Fishing’s phantom menace How ghost fishing gear is endangering our sea life #seachange Contents Executive summary 4 4. Country-specific case studies 31 (Australia, UK, US and Canada) 1. Ghost fishing gear: the background 7 4.1 Australia 32 4.1.1 Introduction 32 1.1 Ghost fishing gear: the background 8 4.1.2 Species commonly found in 33 1.1.1 The problem of plastics 9 ghost gear in Australian waters 1.1.2 What are the causes of ghost fishing 10 4.1.3 Types of ghost gear frequently 35 gear and where does it end up? causing entanglement and the 1.1.3 What problems can ghost fishing 11 worst affected areas gear cause? 4.1.4 Economic implications of 36 ghost gear 4.1.5 Regional contribution to ghost 38 2. How much ghost fishing gear 13 net occurrence – Indonesia is out there? A global snapshot 4.2 United Kingdom 39 2.1 North-east Atlantic 14 4.2.1 Introduction 39 4.2.2 Species at risk from ghost gear 39 2.2 North-east Pacific 14 in UK waters 4.2.3 Volumes of ghost gear in 41 2.3 North-west Atlantic 15 UK waters 4.2.4 What are the key drivers for the 42 2.4 Arabian Sea 15 ghost gear problem within the UK? 4.2.5 What are the economic implications 42 2.5 South-east Asia and north-west Pacific 15 of ghost gear for the government/ industry? 2.6 Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico 15 4.3 United States and Canada 44 4.3.1 Introduction 44 3. Which animals are affected by 17 4.3.2 Species at risk from ghost gear 44 ghost fishing gear? in US and Canadian waters 4.3.3 What types of ghost gear cause 47 3.1 What are the impacts of ghost 19 the most entanglements? fishing gear on the health and 4.3.4 Entanglement ‘hotspots’ 48 welfare of animals? 4.3.5 Economic implications of ghost 49 3.1.1 Acute or chronic suffering? 20 gear for the government and 3.1.2 Seals, fur seals and sea lions 20 industry (pinnipeds) 3.1.3 Whales, dolphins and porpoises 24 (cetaceans) 5. Conclusions: the need 51 3.1.4 Turtles 26 for global action – towards 3.1.5 Birds 26 ghost-gear-free seas 3.2 How many animals are likely to be 28 affected by ghost fishing gear? References 54 Cover image: Female grey seal entangled in a ghost net, Devon, United Kingdom Alex Mustard/naturepl.com Executive summary Ocean death trap What lies beneath Our oceans are an unsafe place to live. Every year millions Ghost fishing gear often travels long distances from its point of animals, including whales, seals, turtles and birds, are of origin and accumulates in hotspots around oceanic An estimated... mutilated and killed by ‘ghost’ fishing gear – nets, lines and currents. Even remote Antarctic habitats are not free from traps that are abandoned, lost or discarded in our oceans. this pollution – every ocean and sea on earth is affected. A recent scientific expedition to southern Alaska’s beaches 640,000 25,000 This report shows the scale of this problem, and the found up to a tonne of garbage per mile, much of it plastic particular threat ghost gear poses to our most iconic fishing nets and lines washed in by the tides. tonnes of fishing gear nets in the north-east marine animals. Among the animals most frequently reported wounded and killed are fur seals, sea lions, The materials used to make fishing gear cause long-lasting are left in our oceans Atlantic were recorded lost and humpback and right whales. dangers. The plastics used are very durable, some persisting in the oceans for up to 600 years. Some are almost invisible each year. or discarded annually. Critically, we conclude that it is possible to solve in the water, and they are extremely strong and resistant to the problem through cross-sectoral cooperation and biting and chewing by entangled animals so they action between the seafood industry, governments, cannot escape. intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations worldwide. The net effect (USD) As well as causing needless animal suffering and death, 1 $20,000 The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) ghost fishing gear causes large-scale damage to marine and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United ecosystems and compromises yields and income in ghost net can kill... worth of Dungeness crab Nations (FAO) conservatively estimate that some 640,000 fisheries. US researchers have estimated, for example, that tonnes of fishing gear are left in our oceans each year. In a single ghost net can kill almost $20,000 (USD) worth of over 10 years. just one deep water fishery in the north-east Atlantic some Dungeness crab over 10 years. 