Scientists Offer New Take on Selective Fishing

A new, less selective approach to commercial fishing is needed to ensure the ongoing productivity of marine ecosystems and to maintain biodiversity, according to a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The paper, 'Ecosystem-based fisheries management requires a change to the selective fishing philosophy', was written by a team of authors led by Shijie Zhou of the CSIRO Wealth from Oceans Flagship.

Dr Zhou says ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) is broadly practiced as a means of reducing the impact of fishing on marine ecosystems while ensuring sustainable fisheries.

He says fishing methods under EBFM vary greatly in how selectively they catch fish. The common view is that highly selective methods that catch only one or a few species above a certain size limit are more environmentally responsible.

But recent advances in fishery science and ecology suggest a selective approach may exacerbate rather than reduce the impact of fishing on both fisheries and marine ecosystems.

"Selective fishing alters biodiversity, which in turn changes ecosystem functioning and may affect fisheries production, hindering rather than helping to achieve the goals of EBFM," Dr Zhou says. "These effects have been overshadowed to some extent by a focus on overharvesting."

"We believe it is time to critically rethink traditional selective fishing approaches that might not protect ecosystems and fisheries as intended, but may in fact make them more vulnerable to large changes in structure and function."

Dr Zhou and his co-authors propose a "balanced exploitation" approach combining reduced fishing effort, less selective fishing strategies, and better use of the catch to help achieve sustainable overall yields while maintaining healthy ecosystems.

"The trade-off is lower exploitation levels on currently highly targeted species against better use of more parts of the ecosystem," Dr Zhou says.

"Fisheries production could actually increase through better use of non-target species, while reducing unsustainably high catches of target species, thereby helping to meet the challenge of increasing global food demand."

Dr Zhou says the implications of such a change in approach would need to be considered by a wide range of stakeholders including fishermen, fishery managers and conservation agencies.

S. Zhou, A. D. M. Smith, A. E. Punt, A. J. Richardson, M. Gibbs, E. A. Fulton, S. Pascoe, C. Bulman, P. Bayliss, K. Sainsbury. Ecosystem-based fisheries management requires a change to the selective fishing philosophy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2010; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0912771107

Hunting and Fishing May Help Maintain Wildlife Populations

Hunting and fishing quotas limit the number of game animals or fish an individual may take based on harvests from the previous year. But according to a new study co-authored by University of Minnesota ecologist Craig Packer, this strategy may jeopardize wildlife populations.

The authors recommend that wildlife managers rethink policies for sustainable utilization. Setting limits on the number of days allowed for hunting and fishing rather than the number of trophies would be a more effective way to ensure continued supply and to prevent extinction.

Results of the study are published in the May 13 issue of Science.

"Quotas don't consider population fluctuations caused by disease outbreaks, harsh weather and other variables that affect animal abundance from year to year," Packer explains. "Hunters and fishermen can work harder to make their quotas when desirable species are scarce. The extra pressure can cause populations to collapse." Setting limits on the amount of time spent hunting could better protect fragile populations.

John Fryxell and Kevin McCann, from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, along with colleagues in Norway and the United States, developed a model based on mass action assumptions about human behavior and current hunting and fishing regulations. They tested the model using data from three populations of deer and moose from Canada and Norway over a 20- year period. Packer's work on the impact of trophy hunting on lion populations in Africa and cougars in the United States, helped to inspire the current study.

The problem is exacerbated by the traditional practice of open access, Fryxell noted. Hunters and fishermen tend to choose spots based on word of mouth, which travels slowly. By the time they are well known, popular sites may already have shrinking populations and visitors may need to work harder and longer to reach quotas, which further endanger the species. Once populations are depleted, restoring them is a challenge.

"It can take decades for large animal populations to recover from collapses, as we know from our disastrous experience with cod stocks off the coast of Newfoundland, Fryxell said. "We need to make strategic long-term changes to make a difference."

ohn M. Fryxell, Craig Packer, Kevin McCann, Erling J. Solberg, and Bernt-Erik Sæther. Resource Management Cycles and the Sustainability of Harvested Wildlife Populations. Science, 14 May 2010 328: 903-906 DOI: 10.1126/science.1185802

Commercial Fishing Estimated to Kill Millions of Sea Turtles

The number of sea turtles inadvertently snared by commercial fishing gear over the past 20 years may reach into the millions, according to the first peer-reviewed study to compile sea turtle bycatch data from gillnet, trawl and longline fisheries worldwide.

The study, which was published online April 6 in the journal Conservation Letters, analyzed data compiled from peer-reviewed papers, government reports, technical reports, and symposia proceedings published between 1990 and 2008. All data were based on direct onboard observations or interviews with fishermen. The study did not include data from recreational fishing.
Six of the world's seven species of sea turtles are currently listed as vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
"Direct onboard observations and interviews with fishermen indicate that about 85,000 turtles were caught between 1990 and 2008. But because these reports cover less than one percent of all fleets, with little or no information from small-scale fisheries around the world, we conservatively estimate that the true total is at least two orders of magnitude higher," said Bryan Wallace, lead author of the new paper.
Wallace is the science advisor for the Sea Turtle Flagship Program at Conservation International and an adjunct assistant professor at Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment. Most of his co-authors are researchers at Duke's Center for Marine Conservation.
Their global data review revealed that the highest reported bycatch rates for longline fisheries occurred off Mexico's Baja California peninsula, the highest rates for gillnet fishing took place in the North Adriatic region of the Mediterranean and the highest rates for trawls occurred off the coast of Uruguay.
When bycatch rates and amounts of observed fishing activity for all three gear types were combined and ranked across regions, four regions emerged as the overall most urgent conservation priorities: the East Pacific, the Mediterranean, the Southwest Atlantic, and the Northwest Atlantic.
"Although our numbers are estimates, they highlight clearly the importance of guidelines for fishing equipment and practices to help reduce these losses," Wallace said.
Effective measures to reduce turtle bycatch include the use of circle hooks and fish bait in longline fisheries, and Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) in trawling. Many of the most effective types of gear modifications, Wallace noted, have been developed by fishermen themselves.
Wallace said the Hawaiian longline fishery and the Australian prawn fishery have significantly reduced bycatch through close working relationships between fishermen and government managers, use of onboard observers, mandatory gear modifications and innovative technologies. TurtleWatch, a real-time database that provides daily updates on water temperatures and other conditions indicating where turtles might be found, has guided fishermen to avoid setting their gear in those areas.
Other approaches, such as the creation of marine protected areas and use of catch shares, also reduce bycatch, preserve marine biodiversity and promote healthy fish stocks in some cases, he said.
"Fisheries bycatch is the most acute threat to worldwide sea turtle populations today. Many animals die or are injured as a result of these interactions," Wallace said. "But our message is that it's not a lost cause. Managers and fishers have tools they can use to reduce bycatch, preserve marine biodiversity and promote healthy fish stocks, so that everyone wins, including turtles."
The study stems from work Wallace began in 2005 as a postdoctoral research associate at the Duke University Marine Lab, where he helped develop the first global bycatch database for longline fisheries. That work was part of a three-year initiative called Project GloBAL (Global By-catch Assessment of Long-lived Species).
Co-authors on the new study -- all of whom were part of the Project GloBAL team -- are Rebecca L. Lewison of San Diego State University; Sara L. McDonald of Duke's Center for Marine Conservation; Richard K. McDonald of the Center for Marine Conservation and the University of Richmond; Connie Y. Kot of the Center for Marine Conservation and the Marine Geospatial Ecology Lab at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment; and Shaleyla Kelez, Rhema K. Bjorkland, Elena M. Finkbeiner, S'rai Heimbrecht and Larry B. Crowder, all of the Center for Marine Conservation. Crowder is director of the center and the Stephen Toth Professor of Marine Biology at the Nicholas School. Lewison formerly was a research associate at the Duke Marine Lab.

