DOCSLIB.ORG

Marine Mammal Bycatch in Gillnet and Other Entangling Net Fisheries, 1990 to 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marine Mammal Bycatch in Gillnet and Other Entangling Net Fisheries, 1990 to 2011 Vol. 20: 71–97, 2013 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Published online March 21 doi: 10.3354/esr00481 Endang Species Res Contribution to the Theme Section ‘Techniques for reducing bycatch of mammals in gillnets’ OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS REVIEW Marine mammal bycatch in gillnet and other entangling net fisheries, 1990 to 2011 Randall R. Reeves1, Kate McClellan2,3,*, Timothy B. Werner2,4 1Okapi W ildlife Associates, 27 Chandler Lane, Hudson, Quebec J0P 1H0, Canada 2Consortium for Wildlife Bycatch Reduction, John H. Prescott Marine Laboratory, New England Aquarium, Central Wharf, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA 3Department of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003, USA 4Department of Biology, Boston University, 5 Cummington Mall, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA ABSTRACT: Since the 1970s the role of fishery bycatch as a factor reducing, or limiting the recov- ery of, marine mammal populations has been increasingly recognized. The proceedings of a 1990 International Whaling Commission symposium and workshop summarized fishery and bycatch data by region, fishery, and species, and estimated the significance of the ‘impacts’ of bycatch in passive gear on all cetacean species and subspecies or geographically defined populations. A global review of pinniped bycatch in 1991 concluded that incidental mortality in passive gear had contributed to declines of several species and populations. Here we update the information on cetacean gillnet bycatch, assess bycatch data on marine mammals other than cetaceans (i.e. pin- nipeds, sirenians, and 2 otter species), determine where important data gaps exist, and identify species and populations known or likely to be at high risk from bycatch in gillnets. We found that at least 75% of odontocete species, 64% of mysticetes, 66% of pinnipeds, and all sirenians and marine mustelids have been recorded as gillnet bycatch over the past 20-plus years. Cetacean bycatch information in some areas has improved, facilitating our ability to identify species and populations at high risk, although major gaps remain. Understanding of the scale of pinniped and sirenian bycatch has also improved, but this bycatch remains poorly documented, especially at the population level. This study reveals how little is known about marine mammal bycatch in gillnets in much of the world. Even as other significant threats to marine mammals have become better documented and understood, bycatch remains a critical issue demanding urgent attention if there is to be any hope of preventing further losses of marine mammal diversity and abundance, and of protecting, or restoring, ecological health. KEY WORDS: Bycatch · Entanglement · Gillnets · Marine mammals Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher INTRODUCTION organized and convened by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) (Per- Bycatch (incidental mortality and injury in fishing rin et al. 1994). The published proceedings of that gear; see ‘Materials and methods’ for a more exact event included a global summary of fishery and definition) has been increasingly recognized since bycatch data by region, fishery, and species, as well the 1970s as a factor limiting or reducing marine as an experts’ evaluation of the ‘impacts’ of bycatch mammal populations (Mitchell 1975, Hofman 1995, on many cetacean species and geographically Read 2005, 2008). A benchmark for this recognition defined populations (IWC 1994). The workshop was the 1990 Symposium and Workshop on the Mor- report contained a series of recommendations related tality of Cetaceans in Passive Fishing Nets and Traps to bycatch documentation, mitigation, and monitor- *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] © Inter-Research 2013 · www.int-res.com 72 Endang Species Res 20: 71–97, 2013 ing. Six species or populations were highlighted as of the potential population-level impacts (Ross et al. urgently needing action to reduce unsustainable 1989, Cockcroft 1990, Cockcroft et al. 1991, 1992). bycatch: the Yangtze River dolphin or baiji Lipotes Finally, sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus in the vexillifer, the Gulf of California porpoise or vaquita Mediterranean Sea are thought to number