4: ETP Species - Management ............................................................................. 30 11.5 Condition 5: Ecosystems ....................................................................................................... 33 12 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 35 12.1 Summary of findings ............................................................................................................. 35 13 References ............................................................................................................................... 36 13.1 Legislation ............................................................................................................................. 37 14 Glossary ................................................................................................................................... 39 15 Appendix 1 – Re-scoring evaluation tables (if necessary) ................................................. 40 16 Appendix 2 – Revised conditions .......................................................................................... 41 16.1 Condition 1 – Harvest Control Rules & Tools ....................................................................... 41 16.1.1 Original
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diet Composition of Cod (Gadus Morhua): Small-Scale Differences in a Sub-Arctic Fjord
    Diet composition of cod (Gadus morhua): small-scale differences in a sub-arctic fjord Enoksen, Siri Elise BI309F MSc IN MARINE ECOLOGY Faculty for Biosciences and Aquaculture May 2015 Acknowledgements The presented thesis is the final part of a two-year Master of Science program at the Faculty of Biosciences and Aquaculture, University of Nordland, Bodø, Norway. I owe my supervisor Associate Professor Henning Reiss eternal gratitude for his patience and all the help with sampling, species determination and writing of this thesis. Without his expertise and guidance, this master thesis would not have been possible. A special thanks to Bjørn Tore Zahl at Saltstraumen Brygge, Geir Jøran Nyheim at Saltstraumen camping, Lill-Anita Stenersen at Kafe Kjelen, Fauske Båtforening and Saltdal Båtforening for helping during sampling, Coop Extra Bygg Fauske for sponsoring sheds for collecting stations, and to all anglers who handed inn samples. This project would not have been possible without their help. I would like to thank Professor Truls Moum, Martina Kopp, Vigdis Edvardsen, Tor Erik Jørgensen and Teshome Tilahun Bizuayehu for help and guidance during DNA barcoding analysis. I thank Nina Tande Hansen and Bibbi Myrvoll at Karrieresenteret Indre Salten for believing in me and convincing me that I was capable of studying at university level. This thesis would not have been possible without their guidance. I would also like to thank my family for their patience during the five years of fulfilling my Master. i Table of contents Acknowledgements .........................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • Atlas of North Sea Fishes
    ICES COOPERATIVE RESEARCH REPORT RAPPORT DES RECHERCHES COLLECTIVES NO. 194 Atlas of North Sea Fishes Based on bottom-trawl survey data for the years 1985—1987 Ruud J. Knijn1, Trevor W. Boon2, Henk J. L. Heessen1, and John R. G. Hislop3 'Netherlands Institute for Fisheries Research, Haringkade 1, PO Box 6 8 , 1970 AB Umuiden, The Netherlands 2MAFF, Fisheries Laboratory, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 OHT, England 3Marine Laboratory, PO Box 101, Victoria Road, Aberdeen AB9 8 DB, Scotland Fish illustrations by Peter Stebbing International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer Palægade 2—4, DK-1261 Copenhagen K, Denmark September 1993 Copyright ® 1993 All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by photostat or microfilm or stored in a storage system or retrieval system or by any other means without written permission from the authors and the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Illustrations ® 1993 Peter Stebbing Published with financial support from the Directorate-General for Fisheries, AIR Programme, of the Commission of the European Communities ICES Cooperative Research Report No. 194 Atlas of North Sea Fishes ISSN 1017-6195 Printed in Denmark Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................................................... 1 2. Recruit surveys.................................................................................. 3 2.1 General purpose of the surveys.....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Fishes from Galicia (NW Spain): an Updated Checklist
    1 2 Marine fishes from Galicia (NW Spain): an updated checklist 3 4 5 RAFAEL BAÑON1, DAVID VILLEGAS-RÍOS2, ALBERTO SERRANO3, 6 GONZALO MUCIENTES2,4 & JUAN CARLOS ARRONTE3 7 8 9 10 1 Servizo de Planificación, Dirección Xeral de Recursos Mariños, Consellería de Pesca 11 e Asuntos Marítimos, Rúa do Valiño 63-65, 15703 Santiago de Compostela, Spain. E- 12 mail: [email protected] 13 2 CSIC. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas. Eduardo Cabello 6, 36208 Vigo 14 (Pontevedra), Spain. E-mail: [email protected] (D. V-R); [email protected] 15 (G.M.). 16 3 Instituto Español de Oceanografía, C.O. de Santander, Santander, Spain. E-mail: 17 [email protected] (A.S); [email protected] (J.-C. A). 18 4Centro Tecnológico del Mar, CETMAR. Eduardo Cabello s.n., 36208. Vigo 19 (Pontevedra), Spain. 20 21 Abstract 22 23 An annotated checklist of the marine fishes from Galician waters is presented. The list 24 is based on historical literature records and new revisions. The ichthyofauna list is 25 composed by 397 species very diversified in 2 superclass, 3 class, 35 orders, 139 1 1 families and 288 genus. The order Perciformes is the most diverse one with 37 families, 2 91 genus and 135 species. Gobiidae (19 species) and Sparidae (19 species) are the 3 richest families. Biogeographically, the Lusitanian group includes 203 species (51.1%), 4 followed by 149 species of the Atlantic (37.5%), then 28 of the Boreal (7.1%), and 17 5 of the African (4.3%) groups. We have recognized 41 new records, and 3 other records 6 have been identified as doubtful.