Wallace et al. Global patterns of marine turtle bycatch. Conservation Letters, 2010; DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00105.x

Commercial Fishing Endangers Dolphin Populations, New Study Finds

Extensive commercial fishing endangers dolphin populations in the Mediterranean. This has been shown in a new study carried out at the University of Haifa's Department of Maritime Civilizations. "Unfortunately, we turn our backs to the sea and do not give much consideration to our marine neighbors," states researcher Dr. Aviad Scheinin.

The study, which was supervised by Prof. Ehud Spanier and Dr. Dan Kerem, examined the competition between the two top predators along the Mediterranean coast of Israel: the Common Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and bottom trawlers. (Trawling is the principal type of commercial fishing in Israel and involves dragging a large fishing net through the water, close to the sea floor, from the back of a boat.) These two predators off the coast of Israel trap similar types of fish near the sea floor, so the researchers decided to examine the nature of the competition between the two.

Commercial trawling in the Mediterranean off the coast of Israel targets codfish, red mullet and sole, three commercial and sought-after types of fish. The Department of Fisheries in Israel's Ministry of Agriculture has data showing that over the years the amount of fish from the sea floor looted by Israel's commercial trawling is larger than the amount of fish that nature provides, indicating that the sea floor fish population dropped between the years 1949 and 2006.

Would this decline in fish supply necessarily cause direct harm to the dolphins, seeing as their diet might also include other types of fish? In order to verify this, the researcher examined the contents of the stomachs of 26 dolphins that died and landed on the beach, or that had been caught by mistake. He also examined the behavior of living dolphins by carrying out 232 marine surveys over more than 3,000 km. along the central coast of Israel. The dolphins' stomachs contained mainly non-commercialized fish, suggesting that they perhaps do not compete directly with the commercial trawlers, and that the commercial fishing does not directly affect the dolphins' nutrition.

The living dolphins' behavior, on the other hand, draws an entirely different picture. According to Dr. Scheinin, most of the dolphins were observed around the trawling boats: the chances of observing a school of dolphins near a trawler is ten times higher than in the open sea. This is because the trawler serves as a "feeding station" for the dolphins: there they are not able to feed from the more expensive loot caught in the nets, but they are able to enjoy schools of other types of fish that swim around the trawler. "The problem is that this type of fishing endangers the dolphins. Eight dolphins die each year off the coast of Israel on average, and of those, four die after having been mistakenly caught in trawling nets. Seeing as many studies have proven the high intelligence of the dolphin, it is clear that these sea mammals are aware of this danger, but are left with little choice due to their need to search for food around the trawlers due to the scarcity of other food sources," Dr. Scheinin explains.

This conclusion is reinforced by the suckling female dolphins. These dolphins require larger quantities of food than usual, and despite the risk for the younger and much less experienced dolphins that swim by their side, all of the suckling dolphins have been observed significantly more frequently around the trawlers. This indicates that they could not obtain enough food in other places.

The dolphins off the coast of Israel spend most of their time in search of food while their mates in other areas in the world are far busier with social activities. This fact is yet another contributing factor to the assumption that they suffer a deficiency in food resources.

The present study illustrates, for the first time, the characteristics of the dolphins inhabiting the sea region off the Mediterranean coast of Israel. This dolphin population is stable and at any given time can be counted at about 350 dolphins. Of these, the researchers are personally familiar with 150 dolphins -- on a first name basis -- which can be identified by the dorsal fin, the dolphin's fingerprint. Forty of these are seen repeatedly and are permanent inhabitants of opposite the coast of Israel. "There is a stable dolphin population off the shores of Israel, and any resolution concerning the sea must also consider the dolphins. So as to preserve this population we must declare extensive marine nature reserves, so as to regulate fishing and bring an end to sea pollution. Regrettably, we are not considerate enough of the dolphins," concludes Dr. Scheinin

Poor Sacramento River salmon runs a bad sign for Oregon's fishing fleet

What remains of the Oregon coast's salmon fishing fleet is largely dependent on chinook salmon that are born and spawn in California's Sacramento River but mature in the ocean.

Poor runs in the Sacramento have led to the repeated shutdown of the salmon fishing here, and the signs are pointing to another nonexistent commercial fishing season this year.
The Sacramento Bee's Matt Weiser reported this week on the state of the fall chinook runs in the Sacramento River:

The run as a whole seems likely to turn out the same or slightly smaller than in 2008, which was the smallest year ever recorded.

"We are really upset," said Dick Pool, president of Pro-Troll Fishing Products, a Bay Area manufacturer of salmon fishing tackle. "Every appearance is the fall run returns this year (2009) may set a new record low."

Weiser reports the cause of the poor runs is two-fold: poor ocean conditions, and environmental degradation and water withdrawals for irrigation in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

Those poor returns contrast with relatively strong runs in the Columbia Basin and on coastal river further north.

The fishing seasons are set by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council.

Weiser's article goes on to say that the fall chinook run could eventually be listed under the Endangered Species Act, leading to further fishing and farming restrictions.

In a related story in Redding's Record Searchlight, Dylan Darling reports on the effect the disappointing run is having on the system's biggest salmon-producing hatchery:

Normally, the hatchery's biologists choose the biggest, strongest and healthiest fish to supply eggs and sperm for the following spring's young.
This year, Darling reported, they aren't being so picky.

Changing The Course Of Nature: Are Fisheries Directing The Evolution Of Fish Populations?

For many of the types of fish we buy in stores or order in restaurants, the chance that an individual dies from fishing is several times higher than dying of natural causes. This may seem obvious to most (they had to get to our table somehow), but what may not be apparent is that the relentless pursuit of consumer-friendly fish product is having a massive impact on fish populations around the world. By repeatedly choosing only the biggest fish, or only those found in certain habitats, the fisheries industry may be permanently altering the genetic composition of fish populations.