25,000 nets, totalling around 1,250km in length, were recorded lost or discarded annually. Each net is a floating Governments and marine industries spend many millions of death trap. For example, when 870 ghost nets were dollars annually to clean up and repair damage caused recovered off Washington State in the US, they contained by ghost gear. It also threatens human life and health, more than 32,000 marine animals, including more than 500 particularly divers and those trying to navigate the oceans 870 32,000 birds and mammals. in both small and large vessels. nets recovered in the marine animals. Animals entangled may either drown within minutes, or US contained more than... endure long, slow deaths lasting months or even years, suffering from debilitating wounds, infection and starvation. Analysing the current scientific evidence available, World Animal Protection estimates that entanglement in ghost gear kills at least 136,000 seals, sea lions and large whales every year. An inestimable number of birds, turtles, fish and other species are also injured and killed. 4 5 Sea change in the oceans: campaign to save The initiative will share data, intelligence and resources to a million lives understand global ghost gear abundance, causes, impacts Launching in 2014, World Animal Protection’s Sea Change and trends. Critically, it will enable the expansion and campaign aims to save1 million marine animals by 2018. replication of the most effective solutions to reduce ghost We will do this by measurably reducing the volume of ghost gear at source and remove existing gear, as well as the gear added to our seas, removing gear that is already development of new solutions. The initiative will direct and there, and rescuing animals already entangled. drive solution delivery in ghost gear hotspots, and create opportunities for provision of seed funding of solution At the heart of our campaign approach is our plan to projects using best practice models. It will also enable form a cross-sectoral Global Ghost Gear Initiative, uniting global monitoring and showcasing of the impact of solution people and organisations with the knowledge, power and projects to catalyse further change. influence to deliver solutions for ghost-gear-free seas. With the Global Ghost Gear Initiative, we aim to forge an alliance of governments, industry, intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, with a shared commitment to understanding and tackling the problem of ghost fishing gear. Our aim: to save 1 million marine animals by 2018 1. Ghost fishing gear: the background Image: Workers repair nets aboard their fishing vessel, American Samoa Wolcott Henry / Marine Photobank 6 1.1 Ghost fishing gear: The scale and impact of ghost gear has increased significantly in recent decades the background and is likely to grow further as oceans accumulate greater volumes of it. When Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl crossed the debris – nets, line, rope, traps, pots, floats and packing 1.1.1 The problem of plastics “Long Life – the line has a very long life, it does not rot, and Atlantic Ocean in 1970, he encountered a huge amount bands – causes particular animal welfare concerns Over the last 50 years, as technology has advanced is not readily damaged by ultraviolet rays in sunlight, as is of debris, litter and waste. What he saw left him gravely due to its proven capacity to entangle and trap and human demand has risen, there has been a dramatic monofilament, it does not swell in water, nor does it lose concerned, prompting his report to the 1972 United marine animals. increase in fishing effort in the world’s oceans. During this strength when wet.” Nations Conference on the Human Environment in time non-biodegradable fishing gear – primarily made Stockholm. Since that time, a huge swell of reports, There are no robust statistics regarding quantities of fishing from plastics – has also been introduced (Macfadyen et And the US-based Nylon Net Company claims their government actions and specific studies have shown gear abandoned, lost or discarded annually. However, it is al. 2009). The mass production of plastics soared after monofilament nets offer a number of advantages including the marine environment is accumulating an increasing conservatively estimated that 640,000 tonnes of fishing gear the Second World War and items from that period are still being “almost invisible in any water”. Prospective buyers are volume of human-originated debris. – around 10 per cent of total marine debris – is added to being retrieved from the oceans today. also cautioned that “monofilament is so effective it has been the oceans annually (Macfadyen et al., 2009). outlawed in some states!”. Estimates vary, but some indicate that up to 300,000 Many of the plastics used to make fishing gear are very items of debris can be found per square kilometre of ocean Two studies reporting on material collected from US and UK durable; some are expected to last in our seas for up to Plastic fishing gear and other debris in the oceans slowly surface (National Research Council, 2008).