    [Show full text]
  • ICES CH 1986/G:58 Ref. Pelagic Fish Committee FISH COHHUNITIES OF
    ICES C.H. 1986/G:58 Ref. Pelagic Fish Committee FISH COHHUNITIES OF THE NORWEGIAN OEEPS: SPEelES COHPOSITION ANO OISTRIBUTIONAl PATTERNS. by Odd Aksel Bergstad Department of fisheries biology. University of Bergen. Norway. \ P.O.Bo~ 1839. N-5011 Bergen-Nordnes / ABSTRACT Preliminary results from studies of the fishes inhabiting the Norwegian Oeeps and bordering slopes are presented. including accounts of species composition and distributional patterns. The Norwegian Oeeps proper is a nursery and feeding area for a number of species. mainly species which are abundant along the upper continental slopes of the North Atlantic and the deep fjord environments. The more abundant include the greater argentine. Argentina silus. blue whiting. Hicromesistius poutassou. and in the Skagerrak. roundnose grenadier. Coryphaenoides rupestris. Above the 200m isobath the species composition resembles the one found in adjacent coastal areas or on the North Sea plateau. The more abundant demersal species are Norway pout. Trisopterus esmarkii. saithe, Pollachius virens, and haddock, Helanogrammus aeglefinus. Data from hydroacoustic surveys and bottom trawl surveys suggest pronounced seasonal changes in distributional patterns of some species, notably the greater argentine and blue whiting. • INTRODUCTIOH The Norwegian Deeps, with depths in the range 275-700 m, represents a major topographical feature of the comparatively shallow and even North Sea (Fig.1). As such, it has a pronounced influence on watermass distributions and current patterns in the eastern Horth Sea, the Skagerrak and in the Norwegian Coastal waters (Furnes et al. 1986). From fishery data and a few regional studies it is known that the Horwegian Deeps is inhabited by a .fish fauna differing rather markedly from the one found in the bordering shallow waters (Hjort and Ruud 1938; Sahrhage 1964, Aker et Al.
    [Show full text]
  • First Detection of Piscine Reovirus (PRV) in Marine Fish Species
    Vol. 97: 255–258, 2012 DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Published January 24 doi: 10.3354/dao02425 Dis Aquat Org NOTE First detection of piscine reovirus (PRV) in marine fish species Christer R. Wiik-Nielsen1,*, Marie Løvoll1, Nina Sandlund,2 Randi Faller1, Jannicke Wiik-Nielsen1, Britt Bang Jensen1 1Norwegian Veterinary Institute, PO Box 750 Sentrum, 0106 Oslo, Norway 2Institute of Marine Research, PO Box 1870 Nordnes, 5817 Bergen, Norway ABSTRACT: Heart and skeletal muscle inflammation (HSMI) is a disease that affects farmed Atlantic salmon Salmo salar L. several months after the fish have been transferred to seawater. Recently, a new virus called piscine reovirus (PRV) was identified in Atlantic salmon from an out- break of HSMI and in experimentally challenged fish. PRV is associated with the development of HSMI, and has until now only been detected in Atlantic salmon. This study investigates whether the virus is also present in wild fish populations that may serve as vectors for the virus. The virus was found in few of the analyzed samples so there is probably a more complex relationship that involves several carriers and virus reservoirs. KEY WORDS: Heart and skeletal muscle inflammation · HSMI · Transmission · Reovirus · Wild marine fish species · Farmed fish · PCR Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher INTRODUCTION stranded RNA virus related to the Reoviridae group, named PRV (Palacios et al. 2010). PRV is detected in A severe disease affecting farmed Atlantic salmon both farmed and wild Atlantic salmon. In wild Salmo salar L. in Norway is heart and skeletal muscle Atlantic salmon PRV has only been detected in low inflammation (HSMI).
