STANDARD FORM FOR THE SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS FOR GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREAS (FRAs) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Proposal revised by (SAC technical group/subregional committee):

Date of endorsement:

Name of the FRA

Bari Canyon (Southern Adriatic)

Submitted by (institution, scientists, GFCM contracting parties, etc.):

1. ISMAR-CNR 2. IUCN Center for Mediterranean Cooperation 3. University of Bari 4. Coispa Bari

Date of submission:

April 2018

Table of contents

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 4 2. AREA IDENTIFICATION ...... 5 2.1. GFCM GEOGRAPHICAL SUBAREA ...... 5 2.2. NAME OF THE FRA...... 5 2.3. GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION ...... 5 2.3.1. General location ...... 5 2.3.2. Precise location of the proposed core area ...... 6 2.3.3. Buffer area (if applicable) ...... 6 2.3.4. Location map ...... 7 2.3.5. Depth range ...... 7 2.4. SURFACE AREA ...... 7 3. SITE DESCRIPTION ...... 7 3.1. MAIN PHYSICAL FEATURES ...... 8 3.1.1. Geology/Geomorphology ...... 8 3.1.2. Other relevant physical or chemical features ...... 8 3.2. BIOLOGICAL FEATURES ...... 8 3.2.1. Habitats ...... 8 3.2.2. List of species of regional importance ...... 9 3.2.3. Occurrence of biological and ecological processes relevant to fish resources ...... 11 3.3. USE OF NATURAL RESOURCES ...... 12 3.3.1. Current human use and development of fisheries ...... 12 3.3.2. Current human use and development other than fisheries ...... 20 4. REGIONAL IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE...... 21 4.1. PRESENCE OF ECOSYSTEMS/HABITATS OF PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN...... 21 4.2. PRESENCE OF HABITATS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO ENDANGERED, THREATENED OR ENDEMIC SPECIES ...... 22 4.3. OTHER RELEVANT FEATURES ...... 24 4.3.1. Educational interest ...... 24 4.3.2. Scientific interest ...... 24 5. IMPACTS AND ACTIVITIES AFFECTING THE AREA ...... 25 5.1. IMPACTS AND ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE SITE ...... 25 5.1.1. Exploitation of natural resources ...... 25 5.1.2. Threats to habitats and species ...... 25 5.2. IMPACTS AND ACTIVITIES AROUND THE SITE ...... 26 5.2.1. Pollution ...... 26 5.2.2. Other external, natural and/or anthropogenic threats ...... 26 5.2.3. Sustainable development measures ...... 26 6. EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT AND TRENDS ...... 27 6.1. EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT AND TRENDS RELATED TO THE THREATS TO AND PRESSURES UPON THE AREA ...... 27 7. MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION REGIME ...... 27 7.1. LEGAL STATUS ...... 27 7.1.1. Historical background related to management in the area...... 27 7.1.2. Regulatory measures currently governing management on the site ...... 28 7.1.3. Objectives ...... 28 7.2. LEGAL BACKGROUND ...... 28 7.3. LEGAL PROVISIONS FOR MANAGEMENT ...... 28 7.3.1. Zoning in the area ...... 28 7.3.2. Legal competence ...... 29 7.3.3. Other legal provisions ...... 29 8. OBJECTIVES OF THE FRA AND PROPOSED MANAGEMENT MEASURES ...... 29 8.1. OBJECTIVES OF THE FRA ...... 29 8.2. PROPOSED PROTECTION MEASURES FOR THE FRA ...... 30 8.2.1. Management measures ...... 30 8.2.2. Monitoring, control and surveillance measures ...... 30 8.2.3. Socio-economic impact(s) of the FRA ...... 31 8.2.4. Economic assessment of ecosystems services ...... 31 9. OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION ...... 31 10. RELEVANT CONTACTS ...... 33

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary of the information contained in sections 2 to 8, including expected results (500 words maximum).

The Adriatic Sea is one of the most productive basins in the Mediterranean Sea and hosts several fish stocks of commercial interest. Unfortunately, up to date fisheries management has failed to reverse trends of fish overexploitation and fishing pressure is affecting marine habitats, including vulnerable ecosystems. Demersal resources are highly vulnerable to certain fishing activities and it is a clear need to develop appropriate management approaches, including the protection of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VME) and Essential Fish Habitats (EFH) for the recovery of fish stocks and the support of sustainable human activities especially fishery.

The adoption of spatial management measures, to effectively manage fisheries activity, could limit their impacts on fish stocks and can support the recovery of overexploited fish stocks, EFH as well as to protect VME habitats from the significant adverse impacts of bottom fishing. The Bari Canyon Fisheries Restricted Area (FRA), here proposed, is located in the Southern Adriatic Sea (GSA18) just 40 km off the city of Bari (Italy) and 100 km south of the Gargano National Park, in the Apulia Region. This area is identified as: i) area of unique physical features and hydrological processes (deep-water circulation influencing the entire Mediterranean Sea); ii) a VME hosting numerous endangered mega- and macro-benthic organisms such as cnidarians; iii) a nursery for some deep-cartilaginous species impacted by fisheries; iv) an area of important EFHs for different commercial species such as anchovy, sardine, European hake, red mullet and deep-rose shrimp among others.

This document is proposing the establishment of a Fisheries Restricted Area (FRA) in the Bari Canyon. The core area includes the most valuable benthic habitats recorded in the Bari Canyon, such as the cold-water coral communities, that represent also important nursery and spawning areas. The buffer area extends the protection of complex and heterogeneous habitat present in the area.

The goals of the FRA are to contribute to the sustainability of fisheries by protecting the deep sea VME of the Southern Adriatic and the recover overexploited fish stocks and EFHs.

2. AREA IDENTIFICATION

2.1. GFCM GEOGRAPHICAL SUBAREA www.fao.org/gfcm/data/map-geographical-subareas

18 Southern Adriatic Sea

Map of the Mediterranean Sea and location of the proposed FRA in the Adriatic Sea, zone GSA18.

2.2. NAME OF THE FRA

Bari Canyon

2.3. GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION

2.3.1. General location

The Bari Canyon is located in the South Western Adriatic Sea ca. 20 nautical miles (ca. 40 km) off the city of Bari (Italy) and 100 km south of the Gargano National Park, in the Apulia Region. The Bari Canyon is composed by two main branches, almost parallel, indenting the shelf at depths of ca. 200 m.

2.3.2. Precise location of the proposed core area Provide geographical coordinates (latitude and longitude in degrees, minutes and seconds) for the vertex of a polygonal area.

Vertex coordinates are: 41°23’49’’ N – 17°03’24’’ E; 41°15’27’’ N – 17°19’16’’ E; 41°16’13’’ N – 17°02’42’’ E; 41°23’03’’ N – 17°19’49’’ E.

2.3.3. Buffer area (if applicable) Provide geographical coordinates (latitude and longitude in degrees, minutes and seconds) for the vertex of a polygonal area.

Buffer area vertex coordinates: 41°25’11’’ N – 17°02’09’’ E 41°24’04’’ N - 17°27’31’’ E 41°13’50’’ N 17°27’01’’ E 41°14’57’’ N 17°01’26’’ E

2.3.4. Location map Include geographical coordinates of the core and buffer areas, bathymetry and boundary of international waters. Add a global reference map of the Mediterranean with the location of the site.

B A

FRA Bari Canyon proposed area. A) Core Area, B) Buffer Area.

2.3.5. Depth range In meters. Specify core and buffer area, if applicable.

Depth range is between 200 and 700 m the core area and between 200 and 1200 m the buffer area.

2.4. SURFACE AREA In ha and km2. Specify core and buffer area, if applicable.

The core area is 326 km2; the buffer area is 675 km2

3. SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1. MAIN PHYSICAL FEATURES

3.1.1. Geology/Geomorphology Briefly describe geological aspects, sedimentation and erosion processes observable in the area and other geomorphologic features or geological risks. Indicate bibliographical sources.