What are the long-term evolutionary implications of prolonged fishing for the fish that humans and, perhaps more importantly, diverse ecosystems so depend on? A group of concerned international scientists convened at the 2008 American Fisheries Society Annual Meeting to address this issue, and contributions to the symposium are now available online in an August 2009 special issue of Evolutionary Applications.

Several groups of scientists focused on teasing apart how much of the shift in fish morphology, development and behavior that has been documented over the years is due to genetic versus non-genetic changes. Long-term genetic changes may be more problematic since these may not be reversible and they make predicting the composition of fish stocks in the future very difficult. Equally contentious among scientists was distinguishing between changes that were caused by artificial selection due to fishing per se, versus environmental influences such as habitat destruction or climate change.

The articles in the special issue use multiple approaches to address these concerns and together come to the conclusion that in many cases, fish stocks are indeed evolving in response to the artificial selection pressure imposed by fishing. Shifts in yield-determining traits such as growth and maturation are evident, and how quickly these changes manifest depends on the type of fishing gear and the rate of harvest.

Given the uncertainty surrounding the future sustainability of wild fish stocks, fisheries evolution scientists make several key recommendations: protect a portion of the stock through the creation of non-fished marine protected areas, protect late-maturing and slow-growing individuals, and perhaps the most difficult but most effective: fish less.

This Special Issue of Evolutionary Applications, 2:3, is available free online at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119423602/home.

---

Adapted from materials provided by Wiley - Blackwell, via AlphaGalileo.

West Coast fishermen embark on new wave of fishing

The West Coast groundfish fleet has struggled to stay afloat during major cutbacks to reverse long-standing problems with overfishing and to protect the seafloor from damage caused by bottom trawling gear.They are now embarking, after years of work and negotiation, on the latest system in fisheries management, known as "catch share." Fishermen are given their own individual shares of the total catch, personal responsibility for not catching overfished species, and a promise of better prices for the fish they do haul up."In the short term it might hurt people. In the long term I think it's the way to go," said Todd Whaley, 46, part-owner and skipper of the Miss Sarah, a 102-foot trawler that he rigs for groundfish, Pacific whiting, and crab, depending on the market.NOAA Fisheries Service, the federal agency that oversees commercial fishing, is pressing regional fishery councils that set harvest limits around the country to adopt catch share programs.The agency is under a congressional mandate to end all overfishing in U.S. waters by 2011, the year that the West Coast groundfish accord goes into effect. It still has 41 fisheries to bring in line out of 244 that have been assessed."The scientific evidence is pretty clear that commercial fisheries that are managed with catch shares on balance perform better than traditionally managed fisheries," Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told The Associated Press on a recent visit to Newport."So we are encouraging every (regional fishery management) council to simply look at this tool and say, 'Is it appropriate for these fisheries, or is it not.'"Chief among candidates for switching to catch share is the New England groundfish fishery, which has been struggling for 15 years to rebuild cod and haddock stocks.The stakes are high. According to NOAA, commercial fishing contributes $28 billion a year to the economy. Meanwhile, the nation's appetite for fish outstrips domestic supply. Sixty percent of the seafood consumed comes from imports.The scientific foundation for catch share comes from studies like one examining fisheries in New Zealand and Australia published in the journal Science in 2007. The report found that fishermen who owned a share of the harvest made more money fishing less while doing a better job of conserving the resource.The idea is when they no longer have to race to fill their nets they can concentrate on quality and efficiency."There is nothing magical about catch shares rescuing overfished stocks, but they do change the incentives so that the fishermen who have a dedicated share of a stock know they will be the ones who benefit when stocks are rebuilt," said co-author Ray Hilborn, fishery sciences professor at University of Washington.West Coast groundfish have been rebuilding since 2000, when harvests were cut in half to protect overfished rockfish. Despite limiting harvests and cutting the fleet through buybacks, several groundfish species remain overfished. They are still the region's most valuable fishery, with landings worth $55 million in 2007.The classification covers 82 species, caught mostly by trawlers — also known as draggers — hauling nets along the ocean bottom. The fish are sold as sole, flounder, lingcod, black cod, snapper, and imitation crab.For five years fishermen and conservation groups have been working with the Pacific Fishery Management Council to adopt a catch share system, already in force with a dozen U.S. fisheries including Alaskan halibut, Gulf red snapper and Atlantic surf clams. The council approved the move last year. The rules go into effect Jan. 1, 2011.Catch share gets rid of the traditional race for fish, where fishermen go full-bore until they fill an overall quota, or inadvertently catch too many overfished species — known as bycatch.With their own quota, fishermen can fish when the weather and market are best. With that comes individual responsibility for not exceeding limits on bycatch. Those who do can buy shares to cover the excess. To reward captains who avoid bycatch, and penalize those who don't, each West Coast groundfish trawler will have an observer on board to count every fish hauled up in the net.The New England Fishery Management Council is headed in the same direction. In July they approved a plan giving fishermen the option of a catch share fishery, with sectors rather than individuals allocated shares. NOAA Fisheries is seeking $18.6 million from Congress to implement the switch. Among the first to feel the pain of declining cod harvests — and the first to opt for catch share — were small-boat fishermen on Cape Cod, Mass., who still fish with hooks and lines the way their forefathers did. "We were almost like the canary in the coal mine," said Eric Brazer, sector manager for the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen's Association, which went to catch share in 2004. "We'll live within the limits set by science. Other fishermen are willing to go toe-to-toe with the scientists. We're most interested in preserving our community and making sure we get through the next few years till we start seeing the fish populations come back." Not everyone in the 120-boat West Coast groundfish fleet will be a winner under the new rules. An analysis estimates 50 to 70 boats will be left with fishing permits after things sort out. The remainder will have to stop groundfishing. Don Taylor, captain of the Little Joe, has built his knowledge of where and when to find fish on decades of trial and error, and fears that now even one bad tow could shut him down if the net comes up with a single canary rockfish, an overfished species with no bycatch quota. As for Whaley, he is confident that he will be able to figure out how to succeed under the new rules. "Instead of the race for fish, lately, it's been the race for bycatch," he said. "A person who has his own bycatch quota is going to be fishing much more carefully."