    [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]
  • Length-Weight Relationships of Marine Fish Collected from Around the British Isles
    Science Series Technical Report no. 150 Length-weight relationships of marine fish collected from around the British Isles J. F. Silva, J. R. Ellis and R. A. Ayers Science Series Technical Report no. 150 Length-weight relationships of marine fish collected from around the British Isles J. F. Silva, J. R. Ellis and R. A. Ayers This report should be cited as: Silva J. F., Ellis J. R. and Ayers R. A. 2013. Length-weight relationships of marine fish collected from around the British Isles. Sci. Ser. Tech. Rep., Cefas Lowestoft, 150: 109 pp. Additional copies can be obtained from Cefas by e-mailing a request to [email protected] or downloading from the Cefas website www.cefas.defra.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, 2013 This publication (excluding the logos) may be re-used free of charge in any format or medium for research for non-commercial purposes, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being re-used accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified. This publication is also available at www.cefas.defra.gov.uk For any other use of this material please apply for a Click-Use Licence for core material at www.hmso.gov.uk/copyright/licences/ core/core_licence.htm, or by writing to: HMSO’s Licensing Division St Clements House 2-16 Colegate Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax: 01603 723000 E-mail: [email protected] 3 Contents Contents 1. Introduction 5 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Assessment of the Faunal Remains from the 2007 Midden Excavation in Eyri, Westfjords
    Preliminary Assessment of the faunal remains from the 2007 Midden Excavation in Eyri, Westfjords Ramona Harrison with Megan Hicks Paddy Colligan Amanda Schreiner CUNY Northern Science and Education Center NORSEC CUNY Doctoral Program in Anthropology Hunter College Bioarchaeology Laboratory Brooklyn College Zooarchaeology Laboratory NORSEC ZOOARCHAEOLOGY LABORATORY REPORT No.42 May 18, 2008 Contact: [email protected] This report is a product of the North Atlantic Biocultural Organization (NABO) and the International Polar Year 2007-10 and Icelandic funding through Þjóðhátíðarsjóður and Baugur. Summary In 2007 area G of the Eyri site in Ísafjörður, NW Iceland was object of a midden assessment undertaken by the Archaeological Institute of Iceland. The midden mound in area G is associated with the farm mound at Eyri in downtown Ísafjörður. The farm mound was previously trenched for occupational layers in 2003 and 2004 (Taylor et al 2005), yielding an assortment of animal remains that were analyzed in 2005 (Krivogorskaya & McGovern 2005). Upon coring the midden mound to define its edges, assess its depth, and sample its contents, a large trench (15 m2) was opened up to allow for open area excavation (Lucas 2003). Members of FSÍ and CUNY New York collaborated on the midden assessment. The 2007 midden excavation yielded a generous amount of animal bones, domestic and wild. Bone preservation ranges from good to excellent and the large fish proportion is slightly more varied than witnessed from roughly contemporaneous faunal collections (i.e. Harrison et al 2007, Hambrecht 2006). All the bone materials discussed in this preliminary report were from one context (1045). The total weight of this context’s archaeofauna was more than 11 kg.