only in the Phocoena sinus, coastal populations of humpback 100s, and they are still dying in drift nets (largely ille- dolphins Sousa sp. and bottlenose dolphins Tursiops gal since 2002 when the European Union imposed a sp. in KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa), striped dolphins total ban on driftnetting by member states); a major Stenella coeruleoalba in the Mediterranean Sea, and difference now is that the evidence for demographic harbor porpoises Phocoena phocoena in the western isolation of Mediterranean sperm whales is much North Atlantic. Three other populations were ‘of par- stronger than it was in 1990 (Notarbartolo di Sciara et ticular concern’ because of large known bycatch lev- al. 2006, Engelhaupt et al. 2009). els thought to be unsustainable: dusky dolphins At least 2 of the cetacean populations highlighted Lagenorhynchus obscurus in the eastern South in 1990 would probably not be ranked as being of Pacific (specifically Peru), northern right whale dol- such high concern today, at a global scale, as they phins Lissodelphis borealis in the central North were then. The United Nations ban on the use of Pacific, and sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus large-scale, high-seas driftnets, which took effect at in the Mediterranean Sea. the end of 1992 (Northridge & Hofman 1999), greatly In a separate effort, Woodley & Lavigne (1991) re - reduced the driftnet mortality of northern right whale viewed the literature for information on bycatch of dolphins. Although gillnetting of billfish, sharks, pinnipeds and concluded that incidental mortality in squid, and tuna inside the exclusive economic zones passive gear had contributed to declines in popula- (EEZs) of some North Pacific countries probably con- tions of northern fur seals Callorhinus ursinus and tinue to kill 100s of these dolphins each year, the total harbor seals Phoca vitulina in the North Pacific and number of living right whale dolphins remains fairly harp seals Pagophilus groenlandica in the Barents high: there were estimated to be 10 000s to 100 000s Sea. They also believed that mortality in commercial in the central North Pacific in the early 1990s (Buck- trawl fisheries was at least partly responsible for a land et al. 1993) and about 8000 in the United States decline in Steller sea lions Eumetopias jubatus and EEZ in 2005 to 2008 (Carretta et al. 2011). Given the that bycatch had had ‘detrimental impacts’ on New ongoing driftnet ban on the high seas and these rela- Zealand sea lions Phocarctos hookeri, harbor seals tively high estimates of abundance, the need for con- Phoca vitulina off Newfoundland and Alaska, gray servation measures directed at northern right whale seals Halichoerus grypus in the eastern Baltic Sea, dolphins seems less urgent now than it did 2 decades and endangered Mediterranean and Hawaiian monk ago. seals Monachus schauinslandi and M. monachus, Further, harbor porpoises have been found to be respectively. much more abundant in the western North Atlantic Over the 20-plus years since 1990 much has than was assumed in 1990, when the ‘best available changed. One of the cetacean species singled out in estimates’ ranged between 8000 and 15 300 (north- 1990 as being in great peril, the baiji, is now probably eastern USA, Bay of Fundy, and southwestern Nova extinct (Turvey et al. 2007). The vaquita has contin- Scotia region; IWC 1994, p. 31) compared with a 2006 ued to decline as a result of unsustainable bycatch in estimate of 89 054 (coefficient of variation, CV = 0.47) fishing gear (Rojas-Bracho et al. 2006, Jaramillo- (Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock) (Waring et al. Legorreta et al. 2007); it is now widely regarded as 2011). Annual porpoise bycatch in gillnets and other the world’s most endangered cetacean species. passive gear in this region were estimated at 300 to Dusky dolphins have continued to be killed in Peru, 800 in 1990 (IWC 1994, p. 25) compared with an esti- and the subspecies there (Lagenorhynchus obscurus mate of total annual human-caused mortality in 2004 posidonia) may still be declining as a result, despite a to 2008 of 928+ (CV = 0.16) in all United States and series of legislative measures intended to reduce Canadian fisheries in the Gulf of Maine and Bay of mortality from the deliberate targeting of cetaceans Fundy (Waring et al. 2011). Although this high (Van Waerebeek et al. 2002, Mangel et al. 2010). number of annual porpoise deaths is cause for Similarly, humpback dolphins and bottlenose