NOAA Scientists Map Fish Habitat and Movements at Gray's Reef Marine Sanctuary

Two related research expeditions by NOAA scientists to track the habitat preferences and movements of fish at Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary may help managers protect overfished species such as red snapper and grouper. Research from the two expeditions appears in the current online edition of the peer-reviewed Bulletin of Marine Sciences."It's important to know exactly what areas to protect," says Matt Kendall, principle investigator on the habitat mapping project. "Certain fish gravitate to certain bottom types. If you want to protect red snapper, for example, you have to know where they live."The projects tracking fish movements through telemetry will help researchers better understand the basic "life histories" of these fish. The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, citing the "lack of basic management data as a major obstacle" to the successful management of these species, has recently called for a total ban on red snapper fishing to help restore stock levels. The ban is pending final approval.According to the latest reports from NOAA Fisheries, black sea bass, red snapper, red grouper, and gag are among the region's overfished species. These studies are helping researchers better understand the movements and habitat preferences of these species, and their potential vulnerability to fishing. This knowledge will contribute to stock management and recovery of overfished species.In the first of the two expeditions, researchers confirmed the importance of limestone ledges, which make up only one percent of Gray's Reef and only slightly more of the entire continental shelf of the southeastern United States. Scientists noted a distinct correlation between ledge characteristics such as height and degree of undercut to the types and numbers of fish found at the ledge. This information can help prioritize reef areas for management.For example, gag and scamp, two grouper species prized by recreational fishermen, are nearly always present at ledges extending from a wall or structure by 12-18 inches - a ledge type that represents only a tiny fraction of limestone ledges in the sanctuary. Red snapper are typically present near ledges extending a minimum of 27 inches, a ledge type that also represents only a small portion of the limestone ledges in the sanctuary.Kendall and his colleagues are not only mapping the relative value of Gray's Reef habitat for various fish communities, but also tracking how fish move around the sanctuary. Over the last two years, Kendall and his team have implanted tracking devices in fish which are being used in conjunction with sensors placed throughout part of the sanctuary.These sensors will help them understand, for example, which fish are "homebodies" and which fish travel more widely. The data so far reveals that grouper tend to stay close to their preferred ledges, while snapper venture farther from their home territory.The team's research not only has implications for the management of Gray's Reef Sanctuary, but also for the management of reefs throughout the South Atlantic region. "If the fish have these kinds of specific relationships to the bottom habitat at Gray's Reef, there is no reason to think that these same relationships don't exist elsewhere in the southeastern United States," Kendall said.NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth's environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.NOAA

New Hope For Fisheries: Overfishing Reduced In Several Regions Around The World

Scientists have joined forces in a groundbreaking assessment on the status of marine fisheries and ecosystems. The two-year study, led by Boris Worm of Dalhousie University and Ray Hilborn of the University of Washington and including an international team of 19 co-authors, shows that steps taken to curb overfishing are beginning to succeed in five of the ten large marine ecosystems that they examined.

The paper, which appears in the July 31 issue of the journal Science, provides new hope for rebuilding troubled fisheries.
The study had two goals: to examine current trends in fish abundance and exploitation rates (the proportion of fish taken out of the sea) and to identify which tools managers have applied in their efforts to rebuild depleted fish stocks. The work is a significant leap forward because it reveals that the rate of fishing has been reduced in several regions around the world, resulting in some stock recovery. Moreover, it bolsters the case that sound management can contribute to the rebuilding of fisheries elsewhere.
It's good news for several regions in the U.S., Iceland and New Zealand. "These highly managed ecosystems are improving" says Hilborn. "Yet there is still a long way to go: of all fish stocks that we examined sixty-three percent remained below target and still needed to be rebuilt."
"Across all regions we are still seeing a troubling trend of increasing stock collapse," adds Worm. "But this paper shows that our oceans are not a lost cause. The encouraging result is that exploitation rate – the ultimate driver of depletion and collapse – is decreasing in half of the ten systems we examined in detail. This means that management in those areas is setting the stage for ecological and economic recovery. It's only a start – but it gives me hope that we have the ability to bring overfishing under control."
The authors caution that their analysis was mostly confined to intensively managed fisheries in developed countries, where scientific data on fish abundance is collected. They also point out that some excess fishing effort is simply displaced to countries with weaker laws and enforcement capacity.
While most of the fisheries that showed improvement are managed by a few wealthy nations, there are some notable exceptions. In Kenya, for example, scientists, managers, and local communities have teamed up to close some key areas to fishing and restrict certain types of fishing gear. This led to an increase in the size and amount of fish available, and a consequent increase in fishers' incomes. "These successes are local - but they are inspiring others to follow suit," says Tim McClanahan of the Wildlife Conservation Society in Kenya.
"We know that more fish can be harvested with less fishing effort and less impact on the environment, if we first slow down and allow overfished populations to rebuild," adds co-author Jeremy Collie from the University of Rhode Island. "Scientists and managers in places as different as Iceland and Kenya have been able to reduce overfishing and rebuild fish populations despite serious challenges."
The authors emphasize that a range of management solutions are available to help rebuild fish stocks. They found that a combination of approaches, such as catch quotas and community management coupled with strategically placed fishing closures, ocean zoning, selective fishing gear and economic incentives, offer promise for restoring fisheries and ecosystems. However "lessons from one spot need to be applied very carefully to a new area," says coauthor Beth Fulton of the CSIRO Wealth from Oceans Flagship in Australia, since "there are no single silver bullet solutions. Management efforts must be customized to the place and the people."
According to the authors' analysis, Alaska and New Zealand have led the world in terms of management success by not waiting until drastic measures are needed to conserve, restore and rebuild marine resources. Some other regions are currently recovering from overfishing: fish abundance has recently been increasing above the long-term average in Iceland, the Northeast U.S. Shelf and the California Current.
This new study is a follow-up to a 2006 paper in Science by Worm and others that highlighted a widespread global trend toward fisheries collapse. The results of that paper led to a public disagreement between Worm and Hilborn. Through their subsequent discussions, however, the two scientists recognized a shared sense of purpose. They decided to collaborate on a more detailed assessment of the world's fisheries, and brought together many of the world's most talented fisheries scientists and ecologists for a two-year series of working groups at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS) in Santa Barbara, California. The current paper is the result of those meetings.
"Prior to this study, evaluations of the status of world fish stocks and communities were based on catch records for lack of a better alternative. Results were controversial because catch trends may not give an accurate picture of the trends in fish abundance," explains Ana Parma of Centro Nacional Patagónico in Argentina. "This is the first exhaustive attempt to assemble the best-available data on the status of marine fisheries and trends in exploitation rates, a major breakthrough that has allowed scientists from different backgrounds to reach a consensus about the status of fisheries and actions needed."
The analysis includes catch data, stock assessments, scientific trawl surveys, small-scale fishery data and modeling results. The authors liken their strategy to constructing a "Russian doll", with each nested layer of data adding to the strength and value of the whole.
In looking at the tools that have been used to reduce exploitation rate, the authors note that "some of the most spectacular rebuilding efforts have involved bold experimentation with closed areas, gear and effort restrictions and new approaches to catch allocations and enforcement." Laws that explicitly forbid overexploitation and specify clear rules and targets for rebuilding were seen as an important prerequisite, for example in the U.S.
While the study suggests that these tools have long-term benefits, they also come with short-term costs to fishers. "Some places have chosen to end overfishing," says Trevor Branch, a co-author from the University of Washington. "That choice can be painful for fishermen in the short term, but in the long term it benefits fish, fishermen, and our ocean ecosystems as a whole."
Key among the group's recommendations is to fish at rates lower than those producing maximum sustainable yield (MSY), a long-standing and internationally accepted benchmark for total catch. They call for MSY to be reinterpreted as an absolute upper limit rather than a target, in line with U.N. recommendations.
The authors used ecosystem models to calculate a multi-species MSY (or MMSY) that adds up yield across all species, taking account of their interrelations. That analysis suggests that fishing below MMSY yields just as much fish as exceeding that benchmark, but has many ecological benefits including fewer species collapses, an increase in fish size and fish abundance. "Below MMSY there is a fishing-conservation sweet spot," says co-author Steven Palumbi of Stanford University, "where economic and ecosystem benefits converge."
The team also notes that in addition to reducing exploitation rates below MMSY, there are several other measures that can reduce fishing impacts on ecosystems. "Fishing at maximum yield comes at a significant cost of species collapses," explains Heike Lotze, a co-author from Dalhousie University. "But even low levels of fishing do change marine ecosystems and may collapse vulnerable species. That's why we require a combination of measures, including gear restrictions and closed areas, in order to meet both fisheries and conservation objectives."
The authors caution that much work remains to be done to end global overfishing, as a large fraction of global fisheries are not properly managed, reported or regulated. Particularly outside wealthy industrialized nations, prospects for reducing fishing mortality are often more limited unless fishers get access to alternative sources of food and income. Therefore the authors highlight the need for a more global perspective on rebuilding marine resources.
"Fisheries managers currently presiding over depleted fish stocks need to become fast followers of the successes revealed in this paper," says Pamela Mace, a co-author from the New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries. "We need to move much more rapidly towards rebuilding individual fish populations and restoring the ecosystems of which they are a part, if there is to be any hope for the long-term viability of fisheries and fishing communities."
The study was based at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS), funded by the National Science Foundation and the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Adapted from materials provided by Communication Partnership for Science and the Sea, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Overfishing And Evolution: Fish Fear Their Census-takers