    [Show full text]
  • Metabarcoding Reveals Different Zooplankton Communities In
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.23.218479; this version posted July 24, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. 1 Metabarcoding reveals different zooplankton 2 communities in northern and southern areas of the 3 North Sea 4 5 Jan Niklas Macher*1, Berry B. van der Hoorn1, Katja T. C. A. Peijnenburg1,2, Lodewijk van 6 Walraven3, Willem Renema1 7 8 Author affiliation: 9 1: Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Darwinweg 2, 2333 CR Leiden, Netherlands 10 2: Department of Freshwater and Marine Ecology, Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem 11 Dynamics (IBED), University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94248, 1090 GE Amsterdam, the 12 Netherlands. 13 3: Department of Coastal Systems, and Utrecht University, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute 14 for Sea Research, Den Burg, Netherlands 15 *Corresponding author 16 17 Highlights 18 - Zooplankton communities are different in northern and southern areas of the North Sea 19 - Metabarcoding results are consistent with known species distributions and abundance 20 - Metabarcoding allows for fast identification of meroplanktonic species 21 22 Abstract 23 Zooplankton are key players in marine ecosystems, linking primary production to higher 24 trophic levels. The high abundance and high taxonomic diversity renders zooplankton ideal 25 for biodiversity monitoring. However, taxonomic identification of the zooplankton assemblage 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.23.218479; this version posted July 24, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • The Poor Health of Deep‐Water Species in the Context Of
    1 Journal of Fish Biology Archimer June 2021, Volume 98, Issue 6, Pages 1572-1584 https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.14347 https://archimer.ifremer.fr https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00623/73502/ The poor health of deep-water species in the context of fishing activity and a warming climate: will populations of Molva species rebuild or collapse? Lloret Josep 1, *, Serrat Alba 1, Þórðarson Guðmundur 2, Helle Kristin 3, Jadaud Angelique 4, Bruno Isabel 5, Ordines Francesc 6, Sartor Paolo 7, Carbonara Pierluigi 8, Rätz Hans-Joachim 9 1 University of Girona; Institute of Aquatic Ecology; Girona Catalonia, Spain 2 Marine and Freshwater Research Institute; Reykjavík, Iceland 3 Institute of Marine Research; Bergen,Norway 4 MARBEC, Ifremer, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, IRD; Sète, France 5 Centro Oceanográfico de Vigo, Instituto Español de Oceanografía; Vigo ,Spain 6 Centre Oceanogràfic de Balears, Instituto Español de Oceanografía; Palma de Mallorca, Spain 7 CIBM Consorzio per il Centro Internuniversitario di Biologia Marina ed Ecologia Applicata “G. Bacci”; Livorno ,Italy 8 COISPA Tecnologia & Ricerca, Stazione Sperimentale per lo Studio delle Risorse del Mare; Bari, Italy 9 Thünen Institut; Bremerhaven, Germany * Corresponding author : Josep Lloret, email address : [email protected] Abstract : Many deep‐water fish populations, being k‐selected species, have little resilience to overexploitation and may be at serious risk of depletion as a consequence. Sea warming represents an additional threat. In this study, the condition, or health, of several populations of common ling (Molva molva), blue ling (M. dypterygia) and Mediterranean or Spanish ling (M. macrophthalma) inhabiting different areas in the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean was evaluated, in order to shed light on the challenges these deep water species are facing in the context of fishing activity and a warming climate.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxa Common Size Class Size Category (Cm) Number of Stomachs
    Size Number category of Number of Taxa Common Size class (cm) stomachs observations Agonus cataphractus Pogge (armed bullhead) Js 3 to 4 0 0 Ammodytidae Sandeel Js 3 to 8 0 0 Atherina presbyter Sand smelt L 11+ 0 0 Belone belone Garfish Jm 11 to 22 0 0 Belone belone Garfish M 22 to 32 0 0 Brama brama Rays bream (pomfret) M 32 to 47 0 0 Buglossidium luteum Solenette Js 3 to 4 0 0 Callionymus maculatus Spotted dragonet Js 3 to 8 0 0 Callionymus maculatus Spotted dragonet M 15 to 21 0 0 Callionymus maculatus Spotted dragonet L 21+ 0 0 Dipturus batis Common skate L 185+ 0 0 Engraulis encrasicolus European anchovy Jm 5 to 10 0 0 Engraulis encrasicolus European anchovy Js 3 to 5 0 0 Gadiculus argenteus Silvery pout L 13+ 0 0 Gadiculus argenteus Silvery pout Js 3 to 5 0 0 Galeorhinus galeus Tope shark L 153+ 0 0 Helicolenus dactylopterus Blue-mouth redfish M 24 to 30 0 0 Hippoglossus hippoglossus Halibut M 97 to 151 0 0 Lumpenus lampretaeformis Snake blenny Js 3 to 13 0 0 Lumpenus lampretaeformis Snake blenny L 36+ 0 0 Mustelus mustelus Smooth hound Js 3 to 46 0 0 Myoxocephalus scorpius Bullrout Js 3 to 7 0 0 Pegusa lascaris Sand sole M 19 to 24 0 0 Raja brachyura Blonde ray M 91 to 110 0 0 Sardina pilchardus Pilchard M 14 to 17 0 0 Spinachia spinachia Sea stickleback Js 3 to 6 0 0 Syngnathus acus Great pipefish Js 3 to 6 0 0 Trachinus draco Greater weever fish Jm 11 to 21 0 0 Trachinus draco Greater weever fish Js 3 to 11 0 0 Trigloporus lastoviza Streaked gurnard L 32+ 0 0 Zoarces viviparus Eelpout/viviparus blenny Jm 9 to 19 0 0 Alopias vulpinus
    [Show full text]