The southwestern Adriatic margin is characterized by an articulated morphology whose two major features are the Gondola Slide in the northern sector and the Bari Canyon System (BCS) in the southern sector, respectively (Foglini et al., 2015). The BCS is an erosional-depositional structure consisting of two almost parallel E-W oriented main branches. BCS is characterized by a channel-levee complex, with sub-vertical flanks in its southern part (about 800 m in relief and more than 30° in steepness) and less abrupt flanks northward, separated by a mounded relief, a slope-confined trough between 500 and 700 m in depth (Trincardi et al., 2007). The southern branch is wider (approximately 4 km), markedly asymmetrical and U- shaped with a very steep wall (Ridente et al., 2007; Trincardi et al., 2007). Its complexity and morphology result from a structural control of the area nearby (Ridente et al., 2007). Between 200-700 m the BCS shows prevalently erosional character testified by the high reflectivity of the backscatter data available (Trincardi et al., 2007; unpublished observations). The main channel of the canyon, that displays the same erosional features until ca. 750 m, becomes slightly sinuous and appears slightly covered by sediments and evolves in a well-defined channel, with low sinuosity and a levee wedge in the southern part. At depth greater than 1100 m, the channel disappears by sedimentary cover. The second branch is broader and characterized by a steep and high southern flank (> 30° and> 600 m) and is axis is characterized by deep scours and gradient changes.

3.1.2. Other relevant physical or chemical features E.g. hydrodynamics, frontal areas, upwelling, etc.

The Bari Canyon is active and represents an efficient channel transporting sediments and nutrients from the continental shelf down to the bathyal zone (Turchetto et al., 2007); it is impacted by a- periodical dense water flow (North Adriatic Dense Water, NAdDW) developing from the northern Adriatic Sea and by the Levantine Intermediate Water (LIW) that generates in the Aegean Sea and flows through the entire Mediterranean Sea. Both NAdDW and LIW affect the Italian side of the Adriatic margin. These two dense currents are responsible for oxygen and nutrient transportation that contribute sustaining deep-water ecosystems such as cold-water corals (Taviani et al., 2016). High dynamic currents flush the canyon (NAdDW), even if a-periodically and prevent oversilting. Dense water cascading is also responsible, in the area nearby of the Bari Canyon System, of erosional-sediment features (e.g., slope incision and dune field) that characterize this part of the slope (Foglini et al., 2016).

3.2. BIOLOGICAL FEATURES

3.2.1. Habitats Briefly describe the dominant marine habitats, including pelagic habitats, if applicable

Predominant habitats and biocoenoses present in the Bari Canyon, referring to the SPA/BIO Protocol of the Barcelona Convention, were listed below:

ME1.5 Mediterranean upper bathyal rock ME1.51 Upper bathyal rock ME1.521 Madrepora oculata reefs ME1.513 Madrepora oculata and Lophelia pertusa reefs Bathyal rocks with Scleractinia and Alcyonacea with Madrepora oculata and/or Lophelia pertusa and Corallium rubrum Bathyal rocks with Scleractinia and Tetractinellida Bathyal rocks with Madrepora oculata and/or Lophelia pertusa and/or Desmophyllum dianthus with Pachastrella monilifera and/or Poecillastra compressa

ME2.1 Mediterranean upper bathyal biogenic habitat Bathyal Anthozoa bioconstructions Madrepora oculata/Lophelia pertusa/Desmophyllum dianthus reefs Madrepora oculata and Serpula vermicularis reefs

MF1.5 Mediterranean lower bathyal rock MF1.51 Lower bathyal rock MF1.512 Madrepora oculata reefs MF1.513 Madrepora oculata and Lophelia pertusa reefs

3.2.2. List of species of regional importance List the marine species protected under international agreements (specify which agreements) and/or included in the GFCM priority list. If applicable, indicate the IUCN category. Any other species may be listed if they are clearly considered of regional importance given their high representation in the area. For each species indicate: 1) relative abundance (common [C], uncommon [U] or occasional [O]); 2) regional status (rare [r], endemic [e] and/or threatened [t]); and 3) local status as an important resident population (R), or important for breeding (B), feeding (F), wintering (W) or migratory passage (M).

1 - 3 - Local 2 - Regional Relative status Species status abundance (R) (B) (F) (r) (e) (t) (C) (U) )O) (W) (M) Porifera

Poecillastra compressa C n/a n/a VME proposed indicator taxa

Pachastrella monilifera C n/a n/a VME proposed indicator taxa

Eurypon topsenti (U) (r)(e) n/a

Biemna parthenopea (U) (r)(e) n/a

Biemna tenuisigma (U) (r)(e) n/a Hexadella pruvoti (U) (r)(e) n/a

Cnidaria

Madrepora oculata (C) Endangered (R) IUCN, Annex (IUCN) II of SPA/BD Protocol, VME proposed indicator taxa

Lophelia pertusa (C) Endangered (R) IUCN, Annex (IUCN) II of SPA/BD Protocol, VME proposed indicator taxa

Desmophyllum dianthus (C) Endangered (R) IUCN, VME (IUCN) proposed indicator taxa

Dendrophyllia cornigera (U) Endangered (R) IUCN, VME (IUCN) proposed indicator taxa

Leiopathes glaberrima (U) Endangered (R) IUCN, Annex (IUCN) II of SPA/BD Protocol, VME proposed indicator taxa Annelida

Serpula vermicularis C n/a R n/a

Vermiliopsis (U) (r)(e) n/a monodiscus Hyalopomatus (U) (r)(e) n/a madreporae Chondrichthyes

Centrophorus (U) (t) Critically (R) at IUCN granulosus Endangered regional level (IUCN) Chimaera monstrosa (U) Near (R) at IUCN Threatened regional level (IUCN) Dalatias licha (U) (t) (R) at IUCN Vulnerable regional level (IUCN) Hexanchus griseus (U) (t) Least (R) at IUCN Concern regional level (IUCN) Actinopteriigy Merluccius merluccius (C) (t) (R) at local IUCN, GFCM Vulnerable and regional species (IUCN) level priority Polyprion americanus (U) (t) Data (R) at IUCN deficient regional level

(IUCN) Phycis phycis (U) (r) Least (R) IUCN Concern (IUCN) Helicolenus (C) (c) Least (R) IUCN dactylopterus Concern (IUCN) Pagellus bogaraveo (C) (t) Least (R) IUCN, GFCM Concern species (IUCN) priority Mammalia

Stenella coeruleoalba (O) (t) (R) at IUCN, Annex Vulnerable regional level II of SPA/BD (IUCN) (F) Protocol

Tursiops truncatus (O) (t) (R), (F) IUCN, Annex Vulnerable II of SPA/BD (IUCN) Protocol

3.2.3. Occurrence of biological and ecological processes relevant to fish resources E.g. essential fish habitats.

The walls and sea floor of the Bari Canyon are very rough three-dimensional structures that form habitats, such as hardground, boulders and coral branches. In particular, this canyon is characterized by the presence of cold water corals (CWC). As shown by the ROV images (Freiwald et al., 2009; Sanfilippo et al., 2013; Angeletti et al., 2014; Taviani et al., 2016), the vertical walls of the canyon host an extended facies of the cold water coral Madrepora oculata. Although this species seems to be the most abundant CWC, other coral species, both colonial (Lophelia pertusa, Dendrophyllia cornigera) and solitary (Desmophyllum dianthus, Stenocyathus vermiformis), inhabit this canyon (Freiwald et al., 2009). Solitary cnidarians, sponges, serpulids, boring clams, and colonies of bryozoans have been also recorded in this site during HERMES and HERMIONE cruises (Freiwald et al., 2009; Bo et al., 2012; Sanfilippo et al., 2013). Sponge species, among which Pachastrella monilifera, mixed with living colonies of the stony coral M. oculata dominates the deep assemblage in the Bari Canyon, between 380 and 500 m (Bo et al., 2012). A remarkable abundance of the tubeworm Serpula vermicularis associated with M. oculata build-ups and other stony corals were also observed to increase the biogenic frameworks and habitat complexity (Sanfilippo et al., 2013). A study of mollusc fauna from the Bari Canyon led to 55 species being identified, from typical epibathyal mollusc communities currently present in the Mediterranean basin as well as those from Würmian paleocommunities (Panetta et al., 2013). Corals and a variety of sessile benthic organisms contribute to creating complex three-dimensional habitats exposed to high sedimentation rates and attract numerous species of mobile invertebrates and fish (Angeletti et al., 2014; D’Onghia et al. 2015a, b). Filter and suspension feeders, infauna, epibenthos and suprabenthos feeders as well as benthopelagic feeders, top predators and scavengers play the functional role in this community Cold-Water Corals (CWC) community, mainly structured by Madrepora oculata and to a lesser extent, by Lophelia pertusa together with Desmophyllum dianthus and Dendrophyllia cornigera. Solitary corals, sponges (such as the big sponges Pachastrella monilifera and Poecillastra compressa), serpulids, boring clams and colonies of bryozoans are also widespread in this canyon.