Using snorkelers and SCUBA divers is not the best way to monitor fish populations, if we want to know the evolutionary effects of overfishing.

The fish population in coral reef areas is often assessed by snorkelers or SCUBA divers, but new research shows that these methods may misrepresent the number of fish.
A study from the University of Victoria shows that fish avoid the divers and snorkelers who try to count them. Not all types of fish are equally frightened by the divers, and Faculty of 1000 member Helen Yap, who recommended the study, explains that therefore "such methods may not provide an accurate picture of the actual diversity and abundance of fish communities."
Counting coral reef fish informs researchers about local ecological changes. However, accurate monitoring of fish populations in other parts of the ocean is also necessary. This is because overfishing has long-term, 'evolutionary' effects on fish population and breeding rates.
This was addressed by John Pandolfi in a recent article in Faculty of 1000 Reports. Accurate assessment of changes to fish populations depends on being able to count them. Pandolfi emphasized that fish populations must be monitored over several generations, saying "While the field is exciting and changing almost daily, we still have very little information of how species are affected by fisheries-induced evolution, and the extent to which various traits are vulnerable."
Journal references:
P. Dearden, M. Theberge and M. Yasu. Using underwater cameras to assess the effects of snorkeler and SCUBA diver presence on coral reef fish abundance, family richness, and species composition. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2009; DOI: 10.1007/s10661-009-0855-3
John Pandolfi. Evolutionary impacts of fishing: overfishing's 'Darwinian debt'. F1000 Biology Reports, 2009; 1 DOI: 10.3410/B1-43
Adapted from materials provided by Faculty of 1000: Biology and Medicine, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Dutch to impose temporary eel fishing ban

The Dutch government said Thursday it would ban the fishing of eels, a delicacy in the Netherlands, for several months a year in a bid to protect the fish from extinction.The new measure would kick in this year with a two-month ban from October 1, followed from 2010 with a yearly three-month prohibition from September.The approach would be reviewed in 2012 to measure its effectiveness."I realise this is a very big sacrifice for eel fishers, but ultimately it is also in the interests of the industry that eel numbers are allowed to recover," Agriculture and Environment Minister Gerda Verburg said in a statement.The measure, yet to receive European Commission approval, follows Brussels' rejection of an earlier Dutch plan to rope in eel fishermen to help boost numbers by releasing 157 tons of mature, caught eel closer to their spawning waters in the Atlantic to spare them an arduous journey.The eels travel to the Sargasso Sea in the Atlantic to spawn every year and their offspring travel to Europe to feed in inland waters. One thousand tons of eel are caught in the Netherlands every year."The (initial) plan would have offered guarantees for the recovery of the eel population," the professional fishers' federation Combinatie van Beroepsvissers said in a statement, describing the new measure as "incomprehensible, unreasonable and unacceptable."The government has made available 700,000 euros to help an estimated 240 small fishing businesses affected by the ban."This amounts to a mere 1,000 euros per business per month," federation spokesman Han Walder told AFP.The eel was in June 2007 placed under the protection of the CITES convention on species threatened by extinction and was classified as a fish in which trade should be strictly regulated.

Banning Certain Fishing Gear Can Help Save Reefs From Climate Change

Banning or restricting the use of certain types of fishing gear could help the world's coral reefs and their fish populations survive the onslaughts of climate change according to a study by the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and other groups.

