Tackling Marine Debris in the 21st Century (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Derelict Fishing Gear and Fish Aggregating Devices
4 Derelict Fishing Gear and Fish Aggregating Devices
Pages 89-140
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 89... ...
and fish aggre gating devices (FADs) were specifically referenced in the Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act (33 U.S.C.
|
From page 90... ...
The same properties that make these new m aterials effective as fishing gear also make them particularly problem atic as marine debris. Unlike their natural predecessors, the new materials can last for years or decades in the marine environment.
|
From page 91... ...
While this information is also discussed in Chapter 2, some of what is known and some of the challenges in understanding DFG are highlighted here. As is true for other types of marine debris, there is little information available in the form of quantitative assessments of the sources and amounts of derelict gear generated by specific fisheries, or for linking those losses to impacts.
|
From page 92... ...
, the U.S. Department of State, international fisheries man agement organizations, and other relevant organizations should • engage in technology transfer and capacity building with nations from which DFG components originate to improve implementation of MARPOL Annex V in fisheries; • encourage best practices to reduce gear loss, support recycling of used fishing gear, and promote retrieval of snagged or lost gear; and • facilitate the participation of representatives from nations from which DFG components originate in DFG survey and removal efforts.
|
From page 93... ...
. Other forms of DFG also have the potential to entangle marine organisms, disable vessels, cause physical damage to habitat, and contribute to the marine debris problem.
|
From page 94... ...
In U.S. domestic trawl fish eries, fishermen have stated that this type of net loss is less common (Bob King, personal communication; Michael Stone, personal communication)
|
From page 95... ...
Primarily because of concerns over bycatch and ghost fishing, management interest in controlling these fisheries and their gear loss rates has been high (e.g., coastal state bans, high seas bans)
|
From page 96... ...
Trap loss has many causes, but includes weather-related movement and damage and loss due to conflicts with other user groups. Fishing vessels snag and move trap gear, floats are snagged on passing vessels or in towed fishing gear, competitors are reported to vandalize each other's gear in some fisheries (Acheson, 1977)
|
From page 97... ...
. While these entanglements are most likely to occur in active gear rather than in derelict gear, the extent to which derelict gear poses a threat to these marine mammals is unknown and indeed these entanglements are one vector for turning active gear into DFG.
|
From page 98... ...
. The impact of derelict fishing lines is most obvious and dramatic when it entangles sea turtles, sea birds, and marine mammals; however, virtually all marine animals are susceptible to this entanglement (e.g., Shomura and Godfrey, 1990)
|
From page 99... ...
Under international law, both coastal states and flag states (nations that register fishing vessels) bear responsibility to prevent marine debris, including DFG, by providing adequate recep tion facilities at fishing ports and enforcing regulations requiring proper disposal of waste fishing gear.
|
From page 100... ...
IMO's member states, acting through IMO's Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) , recognize that compliance with MARPOL Annex V has been incomplete and that marine debris, including debris from fishing operations, is a substantial threat.
|
From page 101... ...
A gear-marking provi sion could be added to MARPOL Annex V • The Guidelines (International Maritime Organization, 2006b)
|
From page 102... ...
Recommendation: The U.S. delegation should exercise its influence in the correspondence group and on IMO's MEPC to amend MARPOL Annex V to
|
From page 103... ...
MPPRCA amended APPS to require USCG to adopt regulations to implement MARPOL Annex V's ban on the disposal of synthetic fishing nets and other fishing-related plastic garbage and its requirement that vessels maintain refuse record books, garbage management plans, and post placards summarizing MARPOL Annex V (see Chapter 3)
|
From page 104... ...
One explanation for the lack of detail regarding fishing vessels and waste fishing gear may lie in the narrow manner in which USCG interprets its regulatory p owers under MPPRCA. MPPRCA gives USCG broad regulatory powers to give effect to MARPOL Annex V's ban on disposal of plastic, including synthetic fishing gear, at sea (33 U.S.C.
|
From page 105... ...
Given these responses, it appears that USCG is unlikely to adopt additional DFG-related regulations without a direct congressional man date and budget authorization, even though APPS as amended gives USCG broad rulemaking authority to implement items recommended in the Guidelines (International Maritime Organization, 2006b) for prevent ing DFG and to adopt measures to define ambiguous terms in MARPOL Annex V and APPS.
|
From page 106... ...
Recommendation: Congress should direct USCG and NOAA to undertake a joint rulemaking to develop rules that require commer cial and recreational fishing vessels to properly dispose of all waste fishing gear and to take specific precautions to prevent accidental loss of fishing gear. International Fisheries Agreements Prevention and reduction of DFG is clearly a part of sustainable and responsible fisheries management; therefore, international fisheries agreements play a role in preventing and reducing this type of marine debris.
|
From page 107... ...
The international fishery organizations are struggling even to meet their core legal obligations to adopt necessary conservation and management measures to prevent overexploitation and to allocate equitably the burdens of those measures among high seas fish ing states and coastal states. With these difficulties, marine debris is at best a third-order priority.
|
From page 108... ...