3.3. USE OF NATURAL RESOURCES

3.3.1. Current human use and development of fisheries a) Briefly describe the current use of the area by artisanal, industrial and recreational fisheries, including information on:  Number of vessel by fishery operating in the area  Total annual catches by species for each fishery in the area  Percentage of total catches fished in the area in relation to the total  Value of catches fished in the area  Percentage of the value of catches in the area in relation to the total value  Bycatch rates of vulnerable species in the area  Number of fishers involved in the fisheries operating in the area  Name(s) of base port(s)

3.3.1.1 - Base ports and number of vessel by fishery operating in the area (south Adriatic sea – GSA18 -and Bari canyon) Several fisheries operate along the SW Adriatic Sea with different base ports and landing sites. Different fishing techniques are used. The small-scale fisheries, using gill nets, trammel nets, purse seines, longlines, dredges, have the greatest number of vessels overall, whereas the trawlers account for the greatest gross tonnage, engine power and fishing effort (Lembo & Donnaloia 2007, 2008; Lembo & Spedicato 2011a,b; Spedicato et al., 2017). Recreational fishing also occurs mostly in coastal waters. Trawling operates all around the Bari Canyon on soft bottoms on the shelf and slope, as recorded by Vessel Monitoring Systems (Russo et al., 2016). In the whole GSA18 there are 15 base ports in which the vessels are also registered (figure 1). According to the most updated data from the European Fleet Register (update of February 2018; table 1) the whole number of the vessels in the GSA18 is 1006, however only those using gears such as trawls and longlines could potentially operate on the grounds of the Bari canyon, as fixed nets or other similar gears are generally operated in shallower waters. Considering the localization of the Bari Canyon, 92 out 241 (38%) longliners and 156 out the 430 trawlers (36%), as highlighted in the table 1, are considered as possible candidate fleets that may operate on the grounds in the vicinity of the Bari canyon. These fleets have base port in Molfetta, Bari, Mola di Bari and Monopoli (figure 1). The other fleets are based too far and operational costs might not be compensated by the revenues. To better understand the real occurrence of fishing operations in the vicinity of the Bari canyon we used the observations carried out during the CAMPBIOL module of the Data Collection Framework in the GSA18 (time series analysed: 2014-2016; Lembo et al., 2016a). During these monitoring activities observers are embarked on board the fishing vessels to collect data on the specific composition, demographic structure and volume of the catches. Table 1 – Number of vessels, gross tonnage and engine power per port and per main metier (Fleet register, update of 02/2018). The fishing techniques and base ports grouping the vessels that might operate in the vicinity of the Bari canyon are highlighted in yellow.

DRB GND GNS LLS OTB PS PTM TBB Total

n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW n GT kW Manfredonia 64 702 6454 0 0 0 160 199 1075 63 97 726 207 4333 24905 8 103 465 0 0 0 1 8 95 503 5442 33720 Maritime District MOLFETTA 2 2 24 3 33 177 49 2450 12657 54 2485 12857 Molfetta Maritime 12 109 1128 2 7 89 17 30 352 18 56 416 115 5095 28848 0 0 0 1 85 243 0 0 0 165 5382 31075 District BARI 30 44 210 25 32 181 17 390 2759 5 2150 3790 77 2616 6940

MOLA DI BARI 7 9 63 19 64 599 51 1430 10111 77 1503 10774

MONOPOLI 11 14 112 48 362 4977 39 1336 8546 4 98 809 102 1810 14444

Bari Maritime 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 67 386 92 458 5757 107 3156 21416 9 2248 4599 0 0 0 0 0 0 256 5929 32157 District Brindisi Maritime 0 0 0 1 1 25 11 11 39 68 173 2322 1 7 74 1 2 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 194 2514 District Total 76 811 7582 3 8 114 236 307 1852 241 784 9221 430 12591 75243 18 2353 5116 1 85 243 1 8 95 1006 16947 99466

Figure 1 - 3D view of the Bari canyon FRA (core and buffer areas) and the coastline with the localization of some relevant fishing ports in the area None of these observations related to trawlers and longliners were localized in the core and/or in the buffer zone of the candidate FRA. A very limited number of observations (6 out 135 trips analysed) were encompassed within 15 nautical miles from the borders of the buffer zones (Figure 2). All the other observations were related to locations far away more than 15 nautical miles.

Figure 2 - CAMPBIOL hauls (red points) and locations of MEDITS hauls (yellow tracks) close to the Bari canyon However, the number of observations of DCF were probably few to infer a fishing activity carried out in the core area and/or in the buffer area of the FRA, especially considering that fishing activities are not supposed to be carried out on a regular basis in the Bari canyon, considering the uneven characteristics of the grounds and the risk of damaging the fishing gears. Thus, in order to take into consideration a broader data set of the fishing trips in the area, additional information about fishing effort and vessels’ presence were searched using AIS (Automatic PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Identification System) data, available at the Global Fishing Watch's community page (https://globalfishingwatch.force.com). Since 2014 all EU fishing boats over 15m have a Class A AIS (Directive 2002/59/EC). Data of Daily Fishing Effort are measured in units of hours per vessel at 0.1 Degree Resolution since 2012 to 2016. The time is calculated by assigning an amount of time to each AIS detection (which is half the time the previous plus half the time to the next AIS position). AIS data (time of permanence of a vessel in each AIS grid cell) were firstly filtered to consider exclusively data from vessels during fishing operations, excluding navigation. The filtering operation was carried out, for each fishing gear (trawlers and longliners), selecting the first mode of the modal decomposition of AIS data frequency distribution (e.g. Natale et al., 2015). The statistical data elaboration was performed using R software and in particular the normalmixEM function of the mixtools library. The mode value plus two times the standard deviation was used as threshold (first mode: 1.46 ± 1.82 hours; second mode: 5.17 ± 4.25 hours) to separate the first mode and thus keeping vessels very likely carrying out fishing operations. Vessel detections shorter than the threshold value were considered as vessels in transit and not in fishing activity and, hence, excluded. Error! Reference source not found. reports the map of the fishing effort data for bottom trawl vessels with the AIS devices active during the year 2016. There were 8 vessels very likely making fishing operations in the FRA area, however the annual amount of fishing hours by the trawlers was on average low (around 60.0 ± 49.4 hours/year), while it was 0 for vessels using longlines. This probably also because longliners are operated by vessels also smaller than 15 m LOA. From all the fishery data collected it seems that the FRA area, and in particular the core area of the FRA, is not a regular fishing ground for longlines and the use of the area by trawlers seems occasional. However this might also due to the effective use of AIS by fishing vessels using loglines (some with LOA less than 15 m) and even by some trawlers.

Figure 3 - Fishing effort of trawl vessels with AIS system during 2016.

3.3.1.2 - Total annual catches by species of each fishery in the area, percentage of total catches fished in the area with respect to the total and value of these catches In the GSA 18 total landings from 2006 to 2016 (Figure 4) are decreasing, possibly as effect of the reduction of the fishing pressure (e.g. through Management Plans with fleet scraping and seasonal fishing ban). Indeed, also the assessments show a trend of fishing mortality reduction for some stocks

15 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

(e.g. red mullet and deep-water rose shrimp), however the exploitation status of some other very important stock in the area, as European hake, is still too high (Spedicato et al., 2017).