The international team of scientists has proposed that bans on fishing gear - like spear guns, fish traps, and beach seine nets – could aid in the recovery of reefs and fish populations hard hit by coral bleaching events.
Around the world corals have been dying at alarming rates, due to unusually warm water events resulting from global warming.
Research carried out in Kenya and Papua New Guinea has shown that certain types of gear are more damaging to corals, to coral-dependent fish and to the key species of fish that are needed to help reefs recover from bleaching or storm damage.
"This is creating a double jeopardy for both the corals and certain types of reef fish. They are already on the edge because of overfishing– and the additional impact caused by a bleaching can push them over" Dr Cinner explains. The result can be an accelerated decline of the reef, its fish populations – and their ability to sustain local people.
"From an ecological perspective, the best response to bleaching is to close reefs to fishing entirely. But that is not feasible everywhere and is a particularly hard sell among the impoverished fishers in developing countries" says co-author Dr. Tim McClanahan of the Wildlife Conservation Society. "In areas where fishery closures are impractical, managers don't have many options and haven't been able to do much but watch the reef die and often not recover."
"Selective gear restrictions offer reef managers and fishers alike some middle ground, reducing pressure on the reef and its fish while it is in the recovery phase, while also providing fishers with some options for their livelihood" Dr Cinner says. This middle way is also more likely to be taken up by fishers. "In other research we've found that fishers themselves prefer gear restrictions to total closures, because most fishers use several types of gear so they can still earn a living when the use of one sort of gear is banned. They are more likely to comply."
The team investigated the effects of five main types of gear on different types of fish: spear guns, traps, hook and line, beach seine nets and gill nets.
They found that spear guns were the most damaging of all – to corals themselves, to susceptible fish species and to the fish needed to help reefs recover, such as parrot, surgeon and trigger fish, which keep seaweeds and urchins in check while the coral re-grows.
"Spear guns target a high proportion of species that help maintain the resilience of coral reefs, but also can result in a surprising amount of damage to the corals themselves. When a fish is shot with a spear gun, it often hides in the reef, so some fishermen break the corals in their attempts to get it." Dr Cinner says.
But in developing countries, spear guns can be the fishing tool most used by the poorest fishers because they are cheap to make and the yield can be high, so they are an important source of income for poor fishers.
"You can't simply impose an arbitrary ban on their use – you need to consider issues like compensation, other fishing options, or alternative livelihoods for the affected fishers," says co-author Dr. Shaun Wilson of the Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation. "One key issue may be educating fishers about the importance of reef habitat and the species that help to maintain reef quality – and the need to be selective in what they shoot. This would mean fishers could still use this cheap and effective fishing tool without necessarily damaging habitat and reef resilience."
Fish traps also targeted both the most susceptible reef fish and the ones most involved in reef recovery. Beach seine nets didn't target as many key fish species as gill nets, traps, or spear guns, but were damaging both to corals directly and took large amounts of juvenile fish.
"Where people really depend on reef resources, it may not be possible to permanently ban all of these types of gear. By creating temporary bans for specific types of gear following a coral bleaching event, reef managers could ease pressure on the reef and its fish population for a time when corals ecosystems are most sensitive without causing undue hardship to the human populations that depend on it." Dr Cinner says
"Of course, where the conditions are right, managers and fishers don't have to wait for a bleaching event- preventative gear bans are a good idea, particularly in areas that are highly susceptible to the impacts of bleaching," says co-author Dr Nick Graham. "And our new research provides managers with some ideas about the trade-offs involved in banning certain gear."
Dr Cinner says that temporary bans or imposing permanent restrictions on the use of various types of gear can apply to virtually any coral reef management – whether in the developing world or in developed countries such as on Australia's Great Barrier Reef.
"In principle, it can be used anywhere. It offers both communities and reef managers much greater flexibility. Around the world, communities are increasingly making their own decisions about how to protect their reefs and they could impose voluntary bans on certain gears.
Journal reference:
Cinner et al. Gear-based fisheries management as a potential adaptive response to climate change and coral mortality. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2009; 46 (3): 724 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01648.x
Adapted from materials provided by Wildlife Conservation Society, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Basking Sharks: Disappearing Act Of World's Second Largest Fish Explained

Researchers have discovered where basking sharks – the world's second largest fish – hide out for half of every year, according to a report published online on May 7th in Current Biology. The discovery revises scientists' understanding of the iconic species and highlights just how little we still know about even the largest of marine animals, the researchers said."While commonly sighted in surface waters during summer and autumn months, the disappearance of basking sharks during winter has been a great source of debate ever since an article in 1954 suggested that they hibernate on the ocean floor during this time," said Gregory Skomal of Massachusetts Marine Fisheries. "Some 50 years later, we have helped to solve the mystery while completely re-defining the known distribution of this species."Using new satellite-based tagging technology and a novel geolocation technique, the researchers found that basking sharks make ocean-scale migrations through tropical waters of the Atlantic Ocean during the winter, traveling at depths of 200 to 1,000 meters. Their data show that the sharks sometimes stay at those depths for weeks or even months at a time. "In doing so, they have completely avoided detection by humans for millennia," Skomal said, emphasizing that as one of the very largest of marine animals, the sharks grow to over 10 meters and weigh as much as seven metric tons.Skomal said they were "absolutely surprised" when they first received a signal from the tagged sharks coming from the tropical waters of the western Atlantic, in the vicinity of the Caribbean and Bahamas. After all, basking sharks were always believed to be cool-water sharks, restricted to temperate regions.Several factors had made basking sharks a challenge to study. On top of the fact that they disappear for long periods of time, they also feed exclusively on plankton. That means they can't readily be captured with traditional rod-and-reel methods. And even when the sharks are found closer to the ocean surface, they spend their time in the cool-temperature, plankton-rich waters that limit underwater visibility and make diving difficult.The findings could have important implications for the conservation of basking sharks, which have shown some signs of dramatic decline in the last half century and are listed as threatened by the International Union for Conservation of Nature."Coupled with recent genetic data, our finding indicates that the Atlantic population – and perhaps the world population – are connected and may constitute a single population," Skomal said. "Hence, the global population of basking sharks may be even smaller than previously thought." Efforts to boost basking sharks' numbers will therefore need to be coordinated at a global scale.The authors include Gregory B. Skomal, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Oak Bluffs, MA; Stephen I. Zeeman, University of New England, Biddeford, ME; John H. Chisholm, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, New Bedford, MA; Erin L. Summers, Maine Department of Marine Resources, Boothbay Harbor, ME; Harvey J. Walsh, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA; Kelton W. McMahon, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA; and Simon R. Thorrold, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA.

EU seeks deep cuts in fishing quotas for 2010

The European Commission on Tuesday proposed substantial cuts in fishing quotas next year over concerns that current levels are too high to sustain fish stocks.EU Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg supported allowable catch cuts of "at least 25 percent" for the most vulnerable species where the commission's own scientific committee is calling for fishing to be stopped altogether."Slow progress has been made in stock recovery since the 2002 reform" of the EU's fisheries policy, he said in a statement."One of the reasons for this is that fishing opportunities consistently have been set at levels which were too high for the fish stocks to sustain," he said.As a result, more than 80 percent of EU fish stocks are now overfished, compared with a global average of 28 percent.On the other hand, the commission is ready to adopt "a more flexible approach" for species whose stocks are not under threat, with a cut in quotas limited to 20 percent.For stocks which have been replenished, quotas could be lifted by 25 percent.Total Allowable Catches (TACs) are set annually for the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, and the Northeast Atlantic including the North Sea.TACs for fisheries on deep sea species are fixed every two years.Fisheries in the Mediterranean are not managed through catch limits, except in the case of bluefin tuna.Haggling involving the 27 EU member states, the fishing community and environmentalists should culminate in an overall deal agreed by the end of the year ahead of next year's fishing season.