dol- ongoing concern, the situation appears less grave phins have continued to be subjected to incidental than it did in 1990 in terms of sustainability (Or- mortality in anti-shark nets off KwaZulu-Natal (Ped- phanides & Palka 2013, this Theme Section, Read demors et al. 1997, Peddemors 1998, Best 2007), with 2013, this Theme Section). The situation for striped no clear assessment since the late 1980s/early 1990s dolphins in the Mediterranean Sea is broadly similar Reeves et al.: Marine mammal bycatch 73 to that of harbor porpoises in the western North At- cially in developing countries (Moore et al. 2010); lantic, with the caveat that besides continuing to sus- and (3) what Read (2008) described as a ‘transition tain considerable bycatch, they have been strongly af- from bycatch to market value,’ that is, animals that fected since 1990
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Meetings and Announcements
    3. the prohibition of painful sur­ b. inspect and report to the Board on gical procedures without the use of a the treatment of animals in commer­ properly administered anesthesia; cial farming; MEETINGS !!!!! and c. investigate all complaints and alle­ ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. provisions for a licensing system gations of unfair treatment of for all farms. Such system shall in­ animals; clude, but shall not be limited to, the d. issue in writing, without prior hear­ following requirements: ing, a cease and desist order to any i. all farms shall b'e inspected person if the Commission has reason prior to the issuance of a I icense. to believe that that person is causing, ii. farms shall thereafter be in­ engaging in, or maintaining any spected at least once a year. condition or activity which, in the iii. minimum requirements shall Director's judgment, will result in or be provided to insure a healthy is likely to result in irreversible or ir­ life for every farm animal. These reparable damage to an animal or its requirements shall include, but environment, and it appears prejudi­ not be limited to: cial to the interests of the [State] a. proper space allowances; {United States] to delay action until b. proper nutrition; an opportunity for a hearing can be c. proper care and treatment provided. The order shall direct such of animals; and person to discontinue, abate or allevi­ d. proper medical care. .ate such condition, activity, or viola­ f. The Board may enter into contract tion. A hearing shall be provided with with any person, firm, corporation or ____ days to allow the person to FORTHCOMING association to handle things neces­ show that each condition, activity or MEETINGS sary or convenient in carrying out the violation does not exist; and functions, powers and duties of the e.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Oceanographic Study on the Baleen Whaling Grounds
    FISHERY OCEANOGRAPHIC STUDY ON THE BALEEN WHALING GROUNDS KEIJI NASU INTRODUCTION A Fishery oceanographic study of the whaling grounds seeks to find the factors control­ ling the abundance of whales in the waters and in general has been a subject of interest to whalers. In the previous paper (Nasu 1963), the author discussed the oceanography and baleen whaling grounds in the subarctic Pacific Ocean. In this paper, the oceanographic environment of the baleen whaling grounds in the coastal region ofJapan, subarctic Pacific Ocean, and Antarctic Ocean are discussed. J apa­ nese oceanographic observations in the whaling grounds mainly have been carried on by the whaling factory ships and whale making research boats using bathyther­ mographs and reversing thermomenters. Most observations were made at surface. From the results of the biological studies on the whaling grounds by Marr ( 1956, 1962) and Nemoto (1959) the author presumed that the feeding depth is less than about 50 m. Therefore, this study was made mainly on the oceanographic environ­ ment of the surface layer of the whaling grounds. In the coastal region of Japan Uda (1953, 1954) plotted the maps of annual whaling grounds for each 10 days and analyzed the relation between the whaling grounds and the hydrographic condition based on data of the daily whaling reports during 1910-1951. A study of the subarctic Pacific Ocean whaling grounds in relation to meteorological and oceanographic conditions was made by U da and Nasu (1956) and Nasu (1957, 1960, 1963). Nemoto (1957, 1959) also had reported in detail on the subject from the point of the food of baleen whales and the ecology of plankton.