35000 25000 30000 20000

25000 3 20000 15000 15000 tons 10000 landings 10000 kw*days*10 5000 5000 fishing effort 0 0

Figure 4 – Total landings (in tons) and fishing effort (in kw*days) in the GSA18 from 2006 to 2016 (JRC Data dissemination tool; https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dd/medbs/graphs). Considering the trawlers, in the GSA18 the fleet more contributing to the production are those classified as “demersal OTB” according to DCF, operating on the muddy bottoms of continental shelf. The main species are Merluccius merluccius (HKE), Nephrops norvegicus (NEP), Mullus spp (MUX), Eledone sp (OCM) and Parapenaeus longirostris (DPS) (Error! Reference source not found.). The bottom trawl fleets operating on the muddy bottoms of continental shelf and slope (mixed demersal and deep water species OTB) is targeting more: Nephrops norvegicus (NEP), Merluccius merluccius (HKE), Parapenaeus longirostris (DPS), Aristaeomorpha foliacea (ARS), Lophius spp (MNZ) (Error! Reference source not found.6).

Figure 5. Cumulative percentage for the GSA18_DEMSP_OTB, in terms of value in Euros (a) and volume in kg (b), of the species landed. The vertical line represents the 75 % cumulative percentage (DCF data, average values of the years 2012-2014). Percentage of GT*days at sea, proxy value of the fishing effort (c), by year and fleet segment (from STECF, 2015).

16 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Figure 6. Cumulative percentage for the GSA18_MDDWSP_OTB, in terms of value in Euros (a) and volume in kg (b), of the species landed. The vertical line represents the 75 % cumulative percentage (DCF data, average values of the years 2012-2014). Percentage of GT*days at sea, proxy value of the fishing effort (c), by year and fleet segment (from STECF, 2015). Considering the demersal longline fisheries (DEMF_LLS) the species which landing volume in percentage is accounting for the part of the cumulative distribution left to the slope change is Merluccius merluccius (HKE), while in terms of landing value the species accounting for 75 % of the cumulative distribution (in this case the threshold of 75 % and that of the slope change in the cumulative distribution are overlapping) are Merluccius merluccius (HKE) and Eutrigla gurnardus (GUG) (Error! Reference source not found.7).

Figure 7. Cumulative percentage for the GSA18_DEMF_LLS, in terms of value in Euros (a) and volume in kg (b), of the species landed. The vertical line represents the 75 % cumulative percentage (DCF data, average values of the years 2012-2014). Percentage of GT*days at sea, proxy value of the fishing effort (c), by year and fleet segment (from STECF, 2015). The analyses carried out on the intensity and localization of the fishing effort in the area showed that the expected production level, in terms of catch and landings, from the grounds of the candidate FRA should be almost negligible compared to the production in the whole GSA18, especially considering that the metier more contributing to the landings is the OTB_demersal. Taking into account the

17 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA amount of sampled catches during 2014-2016, it is possible to evaluate that the amount of catches taken inside 15 nautical miles around the core area of the Bari canyon is approximately 1.5 % of the total sampled catches in the GSA18, with M. merluccius and P. longirostris being the dominant species in both cases. Notwithstanding, also a fishing activity at low-intensity can endanger the integrity of the deep-water ecosystem of cold-water corals of the Bari canyon, whereas the closure of the core area would not significantly impact the fishing activities in the area. The MEDITS data (Bertrand et al., 2002; Lembo et al., 2016b; AA.VV. 2017) were finally analysed, to give insights into the characteristics of the underlying demersal populations in the area (for the localization of the MEDITS hauls see fig. 2). The hauls were selected in a range of 8 nautical miles from the core area of Bari canyon, in a more far place (offshore Brindisi, Figure 8) but with depth profile very similar to the previous one (so called control area) and finally in a homogeneous bathymetric range of the whole west side of the GSA18. The whole MEDITS time series from 1994 to 2016 was considered. The composition by species in weight percentage was compared between the three examined zones (Figure 9).

Figure 8 – 8NM buffer areas for the selection of the hauls around the FRA core area (yellow line) and for comparison (cyan line). Red points are the selected hauls in the two zones. The species Helicolenus dactylopterus was by far more abundant (21% in weight) in the area 8NM around the FRA compared to the so called “control area” and to the whole west GSA18 (500-600 m depth). Even Pagellus bogaraveo was more abundant in this area, whereas for the other species similar abundance was observed between the three areas. H. dactylopterus and P. bogaraveo are known to be slow growing fish, characterising the assemblage in the core area of the Bari canyon, consequently the FRA might play a role of refugium and spillover for these species.

18 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Figure 9 –Contribute (in percentage) of each species to the total caught weight standardized to the km2 in the depth stratum 500-600m in a 8 NM buffer zone around the core area of the FRA, in a more distant area (control area) and in the whole west side of GSA18 (MEDITS data from 1994-2016).

3.3.1.3 - By-catch rates of vulnerable species in the area Several species are captured as by-catch. The blackmouth catshark, Galeus melastomus, is the most abundant deep-water shark captured as by-catch on the fishing grounds (Relini et al. 2000, 2010). The available landing data from longliners in the SW Adriatic fisheries, from 2006 to 2014, indicate catches of hake between 151.49 t (2013) and 721.41 t (2006) and those of sharks between 1.01 t (2012) and 83.18 t (2014) (D’Onghia et al., 2016). No information is available regarding the bycatch of VME indicator taxa.

3.3.1.4 - Number of fishers involved in the fisheries operating in the area In 2013 the number of fishers in the western side of GSA18 was around 2159 professional units, among which 1146 fishers were working onboard trawlers, 147 onboard longlines and the number of workers in the small scale fishery was 866 (Spedicato et al., 2016). It is likely that the number of employees has not been varied significantly since then. Considering the fishing effort deployed in the

19 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Bari canyon the number of professional fishermen potentially involved in such fishing activities should be quite small. There is no however information on the number of recreational fishers involved in fishing activities in that area and the impact from them on the resources and the habitats.

b) Provide the number of users depending on these resources, seasonality, assessment of the social and economic importance of their use and of the perceived impact on the conservation of the area, using a score of 0-1-2-3 (0: null, 1: low, 2: medium, 3: high).

ACTIVITY AND ASSESS THE IMPORTANCE OF CATEGORY ESTIMATED NUMBER SEASONALITY Fishing SOCIO- CONSERVATION OF USERS ECONOMIC IMPACTS IMPACTS - Artisanal 1 3 See above See above - Industrial NA NA NA NA Other - Aquaculture NA NA NA NA

3.3.2. Current human use and development other than fisheries a) Briefly describe how the area is currently used by other economic sectors

The activities that mostly impact on the Adriatic Sea (GSA17 and GSA18) are coastal and maritime tourism, followed by maritime transportation and oil and gas exploitation, especially for the offshore concessions, and transportation. Mining could be exploit mineral resources in shelf areas of the Apulian region, but should not interact with the Bari Canyon.

Map shows the intensity of traffic density in the Adriatic Sea in the 2014-2015 (data from ADRIPLAN).

20 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

b) Provide the number of users depending on these resources, seasonality, assessment of the social and economic importance of their use and of the perceived impact on the conservation of the area, using a score of 0-1-2-3 (0: null, 1: low, 2: medium, 3: high).

ACTIVITY AND ASSESS THE IMPORTANCE OF CATEGORY ESTIMATED NUMBER SEASONALITY Other activities SOCIO- CONSERVATION OF USERS ECONOMIC IMPACTS IMPACTS - Tourism 3 1 NA All year around - Transport 3 1 NA All year around - Mining 1 3 NA All year around - -

4. REGIONAL IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE This section aims at stressing the importance of the site for conservation at a regional scale.