'Sobering' Decline Of Caribbean's Big Fish

Sharks, barracuda and other large predatory fishes disappear on Caribbean coral reefs as human populations rise, endangering the region's marine food web and ultimately its reefs and fisheries, according to a sweeping study by researcher Chris Stallings of The Florida State University Coastal and Marine Laboratory.While other scientists working in the Caribbean have observed the declines of large predators for decades, the comprehensive work by Stallings documents the ominous patterns in far more detail at a much greater geographic scale than any other research to date. "Seeing evidence of this ecological and economic travesty played out across the entire Caribbean is truly sobering," said Associate Professor John Bruno of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who served as the PLoS One academic editor for Stallings' new paper."I examined 20 species of predators, including sharks, groupers, snappers, jacks, trumpetfish and barracuda, from 22 Caribbean nations," said Stallings, a postdoctoral associate at the FSU Coastal and Marine Laboratory. "I found that nations with more people have reefs with far fewer large fish because as the number of people increases, so does demand for seafood. Fishermen typically go after the biggest fish first, but shift to smaller species once the bigger ones become depleted. In some areas with large human populations, my study revealed that only a few small predatory fish remain."Stallings said that although several factors -- including loss of coral reef habitats -- contributed to the general patterns, careful examination of the data suggests overfishing as the most likely reason for the disappearance of large predatory fishes across the region. He pointed to the Nassau grouper as a prime example. Once abundant throughout the Caribbean, Nassau grouper have virtually disappeared from many Caribbean nearshore areas and are endangered throughout their range."Large predatory fish such as groupers and sharks are vitally important in marine food webs," Stallings said. "However, predicting the consequence of their loss is difficult because of the complexity of predator-prey interactions. You can't replace a 10-foot shark with a one-foot grouper and expect there to be no effect on reef communities. Shifts in abundance to smaller predators could therefore have surprising and unanticipated effects. One such effect may be the ability of non-native species to invade Caribbean reefs."A case in point, said Stallings, is the ongoing invasion by Pacific lionfish, which were introduced by aquarium releases."Lionfish are minor players on their native Pacific reefs, yet they are undergoing a population explosion and overeating small fishes in the greater Caribbean region," said Professor Mark Hixon of Oregon State University, Stallings' doctoral advisor at OSU. "Preliminary evidence suggests that lionfish are less invasive where large predatory native fishes are abundant, such as in marine reserves," Hixon said.The study also demonstrates the power of volunteer and community research efforts by non-scientists. Stallings used data from the Reef Environmental Education Foundation's (REEF) online database, which contains fish sightings documented by trained volunteer SCUBA divers, including more than 38,000 surveys spanning a 15-year period."Chris was completely undaunted by the lack of fisheries data and essentially adopted the 'Audubon Christmas Bird Count' approach in a marine system to find strong evidence for a native fisheries effect," said Felicia Coleman, director of the FSU Coastal and Marine Laboratory and Stallings' postdoctoral advisor.Given that about half the world's populations live near coastlines and that the world population is growing, demands for ocean-derived protein will continue to increase, Stallings warned. He said meeting such demands while retaining healthy coral reefs may require multiple strategies, including implementation of marine reserves, finding alternative sources of protein, and increased efforts to implement family-planning strategies in densely populated areas.Journal reference:Stallings et al. Fishery-Independent Data Reveal Negative Effect of Human Population Density on Caribbean Predatory Fish Communities. PLoS ONE, 2009; 4 (5): e5333 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005333 Florida State University,

Ghost fishing' major sea threat: UN report

Lost or discarded fishing nets can continue to catch fish for years and are a growing threat to the planet's marine ecosystem, according to a United Nations report released Wednesday."The report estimates that abandoned, lost or discarded fishing gear in the oceans makes up around 10 percent, (640,000 tonnes) of all marine litter," said a statement from the UN Environment Programme.The study, co-authored by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), said the problem was getting worse due to the growing scale of global fishing and the use of fishing gear made of increasingly durable materials.Among the main culprits are bottom set gill nets, which are anchored to the sea floor and fitted with floats, forming an undersea wall of netting that can stretch several thousand metres."If a gill net is abandoned or lost, it can continue to fish on its own for months -- and sometimes years -- indiscriminately killing fish and other animals," the UNEP statement said.The report also cited the case of devices such as crab traps, which in some regions are lost by hundreds of thousands with each hurricane season.The UN study listed a number of measures to curb the trend such as financial incentives for fishermen to report lost gear, marking technology, improved disposal schemes and the use of bio-degradable elements in fishing gear.The report urged leaders gathering in Indonesia on May 11-15 for the World Oceans Conference to address the problem urgently."The amount of fishing gear remaining in the marine environment will continue to accumulate and the impacts on marine ecosystems will continue to get worse if the international community doesn't take effective steps to deal with the problem of marine debris as a whole," warned Ichiro Nomura, a senior FAO official for fisheries and aquaculture.UNEP executive director Achim Steiner said ghost fishing was just one of a myriad of the other "ghosts" haunting the marine environment such as acidification linked to greenhouse gases and rising de-oxygenated "dead zones" due to run-off and land-based pollution."Abandoned and lost fishing is part of this suite of challenges that must be urgently addressed collectively if the productivity of our oceans and seas is to be maintained for this and future generations," said Steiner.

Want Sustainable Fishing? Keep Only Small Fish, And Let The Big Ones Go

Scientists at the University of Toronto analysed Canadian fisheries data to determine the effect of the "keep the large ones" policy that is typical of fisheries. What they found is that the effect of this policy is an unsustainable fishery.

In fact, the opposite policy (keep the small young ones and throw back the large old ones) would result in a more sustainable fishery. In short -- a big fish in the water is worth two in the net.
Put simply, a fish population will produce more young -- and therefore sustain more fishing -- if it is made up of big, old fish.
The team of scientists, led by Paul Venturelli, a graduate student in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, used a simple population model, as well as evaluating data from 25 marine fish species. They also tailored their methods to allow for other possible causes for the results, such as the effect of climate.
Finding ways to replenish fishery stocks and improve management provides both ecological and financial benefits.
The research is published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
Adapted from materials provided by University of Toronto

Bottom Trawling Impacts On Ocean, Clearly Visible From Space

Bottom trawling, an industrial fishing method that drags large, heavy nets across the seafloor stirs up huge, billowing plumes of sediment on shallow seafloors that can be seen from space।