    [Show full text]
  • SOLUTION: Gathering and Sonic Blasts for Oil Exploration Because These Practices Can Harm and Kill Whales
    ENDANGEREDWHALES © Nolan/Greenpeace WE HAVE A PROBLEM: WHAT YOU CAN DO: • Many whale species still face extinction. • Tell the Bush administration to strongly support whale protection so whaling countries get the • Blue whales, the largest animals ever, may now number as message. few as 400.1 • Ask elected officials to press Iceland, Japan • Rogue nations Japan, Norway and Iceland flout the and Norway to respect the commercial whaling international ban on commercial whaling. moratorium. • Other threats facing whales include global warming, toxic • Demand that the U.S. curb global warming pollution dumping, noise pollution and lethal “bycatch” from fishing. and sign the Stockholm Convention, which bans the most harmful chemicals on the planet. • Tell Congress that you oppose sonar intelligence SOLUTION: gathering and sonic blasts for oil exploration because these practices can harm and kill whales. • Japan, Norway and Iceland must join the rest of the world and respect the moratorium on commercial whaling. • The loophole Japan exploits to carry out whaling for “Tomostpeople,whalingisallnineteenth- “scientific” research should be closed. centurystuff.Theyhavenoideaabout • Fishing operations causing large numbers of whale hugefloatingslaughterhouses,steel-hulled bycatch deaths must be cleaned up or stopped. chaserboatswithsonartostalkwhales, • Concerted international action must be taken to stop andharpoonsfiredfromcannons.” other threats to whales including global warming, noise Bob Hunter, pollution, ship strikes and toxic contamination.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Effects of Fishing and Whaling in the North Pacific And
    TWENTY-SIX Ecosystem Effects of Fishing and Whaling in the North Pacific and Atlantic Oceans BORIS WORM, HEIKE K. LOTZE, RANSOM A. MYERS Human alterations of marine ecosystems have occurred about the role of whales in the food web and (2) what has throughout history, but only over the last century have these been observed in other species playing a similar role. Then we reached global proportions. Three major types of changes may explore whether the available evidence supports these have been described: (1) the changing of nutrient cycles and hypotheses. Experiments and detailed observations in lakes, climate, which may affect ecosystem structure from the bot- streams, and coastal and shelf ecosystems have shown that tom up, (2) fishing, which may affect ecosystems from the the removal of large predatory fishes or marine mammals top down, and (3) habitat alteration and pollution, which almost always causes release of prey populations, which often affect all trophic levels and therefore were recently termed set off ecological chain reactions such as trophic cascades side-in impacts (Lotze and Milewski 2004). Although the (Estes and Duggins 1995; Micheli 1999; Pace et al. 1999; large-scale consequences of these changes for marine food Shurin et al. 2002; Worm and Myers 2003). Another impor- webs and ecosystems are only beginning to be understood tant interaction is competitive release, in which formerly (Pauly et al. 1998; Micheli 1999; Jackson et al. 2001; suppressed species replace formerly dominant ones that were Beaugrand et al. 2002; Worm et al. 2002; Worm and Myers reduced by fishing (Fogarty and Murawski 1998; Myers and 2003; Lotze and Milewski 2004), the implications for man- Worm 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • American Perceptions of Marine Mammals and Their Management, by Stephen R
    American Perceptions of Marine Mammals and Their Management Stephen R. Kellert Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies May 1999 CHAPTER ONE: Introduction and Research Methodology Most Americans associate marine mammals with two orders of animals-the ceteceans, including the whales and dolphins, and the pinnipeds, consisting of the seals, sea lions, and walrus. The more informed recognize another marine mammal order, the sirenians, represented in the United States by one species, the manatee, mainly found along the Florida peninsula. Less widely recognized as marine mammals, but still officially classified as marine mammals, include one ursine species, the polar bear, and a mustelid, the sea otter. This report will examine American views of all marine mammals and their management, although mostly focusing on, for reasons of greater significance and familiarity, the cetaceans and pinnipeds. Marine mammals are among the most privileged yet beleaguered of creatures in America today. Many marine mammals enjoy unusually strong public interest and support, their popularity having expanded enormously during the past half-century. Marine mammals are also relatively unique among wildlife in America in having been the recipients of legislation dedicated exclusively to their protection, management, and conservation. This law - the Marine Mammal Protection Act - is one of the most ambitious, comprehensive, and progressive environmental laws ever enacted. More problematically, various marine mammal species have been the source of considerable policy conflict and management controversy, both domestically and internationally, and an associated array of challenges to their well-being and, in some cases, future survival. Over-exploitation (e.g., commercial whaling) was the most prominent cause of marine mammal decline historically, although this threat has greatly diminished.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Bycatch' Whaling a Growing Threat to Coastal Whales 23 June 2009