4.1. PRESENCE OF ECOSYSTEMS/HABITATS OF PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN Geomorphological features and its importance.  The Bari Canyon is an erosional-depositional structure, characterized by two, almost parallel E-W oriented branches; in the vicinity, another relevant channel is oriented N-S, but there are lack of information on its geological and hydrological characteristics.  The Bari Canyon is characterized by a channel-levee complex, with sub-vertical flanks in its southern part (about 800 m in relief and more than 30° in steepness) and less abrupt flanks northward.  The main channel of the Canyon, that displays the same erosional features until ca. 750 m, becomes slightly sinuous and appears slightly covered by sediments and evolves in a well- defined channel. At depth greater than 1100 m, the channel disappears by sedimentary cover.  The second branch is broader and characterized by a steep and high southern flank (> 30° and> 600 m) and is axis is characterized by deep scours and gradient changes.  The Bari Canyon is active, it is impacted by a-periodical currents (NAdDW) and by continuous intermediate currents (LIW).  These two dense currents are responsible for oxygen and nutrient transportation that contribute sustaining deep-water ecosystems such as cold-water corals.  Dense water are responsible for cold-water corals settling in the Bari Canyon and larval transportation in the areas along the Apulia peninsula, reaching also Santa Maria di Leuca.

Vulnerable Marine Ecosystem/indicator taxonomic groups. The following habitats support VME:  Cold-water coral reefs  Deep-sea sponge aggregations o Hard-bottom sponge gardens

21 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

 Other dense emergent fauna

Among the Mediterranean those are the relevant VME Indicator Taxa for the Bari Canyon:  Anthozoa: Hexacorallia (Scleractinia)  Porifera: Demospongiae and Hexactinellidae

Bari Canyon host a high biodiversity level: M. oculata is the most abundant cnidarian between 200 and 700 m; but other species also occur. In particular, the sponge Pachastrella monilifera mixed with living colonies of the scleractinian M. oculata and the annelid Serpula vermicularis characterize the megabenthic assemblage. Colonies of Lophelia pertusa are widespread in the Bari Canyon and in particular reach the shallowest record in the Mediterranean Sea at ca. -200 m (personal observation).

Presence of Essential Fish Habitat.  A total of 21 fish species (8 cartilaginous fish and 13 teleost fish) is recorded to date from the Bari Canyon (D’Onghia et al., 2015a, 2015b). More than 70% of these species are of interest to fishery, although of variable commercial value.  Merluccius merluccius, considered threatened in the IUCN Mediterranean Red List, could emphasize the role of this canyon as a partial refuge from fishing activity.  The abundances of Galeus melastomus, Conger conger, Helicolenus dactylopterus, Phycis blennoides and Pagellus bogaraveo compared with that of Merluccius merluccius (the most abundant demersal species in the Mediterranean), might be related to the distribution of adult specimens of these species in structurally complex and heterogeneous habitat of the canyon.  The presence of reproductive individuals of species such as Helicolenus dactylopterus and Pagellus bogaraveo indicates that this canyon acts as a spawning area for these commercial species, thus representing an “Essential Fish Habitat” for the renewal of their populations (D’Onghia et al., 2016) and suggest that these CWC sites also act as spawning areas representing a potential ‘renewal network’ for the fish populations.  Considering the high level of similarity in the fish assemblages between the CWC communities along the Apulian continental margin, the presence of a potential ‘refuge network’ of CWC communities between south-western Adriatic and northern Ionian Sea has been recently suggested (D’Onghia et al., 2016).  Two persistent nursery areas for hake have been observed near Bari Canyon, from 200 to 500 m, and offshore from the Gargano Promontory near Gondola Slide between 100 and 200 m (Carlucci et al. 2009; Druon et al. 2015), as recently confirmed by the investigation carried out in the framework of EU projects (MEDISEH, Giannoulaki et al., 2013).

4.2. PRESENCE OF HABITATS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO ENDANGERED, THREATENED OR ENDEMIC SPECIES Indicate the habitat types and the species linked to them and provide information about their status (IUCN classification, etc.).

CWC habitat Sponge field.

22 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Sponge field are characterized mainly by the two big fan-shaped sponge Poecillastra compressa and Pachastrella monilifera and are identified at depth > 700 m. Submarine Canyon

Madrepora oculata Endangered (IUCN; Annex II of Barcelona Convention) Lophelia pertusa Endangered (IUCN; Annex II of Barcelona Convention) Desmophyllum dianthus Endangered (IUCN; COP 2017, Annex 2) Dendrophyllia cornigera Endangered (IUCN; COP 2017, Annex 2) Leiopathes glaberrima Endangered (IUCN; Annex II of Barcelona Convention)

Centrophorus granulosus Critically Endangered (IUCN) Chimaera monstrosa Near Threatened (IUCN) Dalatias licha Vulnerable (IUCN) Hexanchus griseus Vulnerable (IUCN) Merluccius merluccius Vulnerable (IUCN; GFCM species priority) Polyprion americanus Data deficient (IUCN) Phycis phycis Least Concern (IUCN) Helicolenus dactylopterus Least Concern (IUCN) Pagellus bogaraveo Least Concern (IUCN; GFCM species priority)

Stenella coeruleoalba Vulnerable (IUCN; Annex II of Barcelona Convention) Tursiops truncatus Vulnerable (IUCN; Annex II of Barcelona Convention)

Endemic species: Eurypon topsenti (Porifera: Demospongiae) Biemna parthenopea (Porifera: Demospongiae) Biemna tenuisigma (Porifera: Demospongiae) Hexadella pruvoti (Porifera: Demospongiae) Vermiliopsis monodiscus (Annelida: Polychaeta) Hyalopomatus madreporae (Annelida: Polychaeta)

Habitat ME1.5 Mediterranean upper bathyal rock ME1.51 Upper bathyal rock ME1.521 Madrepora oculata reefs ME1.513 Madrepora oculata and Lophelia pertusa reefs Bathyal rocks with Scleractinia and Alcyonacea with Madrepora oculata and/or Lophelia pertusa and Corallium rubrum Bathyal rocks with Scleractinia and Tetractinellida Bathyal rocks with Madrepora oculata and/or Lophelia pertusa and/or Desmophyllum dianthus with Pachastrella monilifera and/or Poecillastra compressa

ME2.1 Mediterranean upper bathyal biogenic habitat ME1.51 Upper bathyal rock ME1.521 Madrepora oculata reefs ME1.513 Madrepora oculata and Lophelia pertusa reefs Bathyal rocks with Scleractinia and Alcyonacea with Madrepora oculata and/or Lophelia pertusa and Corallium rubrum Bathyal rocks with Scleractinia and Tetractinellida Bathyal rocks with Madrepora oculata and/or Lophelia pertusa and/or Desmophyllum dianthus with Pachastrella monilifera and/or Poecillastra compressa

23 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

ME2.1 Mediterranean upper bathyal biogenic habitat Bathyal Anthozoa bioconstructions Madrepora oculata/Lophelia pertusa/Desmophyllum dianthus reefs Madrepora oculata and Serpula vermicularis reefs

MF1.5 Mediterranean lower bathyal rock MF1.51 Lower bathyal rock MF1.512 Madrepora oculata reefs MF1.513 Madrepora oculata and Lophelia pertusa reefs

4.3. OTHER RELEVANT FEATURES

4.3.1. Educational interest E.g. particular value of the site for environmental education or awareness activities.

Cold-water corals are attracting a growing public awareness because of their scientific and spiritual value. Such public appreciation has been conveyed over the years to the public by means of popular scientific literature, TV documentaries, radio interviews, expositions, conferences, dedicated websites, etc. In order to manage at best the Bari Canyon ecosystem it is advisable to ensure the involvement of local communities, including fishermen, as well any other potential stakeholders.