As a result of scientific studies showing that bottom trawling kills vast numbers of corals, sponges, fishes and other animals, bottom trawling has been banned in a growing number of places in recent years. Now satellite images show that spreading clouds of mud remain suspended in the sea long after the trawler has passed.
But what satellites can see is only the "tip of the iceberg," because most trawling happens in waters too deep to detect sediment plumes at the surface, say scientists speaking a symposium session called Dragnet: Bottom Trawling, the World's Most Severe and Extensive Seafloor Disturbance at the American Association for the Advancement of Science 2008 Annual Meeting February 15. Speakers at the session include Dr. Elliott Norse, President of Marine Conservation Biology Institute in Bellevue WA; John Amos, President of SkyTruth in Shepherdstown WV, Dr. Les Watling, Professor of Zoology at the University of Hawaii in Manoa HI; and Susanna Fuller, Ph.D. Candidate in Biology at Dalhousie University, Halifax NS.
"Bottom trawling is the most destructive of any actions that humans conduct in the ocean," said Dr. Watling. "Ten years ago, Elliott Norse and I calculated that, each year, worldwide, bottom trawlers drag an area equivalent to twice the lower 48 states. Most of that trawling happens in deep waters, out of sight. But now we can more clearly envision what trawling impacts down there by looking at the sediment plumes that are shallow enough for us to see from satellites," he said.
"Bottom-trawling repeatedly plows up the seafloor over large areas of the ocean" said Mr। Amos. "Until recently, the impact was basically hidden from view. But new tools -- especially Internet-based image sites, like Google Earth -- allow everyone to see for themselves what's happening. In shallow waters with muddy bottoms, trawlers leave long, persistent trails of sediment in their wake."

Susanna Fuller studies impacts of trawling on sponges in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. "Seafloor animals such as glass sponges are particularly vulnerable to bottom trawling," said Ms. Fuller, a graduate student of Professor Ransom Myers. Dr. Myers, who died last year, had published a series of papers showing that overfishing has eliminated 90 percent of the world's large predatory fishes and is devastating marine ecosystems.
"What is amazing is the level of damage these types of animals have suffered, after the cod fishery in Canada was closed. We immediately started trawling deeper with no restrictions, and continue to do so," she said. "There are ways to catch fish that are less harmful to the world's vanishing marine life. We need to start protecting the seafloor by using fishing gear, besides bottom trawls, especially in the deep sea. It's the only thing left," she said.
"For years marine scientists have been telling the world that fishing has harmed marine biodiversity more than anything else," said Dr. Norse. "And it's clear that trawling causes more damage to marine ecosystems than any other kind of fishing. Now, as the threats of ocean acidification and melting sea ice are adding insult to injury, we have to reduce harm from trawling to have any hope of saving marine ecosystems," Dr. Norse said.
Scientific findings about trawling impacts have led to increasing restrictions on this industrial fishing method. In 2005, the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean banned trawling in the Mediterranean Sea below depths of 1,000 meters, and the United States closed vast deep-sea areas off Alaska to bottom trawling. In 2006, the United Nations General Assembly began deliberations on a trawling moratorium on the high seas, which cover 45% of the Earth's surface, and South Pacific nations effectively put an end to trawling in an area amounting to 14 percent of the Earth's surface.
There are tens of thousands of trawlers worldwide. They fish for shrimp and finfishes. Some bottom trawling operations catch 20 pounds of "bykill" for every pound of targeted species.
Adapted from materials provided by SeaWeb.

Fishing Ban Protects Largest Coral Reef In The Philippines

Reef fish and other marine species can breathe easier with the introduction of a fishing ban around Apo Reef, the largest coral reef in the Philippines and the second largest contiguous reef in the world after the Great Barrier Reef.Under the ban, all extractive activities, such as fishing, and coral collection and harvesting, will be completely forbidden. "This `no-take' zone will allow the reef and its residents ample time to recover from years of fishing," stressed John Manul of WWF-Philippines.The 27,469-hectare Apo Reef off the coast of Mindoro Island is surrounded by mangrove forest, which serves as a source of food, nursery and spawning ground of several coastal fish and marine species, including sharks, manta rays, sperm whales and several sea turtles.In 1996, the reef was declared a national park, but enforcement proved lax and illegal fishing methods persisted. The park was once one of the world's premier diving destinations, but years of fishing — including by unsustainable fishing practices such as using dynamite and cyanide — took its toll."You would hear 25 to 30 dynamite blasts daily," said Robert Duquil, a former protected area assistant superintendent. "The international diving community lost interest in the area and destructive activities prevailed."Adding to the reef's troubles, the El Niño phenomenon in 1998 raised ocean temperatures, prompting a massive bleaching episode and the death of countless corals, and an explosion of coral-eating crown-of-thorns starfish. "Unfortunately, Apo is plagued by millions of these starfish, probably due to a lack of natural predators like the giant triton, napoleon wrasse and harlequin shrimp," said Gregg Yan of WWF-Philippines. "We hope that the ban will ensure protection of these predators and the many other reef species."WWF has been working towards sustainable coastal practices for the Apo Reef Natural Park since 2003. The marine park will be opened for tourists to help generate funds for its protection, as well as provide an alternative livelihood for hundreds of fishermen in the area.

South Pacific to stop bottom-trawling

A quarter of the world's oceans will be protected from fishing boats which drag heavy nets across the sea floor, South Pacific nations have agreed. The landmark deal will restrict bottom-trawling, which experts say destroys coral reefs and stirs up clouds of sediment that suffocate marine life. Observers and monitoring systems will ensure vessels remain five nautical miles from marine ecosystems at risk. The South Pacific contains the last pristine deep-sea marine environment. It extends from the Equator to the Antarctic and from Australia to the western coast of South America. The high seas encompass all areas not included in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a country. 'Precautionary measures' The agreement reached in the coastal town of Renaca in Chile will come into force on 30 September. It will close to bottom-trawling areas where vulnerable marine ecosystems are known or are likely to exist, unless a prior assessment is undertaken and highly precautionary protective measures are implemented. Bottom-trawling: How it works The delegation from New Zealand, whose fishermen are responsible for 90% of bottom-trawling in the South Pacific high seas, said the restrictions would "severely constrain" its fishing vessels. "Because of the cost implications of the necessary research and assessment and observer requirements, it may even have the effect of putting an end to bottom-trawling," it said. The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, an alliance of leading environmental and conservation groups, welcomed the agreement. Because of the cost implications of the necessary research and assessment and observer requirements, [the agreement] may even have the effect of putting an end to bottom-trawling New Zealand delegationSea fish 'gone in 50 years' "This is a major step forward in the protection of biodiversity on the high seas," Matthew Gianni, a spokesman for the group, said. Mr Gianni said the deal was the first step taken towards implementing a UN resolution passed in December, which urged the adoption of unilateral "precautionary measures" to ensure bottom-trawlers do not cause significant damage. "This is the most significant meeting of fishing nations since the UN General Assembly resolution and it has done what the resolution required. "It can be done, it has been done, and it's time for all countries to do the same in all other ocean regions." In addition to the weighted nets and rollers which crush coral reefs, bottom-trawling targets slow-growing species of fish, such as orange roughy, which take decades to reach breeding age. Such species are especially vulnerable to overfishing because the population replenishes itself very slowly. Last November, leading scientists warned there would be no sea fish left in 50 years if current practices continued.