    'Bycatch' whaling a growing threat to coastal whales 23 June 2009 Scientists are warning that a new form of Whales are occasionally killed in entanglements unregulated whaling has emerged along the with fishing nets and the deaths of large whales are coastlines of Japan and South Korea, where the reported by most member nations of the IWC. commercial sale of whales killed as fisheries Japan and South Korea are the only countries that "bycatch" is threatening coastal stocks of minke allow the commercial sale of products killed as whales and other protected species. "incidental bycatch." The sheer number of whales represented by whale-meat products on the market Scott Baker, associate director of the Marine suggests that both countries have an inordinate Mammal Institute at Oregon State University, says amount of bycatch, Baker said. DNA analysis of whale-meat products sold in Japanese markets suggests that the number of "The sale of bycatch alone supports a lucrative whales actually killed through this "bycatch trade in whale meat at markets in some Korean whaling" may be equal to that killed through coastal cities, where the wholesale price of an adult Japan's scientific whaling program - about 150 minke whale can reach as high as $100,000," annually from each source. Baker said. "Given these financial incentives, you have to wonder how many of these whales are, in Baker, a cetacean expert, and Vimoksalehi fact, killed intentionally." Lukoscheck of the University of California-Irvine presented their findings at the recent scientific In Japan, whale-meat products enter into the meeting of the International Whaling Commission commercial supply chain that supports the (IWC) in Portugal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethics of Human-Chicken Relationships in Video Games: the Origins of the Digital Chicken B
    The ethics of human-chicken relationships in video games: the origins of the digital chicken B. Tyr Fothergill Catherine Flick School of Archaeology and Ancient De Montfort University History The Gateway University of Leicester, Leicester Leicester, United Kingdom LE1 7RH, United Kingdom LE1 9BH, United Kingdom +44 0116 223 1014 +44 116 207 8487 [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT depicted being. In this paper, we explore the many and varied In this paper, we look at the historical place that chickens have roles and uses of the chicken in video games and contextualize held in media depictions and as entertainment, analyse several these with archaeological and historical data. types of representations of chickens in video games, and draw out 2. THE DOMESTICATION AND SPREAD reflections on society in the light of these representations. We also look at real-life, modern historical, and archaeological evidence of OF Gallus gallus, THE CHICKEN chicken treatment and the evolution of social attitudes with regard Humans have conceptually and physically shaped and re-shaped to animal rights, and deconstruct the depiction of chickens in the other animal species with which we have interacted; few video games in this light. examples of this are more striking than the chicken. Domestication is often conceived of as an activity undertaken by Categories and Subject Descriptors humans which converts a wild plant or animal into something K.4.0 General else, a living thing entirely under the control of or dependent upon humans to survive. The complexities of such a transformation are General Terms immense, and are more accurately framed as “an ongoing co- Human Factors, Theory evolutionary process rather than an event or invention” [15].
    [Show full text]
  • Discover Your TRUE Personality…
    8. Salmon and trout are reared intensively in fish farms to produce cheap fish. Farmed salmon constantly swim round their cages instead Discover your of migrating across the ocean. Fish wastes and chemicals used to control disease pollute the environment for other aquatic life. TRUE For each question, a) Fish should live free in the wild, not enclosed in farms. personality… tick the statements b) These fish suffer from stress. We should farm fish less intensively. you agree with. c) Intensive fish farming is damaging to wildlife. We should look for less intensive ways of increasing fish production. Then, give a BIG tick d) Fish farming provides jobs and a cheap form of tasty protein. for the statement you like best. 9. Sheep are transported alive from Britain for slaughter or further fattening to countries such as France and the Netherlands. Total Repeat for all ten journey times can last over 20 hours. questions. a) Sheep are sentient beings, not agricultural goods. We have no right to treat them like this. b) Long distance transport causes unnecessary suffering and risks spreading disease. We should slaughter them here and export their meat. c) Transporting food over long distances is wasteful of energy. We should encourage people to eat more locally produced food. d) The live export market provides continental consumers with the fresh meat they like and provides better prices at market for our hard-pressed farmers. 10. Organic meat comes from animals given feed produced without chemical fertilisers or pesticides. Animals are given more space and the young are weaned later to try to reduce the need for antibiotics.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Bedford Voyage!