4.3.2. Scientific interest Particular value of the site for research.

The scientific interest of the Bari Canyon is related to biological, geomorphological, oceanographic and sedimentological aspects as well as to biodiversity. This canyon acts as a bypass area for sediments and provides a direct pathway for sediment transport and dense water cascading from the continental shelf to the deep Adriatic basin. The effect on local circulation enhance the abundance and the diversity of marine organisms, through the transport of sediment and phytodetritus and the presence of complex physical habitats. Recently, eighty-five living benthic and bentho-pelagic species have been recorded: 29 Porifera, 1 Cnidaria, 2 Mollusca, 11 Annelida, 1 Arthropoda, 19 Bryozoa, 3 Echinodermata, and 19 Chordata. Fifty-one species are new records for the Bari Canyon, and 29 species are new records for the Adriatic Sea (Angeletti et al., 2014; D’Onghia et al., 2014, 2015a, b). Among the Porifera Cerbaris curvispiculifer is a new addition for the Italian sponge fauna. The first confirmed record of living specimens of the bryozoan Crisiatenella longinodata has been reported in the Bari Canyon. A total of six Mediterranean endemic species have been identified, four Porifera and two Annelida (D’Onghia et al., 2015a). In terms of fish fauna, the Bari Canyon shows similar features with other CWC communities along the Apulian continental margin (D’Onghia et al., 2015b, 2016) CWC- habitats are used for shelter, feeding, spawning and nursery sites for a variety of invertebrate and fish species. Several species obtain multiple benefits from their association with these types of habitat, even though they are still scarcely investigated. A high scientific interest is related to the

24 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA bio-ecological and physical factors influencing the distribution of the species and the functioning of the ecosystem canyon-related. Furthermore, in relation to the occurrence of many commercial fish species, a scientific interest regards the role of this canyon as a “refuge” area from fishing and a “renewal” area for the exploited populations.

5. IMPACTS AND ACTIVITIES AFFECTING THE AREA

5.1. IMPACTS AND ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE SITE

5.1.1. Exploitation of natural resources Assess if current exploitation rates of natural resources within the site (e.g. fishing, sand and mineral exploitation) are deemed unsustainable in quality or quantity, and possibly quantify these threats (e.g. percentage of the site area under threat, or any known increase in extraction rates).

Impact of fishing, in the Bari Canyon, is almost exclusively due to longline and occasional trawling activity. Removal of the colonies, breaking up of the branches and entangled gears on the colonies are the main impacts.

However, two assessments were carried out for pelagic stocks in the entire Adriatic Sea (GSA17 and 18) regarding Sardine and Anchovy (STECF, 2015, 2017). Both species resulted overfished in the GSA17 and GSA18. As indicated in the paragraph 3.3 there are other species that are possibly overfished in the Bari Canyon area (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2014) such as the European hake (Merluccius merluccius) that is one of the most abundant demersal fishes caught by fishermen, plus other important demersal species such the Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), the mantis shrimp (Squilla mantis) or the deep water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris). An assessment of the fishing of cephalopod species such as the cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis), the horned octopus (Eledone cirrhosa) and the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) have not been conducted.

5.1.2. Threats to habitats and species Indicate any serious threat to habitats (e.g. modification, disturbance, pollution) or to species (e.g. disturbance, poaching, introduction of alien species, etc.) in the area.

The main threats are represented by the fishing activities, mostly longlining and occasional trawling carried out by Molfetta, Bari, Mola di Bari and Monopoli fisheries. The fishing operations are occasional in the canyon and the number of vessels operating is variable according to the season. Fishermen sometime deploy longlines to catch large individuals of valuable species but often they lost or damage their fishing gears. Other threats are due to dumping of waste and litter, in particular discarded/lost fishing gears and plastic debris. No projects for prospections have been planned or are active or seem to be plan in the near future.

25 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

5.2. IMPACTS AND ACTIVITIES AROUND THE SITE

5.2.1. Pollution Sources and description of pollution.

Pollution derives mainly by oil spilling from ships and waste and discarded ordinance and munitions including chemicals weaponary (from World War to Jugoslavian-Kosovo wars) dumping (e.g., Amato et al., 2007; Liubartseva et al., 2015). Pollutants can conveyed down basin by currents; hydrodynamic processes of canyons enhance the down-canyon transport of litter and persistent organic pollutants eventually discharged in coastal waters.

5.2.2. Other external, natural and/or anthropogenic threats Briefly describe any other external threat to the ecological, biological, aesthetic or cultural values of the area (such as unregulated exploitation of natural resources, serious threats to habitats or species, pollution issues, etc.) that are likely to affect the area.

Pollution problems can derive from oil spilling (e.g., Ferraro et al., 2007; Liubartseva et al., 2015), dumping (Amato et al., 2006; Alcaro et al., 2012), littering as well as from mining and cable or pipeline positioning. The warming of the Mediterranean and the consequent acidification of the waters can represent another problem in the near future (e.g., Luterbacher et al., 2006; McCulloch et al., 2012a,b).

5.2.3. Sustainable development measures Indicate if the area is covered by a management plan or is bordering with another zone subject to a management plan. No management plan exists for the Bari Canyon. EU management plan exists for fishery resources in the area as part of the Mediterranean fishery regulation. The Bari Canyon is out of the national territorial waters of 12 nautical miles. Italian fishing regulation follows the COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006. Despite national and international management measures, the most recent scientific advice indicates that anchovy and sardine in the Adriatic Sea are still being overexploited and the stocks are likely to decline further. The situation is getting worse as we are moving further away from sustainable fishing levels (COM, 2017). Multiannual management plans have been proposed, considering anchovy and sardine, based on several statistical models of exploitation (STECF, 2017, 2018), consisting on a strong reduction of the resource harvesting.

26 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

1 6. EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT AND TRENDS These aspects are not always easy to assess. Therefore, filling out this section is not compulsory.

6.1. EXPECTED DEVELOPMENT AND TRENDS RELATED TO THE THREATS TO AND PRESSURES UPON THE AREA Briefly describe the development of economic and other activities in the area.

Economic activities in Italian seas are growing especially considering oil and gas production in offshore areas, aquaculture, and coastal tourism and onshore and offshore mining (SOER, 2015). Oil and gas exploitation in the Adriatic Sea will dramatically growing in the next few years with 11 new exploration areas in the GSA17 and GSA18 (EEA, 2015). Trends in maritime traffic show increase traffic in the Adriatic Sea. A significant increase in the GSA18, moreover, should be for touristic traffic from Apulia to Albania and Greece and an increase in the volume of transport of oil and gas should be expected. Fishing activity should decrease in the next future, fishing grounds are mainly exploited by italian artisanal fishermen, that impact mainly shelf areas in the national waters (12 nautical miles) (WWF, 2016).

7. MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION REGIME

7.1. LEGAL STATUS If applicable.

7.1.1. Historical background related to management in the area

Italian fishing regulation follows the COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006, the EU Regulation 1224 of 2009 concerning the control of fishing activity, landing, and first sale of the product, EU Regulation 1380 of 2013 and those that have been developed and applied in the GSA 18 zone. In particular, fisheries in the GSA18 zone follow this laws and regulations of the Italian Government: a) L 963/1965 - Maritime fisheries discipline. b) D.P.R. 2 October 1968, n. 1639 - Executive Regulation of the L. 963/1965. c) L 41/1982 - Plan for rationalization and develop of maritime fishery (repealed). d) Legislative Decree n. 153 of 26 May 2004 - Application of L. 38/2003 on maritime fisheries. e) Legislative Decree. n. 154 of 26 May 2004 - Fisheries and aquaculture modernization, as per article 1, paragraph 2 of Act No. 38 of 7 March 2003. f) Decree of July 28 2016 (GU n. 209 of 7 September 2016) against IUU fishery

Fishery is subjected to main legislations:

1 Expected development and trends mean the development which is most likely to occur in the absence of any deliberate intervention to protect and manage the site. 27 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

 Decreto ministeriale 16 marzo 2015 recante " Pesca dei piccoli pelagici nel Mar Adriatico (GSA 17 e GSA 18) ".  Decree of August 5 2013 (GU n. 193 of 19 August 2013) on the replacement of engines in fishing vessels  Decree of September 27 2012 (GU n. 254 of 30 October 2012) on interventions to be undertaken to promote the development of the fisheries sector.  Ministerial Decree on small scale fishing 1999.  Legislative Decree No. 226 of 18 May 2001 laying down guidelines and modernizing the fishery and aquaculture sector, in accordance with article 7 of Act No. 57 of 2001.  Decree of January 22 2009 (GU February 14 2011) on the establishment of ZTB (Zone di Tutela Biologica; i.e. areas where the fishery is specifically regulated and restricted)

7.1.2. Regulatory measures currently governing management on the site Indicate if the area, or part of it, has been designated under an international conservation category and, if the case, when.