    Funding in Part by: ECHO - Education through Cultural and Historical Organizations The Jessie B. DuPont Fund A New Bedford Voyage! 18 Johnny Cake Hill Education Department New Bedford 508 997-0046, ext. 123 Massachusetts 02740-6398 fax 508 997-0018 new bedford whaling museum education department www.whalingmuseum.org To the teacher: This booklet is designed to take you and your students on a voyage back to a time when people thought whaling was a necessity and when the whaling port of New Bedford was known worldwide. I: Introduction page 3 How were whale products used? What were the advantages of whale oil? How did whaling get started in America? A view of the port of New Bedford II: Preparing for the Voyage page 7 How was the whaling voyage organized? Important papers III: You’re on Your Way page 10 Meet the crew Where’s your space? Captain’s rules A day at sea A 24-hour schedule Time off Food for thought from the galley of a whaleship How do you catch a whale? Letters home Your voice and vision Where in the world? IV: The End of the Voyage page 28 How much did you earn? Modern whaling and conservation issues V: Whaling Terms page 30 VI: Learning More page 32 NEW BEDFORD WHALING MUSEUM Editor ECHO Special Projects Illustrations - Patricia Altschuller - Judy Chatfield - Gordon Grant Research Copy Editor Graphic Designer - Stuart Frank, Michael Dyer, - Clara Stites - John Cox - MediumStudio Laura Pereira, William Wyatt Special thanks to Katherine Gaudet and Viola Taylor, teachers at Friends Academy, North Dartmouth, MA, and to Judy Giusti, teacher at New Bedford Public Schools, for their contributions to this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Animal & Natural Resource
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL & NATURAL RESOURCE LAW Michigan State University College of Law MAY 2019 VOLUME XV The Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law is published annually by law students at Michigan State University College of Law. The Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law received generous support from the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the Michigan State University College of Law. Without their generous support, the Journal would not have been able to publish and host its annual symposium. The Journal also is funded by subscription revenues. Subscription requests and article submissions may be sent to: Professor David Favre, Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law, Michigan State University College of Law, 368 Law College Building, East Lansing MI 48824, or by email to msujanrl@ gmail.com. Current yearly subscription rates are $27.00 in the U.S. and current yearly Internet subscription rates are $27.00. Subscriptions are renewed automatically unless a request for discontinuance is received. Back issues may be obtained from: William S. Hein & Co., Inc., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14209. The Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law welcomes the submission of articles, book reviews, and notes & comments. Each manuscript must be double spaced, in 12 point, Times New Roman; footnotes must be single spaced, 10 point, Times New Roman. Submissions should be sent to [email protected] using Microsoft Word or PDF format. Submissions should conform closely to the 19th edition of The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation. All articles contain a 2019 author copyright unless otherwise noted at beginning of article. Copyright © 2019 by the Journal of Animal & Natural Resource Law, Michigan State University College of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the ICES-FAO Working Group on Fishing Technology and Fish Behaviour (WGFTFB)
    ICES WGFTFB REPORT 2010 SCICOM STEERING GROUP ON ECOSYSTEM SURVEYS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ICES CM 2010/SSGESST:14 REF. SCICOM, ACOM Report of the ICES-FAO Working Group on Fishing Technology and Fish Behaviour (WGFTFB) 31 May - 4 June 2010 ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen 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. 2010. Report of the ICES-FAO Working Group on Fishing Technology and Fish Behaviour (WGFTFB), 31 May - 4 June 2010, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen. ICES CM 2010/SSGESST :14. 252 pp. For permission to reproduce material from this publication, please apply to the Gen- eral Secretary. The document is a report of an Expert Group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council. © 2010 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICES WGFTFB REPORT 2010 | i Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 1 1 Directive .......................................................................................................................... 6 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6 3 Terms of Reference .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • REVIEW of METHODS USED to REDUCE RISKS of CETACEAN BYCATCH and ENTANGLEMENTS N CMS Technical Series Publication No
    REVIEW OF METHODS USED TO REDUCE RISKS OF CETACEAN BYCATCH AND ENTANGLEMENTS N CMS Technical Series Publication No. 38 W E Published by the Secretariat of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals Recommended Russell Leaper and Susannah Calderan (2018). Review of methods used to reduce risks of citation: cetacean bycatch and entanglements. UNEP/CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 76 pages. CMS Technical Series No. 38 Prepared by: UNEP/CMS Secretariat Editors: Aimée Leslie WWF & Leigh Henry WWF-US Authors: Russell Leaper1 Susannah Calderan2 1 University of Aberdeen, School of Biological Sciences, Tillydrone Ave, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ [email protected] 2 Canal House, Banavie, Fort William, PH33 7LY [email protected] Coordination: Heidrun Frisch-Nwakanma Front Cover © Chris Johnson Photograph: Back Cover © Chris Johnson Photograph: Cover Design: Karina Waedt, www.karinadesign.de Inside Design and Agenda28 www.agenda28.com Layout: © 2018 UNEP/CMS & WWF. This publication, except the cover photograph, may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational and other non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The UNEP/CMS Secretariat would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purposes whatsoever without prior permission from the United Nations Environmental Programme. Disclaimer: The contents of this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of UNEP/CMS or contributory organisations. The designations employed and the presentation do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP/CMS or contributory organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area in its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]