All the management measures follow the COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006 and laws and rules issued by Italian Government. Italian Government applied also GFCM Resolutions:  Recommendation GFCM/37/2013/1 on a multiannual management plan for fisheries on small pelagic stocks in the GFCM-GSA 17 (Northern Adriatic Sea) and on transitional conservation measures for fisheries on small pelagic stocks in GSA 18.  GFCM Resolution 40/2016/5 establishing a minimum conservation reference size for European hake in the Mediterranean Sea.  GFCM40/2016/3 on sustainable small-scale fisheries in the GFCM area of application  GFCM Resolution 33/2009/1 on the management of demersal fisheries in the GFCM area.

7.1.3. Objectives Indicate the objectives of the area (by order of importance) as stated in its legal declaration.

N/A

7.2. LEGAL BACKGROUND Indicate if the area, or part of it, is subject to any legal claim, or to any pending legal case in this connection within the framework of an international body.

None

7.3. LEGAL PROVISIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

7.3.1. Zoning in the area

28 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Briefly indicate if the legal texts protecting the area provide for different zones to allocate different management objectives in the area (e.g. core and scientific zones, fishing zones, etc.) and, if applicable, indicate the surface area of such zones. Provide a map in annex.

N/A

7.3.2. Legal competence Legal competence and responsibility with regard to administration and implementation measures.

The proposed FRAs include fisheries for GFCM priority stocks (European hake, Norway lobster) and others species such as pelagic ones (Engrualis encrasicolus and Sardine pilchardus, M. merluccius and M. barbatus). It also include vulnerable species such as cartilaginous fishes and other megabenthic organisms like cold water corals.

7.3.3. Other legal provisions Describe any other relevant legal provisions, such as those requiring a management plan or any other significant measure concerning the protection and management of the area.

The GFCM Agreement on the establishment of fisheries restricted areas for the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems (Article 8).

GFCM Resolution 40/2016/2 for a mid-term strategy (2017–2020) towards the sustainability of Mediterranean and Black Sea fisheries, particularly Target 4, Output 4.2 a) on “The promotion of the identification and establishment of new FRAs to protect priority areas within ecologically or biologically significant marine areas (EBSAs), VMEs, etc. from harmful fishing activities, and the implementation of monitoring and control systems to ensure the efficiency of these spatial measures, also in relation to Target 3.

The resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly (59/25, 61/105 and 64/72) and of the FAO International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-sea Fisheries in the High Seas (2008) with the protection of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs).

Resolution GFCM/41/2017/4 on a permanent working group on vulnerable marine ecosystems

Resolution GFCM/41/2015/5 on a network of essential fish habitats

8. OBJECTIVES OF THE FRA AND PROPOSED MANAGEMENT MEASURES

8.1. OBJECTIVES OF THE FRA Indicate the rationale that justifies the designation of a FRA.

The goals of the FRA are to contribute to the sustainability of fisheries by protecting the deep sea VME of the Southern Adriatic and the recover overexploited fish stocks and EFHs.

29 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

8.2. PROPOSED PROTECTION MEASURES FOR THE FRA

8.2.1. Management measures Suggest management measures to be implemented in the FRA.

Core area of the FRA:  Permanent closure of the area to any professional or recreational fishing activity.

Buffer area of the FRA:  Fishing activities with set longlines and traps may be allowed provided that the vessel and/or its master is in possession of a specific authorization and that historical fishing activities in the buffer zone is demonstrated.  Permanent closure to towed nets and bottom set nets and any recreational fishing activity.  Exploratory fishing for towed nets and bottom set nets could be entitled to fish for a specific period of time previous demonstration of no adverse impact on VMEs and EFH. For this, a technical dossier specifying the technical characteristics of the vessels, gear used and proposal for the technical parameters of the campaign (length, gear,..) should be provided to the competent authorities. This technical dossier will be used to evaluate the impact on VMEs and EFH before approval of the exploratory fishing by competent authorities. Observers on board should be considered to identify the footprint of the fishery.

8.2.2. Monitoring, control and surveillance measures Suggest measures to effectively enforce the FRA.

Monitoring measures have been started in accordance with the European and Italian standards under the umbrella of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) measures in the proposed FRA could include:  Access regime: closed list of authorized vessels, which must also meet a number of requirements, namely, be equipped with a vessel monitoring systems (VMS) and/or automated identification systems (AIS) in correct working order, and registration obligations including those for the fishing gear on board.  Control regime: designation of landing points, obligations of notice of arrival in port and control of landings. To this end, the relevant fisheries authority shall designate landing points in which landings from captures in the FRA is authorized. The control of landings should cover a minimum of 20% of the landings.  Monitoring regime: In line with Recommendation MCS-GFCM/33/2009/7 and EU Regulation 1224/2009 for fishing vessels operating or transiting in a FRA, the VMS should give positions in the FRA every 30 minutes, communicate the entry into the FRA area with the declaration of catches on the ship's hold before the entry.  Reporting of fishing catches, VME indicator taxa capture and Vulnerable species as bycatch: - Logbook filled in for each haul - The total catch for any commercial species obtained partially or totally in the FRA core and / or buffer should be reported;

30 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

- Catches of VME indicator taxa must be photographed in order to be identifiable, in addition to indicating their estimated amount in kg that should be consistently recorded in the logbook. - Catches of vulnerable species as bycatch should be reported following the GFCM Protocols for self-reporting. This information should be sent to Fisheries Management Authority and be available for port inspectors and observers on board.

The GFCM Compliance Committee shall regularly review and assess the level of enforcement and compliance in the FRA and provide relevant recommendations. GFCM WGVME could revise the management measures apply in the area and provide advice on the technical measures to decrease any adverse impact on VME and EFH as well as the impact assessment prior exploratory fishing.

8.2.3. Socio-economic impact(s) of the FRA Indicate the potential socio-economic impact(s) of the proposed measures.

Considering that among the 44 (UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA, 2014) local long-liners often fish in the canyon with the aim of catching large specimens of valuable species, a certain socio-economic impact over the short-term will derive from the spatial closure establishment of the FRA. More comprehensive information for the evaluation of socio-economic impacts of the FRA and adequate programme to mitigate these impacts should be part of the FRA implementation of measures. Discussions with stakeholders, including local fishermen, would be important to implement any proposed measures.

8.2.4. Economic assessment of ecosystems services Not only marketable services.

No data.

9. OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION

References cited:  AA. VV., 2017. MEDITS-Handbook. Version n. 9, 2017, MEDITS Working Group : 106 pp. http://www.sibm.it/MEDITS%202011/principale%20project.htm  Alcaro L., et al., (2012). Studies on environmental effects of underwater chemical munitions in the Southern Adriatic Sea (Mediterranean Sea). Marine Technology Society Journal 46(3), 10-20.  Amato E., et al. (2006) An integrated ecotoxicological approach to assess the effects of pollutants released by unexploded chemical ordnance dumped in the southern Adriatic (Mediterranean Sea). Marine Biology 149(1), 17-23.  Angeletti L., et al. (2014) New deep-water cnidarian sites in the southern Adriatic Sea. Mediterranean Marine Science 15(2), 263-273.  Bertrand J.A., Gil de Sola L., Papaconstantinou C et al. 2002. The general specifications of the MEDITS surveys. Sci. Mar. 66: 9-17.  Bo M., et al. (2012). Role of deep sponge grounds in the Mediterranean Sea: a case study in southern Italy. Hydrobiologia

31 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

687(1), 163-177.  Carlucci R., et al., (2009). Nursery areas of red mullet (Mullus barbatus), hake (Merluccius merluccius) and deep-water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris) in Eastern-Central Mediterranean Sea. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 83, 529-538.  D’Onghia G., et al., (2016). New records of cold-water coral sites and fish fauna characterization of a potential network existing in the Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology 37, 1398-1422.  D’Onghia G., et al. (2015a). Exploring composition and behaviour of fish fauna by in situ observations in the Bari Canyon (Southern Adriatic Sea, Central Mediterranean). Marine Ecology 36, 541-556.  D’Onghia G., et al. (2015b). Macro- and megafauna recorded in the submarine Bari Canyon (southern Adriaitc Sea, Mediterranean Sea) using different tools. Mediterranean Marine Science 16(1), 180-196.  Druon J., et al., (2015). Modelling of European hake nurseries in the Mediterranean Sea: An ecological niche approach. Progress in Oceanography 130, 188-204.  FAO (2016). The State of Mediterranean and Black Sea Fisheries 2016.  Ferraro et al., (2007). Towards an operational use of space imagery for oil pollution monitoring in the Mediterranean basin: a demonstration in the Adriatic Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54, 403-422.  Foglini et al. (2015) The reshaping of the South West Adriatic Margin by cascading of dense shelf waters. Marine Geology 375, 64-81.  Freiwald et al. (2009). The white coral community in the central Mediterranean Sea revealed by ROV surveys. Oceanography 22(1), 58-74.  GFCM (2016). REC.CM-GFCM/40/2016/3. Establishing further emergency measures in 2017 and 2018 for small pelagic stocks in the Adriatic Sea (GSA17 and GSA18).  Lembo G., Donnaloia L., (2007). Osservatorio Regionale Pesca e Acquacoltura. Puglia 2007. COISPA, Bari, pp. 89.  Lembo G., Donnaloia L., (2008). Osservatorio Regionale della Pesca. Puglia 2008. COISPA, Bari, 78 pp.  Lembo G. 2016a (coord.) - Programma nazionale Italiano per la raccolta di dati alieutici 2015. Campionamento biologico delle catture. Sezioni C ed E. Risorse demersali. Rapporto finale GSA18-Adriatico Meridionale, COISPA Tecnologia e Ricerca, Italia: 110 pp.  Lembo G. 2016b (coord.) - Programma nazionale Italiano per la raccolta di dati alieutici 2016 Campagne di ricerca in mare Sezione G. Relazione finale GSA18. COISPA, Italia: 55 pp.  Liubartseva S., et al. (2015). Oil spill hazard from dispersal of oil along shipping lanes in the Southern Adriatic and Northern Ionian Seas. Marine Pollution Bulletin 90(1-2) 259-272.  Luterbachert J., et al., (2006). Mediterranean climate variability over the last centuries: a review. Developments in Earth and environmental Sciences 4, 27-148.  Natale F, Gibin M, Alessandrini A, Vespe M, Paulrud A. 2015. Mapping Fishing Effort through AIS Data. PLoS ONE 10(6): e0130746. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0130746.  McCulloch M., (2012a). Coral resilience to ocean acidification and global warming through pH up-regulation. Nature Climate Change 2(8), 623.  McCulloch M., (2012b). Resilience of cold-water scleractinian corals to ocean acidification: Boron isotopic systematics pH and saturation state up-regulation. Geochimica and Cosmochimica Acta 87, 21-34.  Panetta et al. (2013). Tanatocenosi Wurmiana nel Canyon di Bari (Mar Adriatico). Biologia Marina Mediterranea 20(1), 148-149.  Relini G., et al., (2000). I Selaci pescati con lo strascico nei mari italiani. Biologia Marina Mediterranea 7(1), 257-265.  Relini G., et al., (2010), Chondrichthyes caught during the Medits surveys in Italian waters. Biologia Mararina Mediterranea 17(1), 186-204.  Ridente t al. (2007). Shelf-edge erosion, sediment failure and inception of Bari Canyon on the Southwestern Adriatic Margin (Central Mediterranean). Marine Geology 246(2-4), 193-207.  Russo T., et al., (2016). Modeling landings profiles of fishing vessels: an application of self-organizing maps to VMS and logbook data. Fisheries Research 181, 34–47.  SAC (2017). FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No.1209  SAC (2017). Report of the second meeting of the Subregional Committee for the Central Mediterranean (SRC-CM).  Sanfilippo et al. (2013). Serpula aggregates and their role in deep-sea coral communities in the southern Adriatic Sea. Facies 59(4), 663-677.  Spedicato M.T., I. Bitetto, M.T. Facchini, P. Accadia, P. carpi, A. Ligas, C. Musumeci, D. Pinello, P. Sartor, G. Scarcella, G. Lembo, F. Maynou, M.Garcia Rodriguez, B. Guerin, G. Daskalov, M. Panayotova. 2016. Study on the evaluation of specific 32 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

management scenarios for the preparation of multiannual management plans in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. European Union, ISBN 978-92-9202-200-6. doi: 10.2826/85917  Spedicato M.T., W. Zupa, P. Carbonara, L. Casciaro, I. Bitetto, M.T. Facchini, P. Gaudio M. Palmisano e Lembo G. 2017. Lo stato delle risorse biologiche e della pesca nel Basso Adriatico e nello Ionio nord occidentale. Atti del Convegno il Mare Adriatico e le sue risorse (a cura di M. Marini, G. Bombace, G. Iacobone). Carlo Saladino Editore: 177-208 p.  STECF (2017). Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) –Evaluation of alternative scenarios for Adriatic small pelagic MAP (STECF-18-02). Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.  STECF (2017). Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) –Mediterranean Stock Assessments 2017 part I (STECF-17-15). Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.  STECF 2015. Landing Obligation - Part 6 (Fisheries targeting demersal species in the Mediterranean Sea) (STECF-15-19). Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, EUR 27600 EN, JRC 98678, 268 pp.  STECF (2015). Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF)–Small pelagic stocks in the Adriatic Sea. Mediterranean assessments part 1 (STECF-15-14). 2015. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.  Taviani et al. (2016). Reprint of ‘On and off the beaten track: Megafaunal sessile life and Adriatic cascading processes’. Marine Geology 375, 146-160.  Trincardi et al. (2007). The impact of cascading currents on the Bari Canyon System, SW-Adriatic margin (Central Mediterranean). Marine Geology 246(2-4), 208-230.  Turchetto et al. (2007). Particle transport in the Bari canyon (southern Adriatic Sea). Marine Geology 246(2-4), 231-247.  UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA (2014). Status and Conservation of Fisheries in the Adriatic Sea. By H. Farrugio & Alen Soldo. Draftinternal report for the purposes of the Mediterranean Regional Workshop to Facilitate the Description of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas, Malaga, Spain, 7-11 April 2014.  WWF Italia (2015). Progetto MEDTRENDS: Tendenze della Blue Growth e dei potenziali impatti ambientali e conflitti nei mari italiani. Rapporto Finale.  http://data.adriplan.eu/maps/ [checked 6 Feb 2018].  http://nationallegislation.gfcmsecretariat.org/ [checked 6 Feb 2018].

10. RELEVANT CONTACTS Stakeholders (if applicable), name(s), position(s) and contact address(es) of the person(s) who compiled the form and/or can provide further information.

Lorenzo Angeletti [email protected] ISMAR-CNR, Bologna + 39 051 639 8936

Marco Taviani [email protected] ISMAR-CNR, Bologna + 39 051 639 8874

Gianfranco D’Onghia [email protected] Department of Biology, University of Bari + 39 080 544 2228

Maria del Mar Otero IUCN-Centre for Mediterranean Cooperation [email protected] +34 952 02 84 30 ext 200

33 PROPOSAL FOR A GFCM FISHERIES RESTRICTED AREA (FRA) IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AND THE BLACK SEA

Maria Teresa Spedicato and Walter Zupa COISPA tecnologia& Ricerca [email protected] Via dei trulli 18-20, Bari +390805433596

34