The Secretariat maintains a marine debris database from 12 index sites on the Antarctic Peninsula and on Antarctic and sub-Antarctic islands. CCAMLR's active interest in addressing the marine debris -- including DFG -- problem may be due in part to the designation of the waters south of 60°S latitude as a MARPOL Annex V special area in 1992.
|
From page 109... ...
for recycling and proper disposal; and • rewards or regulatory priority given to fishing vessels that report and record waste fishing gear discharges that are successfully prosecuted. Some of these measures are new but many are detailed in the MARPOL Annex V Guidelines (International Maritime Organization, 2006b; see Box 4.1)
|
From page 110... ...
As previously discussed, amendments to MARPOL Annex V that contain more detailed provisions on fishing gear would greatly assist the international and regional bodies that seek to manage fisheries and to protect the marine environment. If these inter national conventions adopted comparable DFG prevention measures, it would ensure implementation of these measures by additional fishing fleets that may not be signatories to each individual convention.
|
From page 111... ...
in the EEZ may not dump over board, jettison, or otherwise discard any article or substance that may interfere with other fishing vessels or gear, or that may catch fish or cause damage to any marine resource, including marine mammals and birds, except in cases of emergency involving the safety of the ship or crew, or as specifically authorized by communication from the appropriate USCG Commander or other authorized officer. These articles and substances include, but are not limited to, fishing gear, net scraps, bale straps, plastic bags, oil drums, petroleum containers, oil, toxic chemicals, or any man-made items retrieved in a [foreign fishing vessel's]
|
From page 112... ...
reports made by vessel operators. Information provided to the committee by the Caribbean Fishery Management Council, the New England Fishery Management Council, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, and the Western Pacific Fishery Manage ment Council indicate that regional FMCs have included provisions in their fishery management plans (FMPs)
|
From page 113... ...
For example, the Caribbean Fishery Management Council has banned gillnets and trammel nets, in part out of concern that these gear types are prone to become entangled on reefs and that they are likely to damage living substrate during retrieval or to be abandoned as unrecoverable. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council established a requirement that crab pots fished in the eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab fishery must be fished in connected strings of at least 10 pots.
|
From page 114... ...
This aspect of gear marking is not controversial. The other aspect of gear marking is focused on tracing DFG back to par ticular fisheries and fishing vessels; this aspect of gear marking is contro versial.
|
From page 115... ...
Finding: Although some FMPs currently include measures that may have a collateral benefit of reducing DFG, current FMPs do not include measures that specifically address DFG. Recommendation: NOAA should establish a timetable for review of all existing FMPs for opportunities to reduce fishing-related marine debris, including reducing gear, minimizing gear loss, and minimiz ing impacts of lost gear, and to improve gear marking and recovery.
|
From page 116... ...
For those fisheries that generate DFG that harms endangered and protected species, NOAA has the authority under ESA and MMPA to require fishing gear accountability measures. Recommendation: NOAA should • determine which endangered and protected marine wildlife species or populations are at risk in part from DFG based on a review of all available information on fisheries interactions with these species; • include information on injury and deaths due to DFG or other fish ing-related marine debris in its marine mammal stock assessments and recovery plans and status reports for other threatened and endangered species; and • use the provisions of ESA and MMPA to require adoption of gear accountability and other measures to minimize or remove DFG for fisheries that generate DFG that poses an entanglement threat to endangered and protected marine wildlife.
|
From page 117... ...
The Northwest Straits Commission's program could serve as a useful model for other fisheries communities facing gear removal. Finding: Fishing is inherently hazardous and, of a necessity, entails some risk of gear loss despite all reasonable precautions.
|
From page 118... ...
Regardless of whether an infraction has occurred, current regulations do not include accountability measures for gear loss and fishermen and fisheries management organizations have few incentives and several disincentives to take responsibility for the impacts and for cleanup. Recommendation: Fishery management organizations, if they adopt gear loss reporting and other accountability measures, should adopt a "no fault" policy regarding the documentation and recovery of lost fishing gear.
|
From page 119... ...
Recommendation: The Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee and the NOAA Marine Debris Program should consider
|
From page 120... ...
In practice, fishing vessels that have recovered such gear have been able to call USCG for authorization to transport it to port for disposal. Also, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council noted that removing DFG from habitat used by listed resources, such as Steller sea lions, could require a "take" permit.
|
From page 121... ...
FISH AGGREGATING DEVICES The growing use of a specific type of fishing gear -- FADs -- in pelagic purse seine fisheries raises questions about its potential impacts on both target and nontarget populations, as well as its potential to become marine debris. FADs, their use in fishing operations, and their potential impacts are defined and described below, focusing on FADs as marine debris.
|
From page 122... ...
Fishing Vessels in the Western Pacific The United States licenses a number of U.S. flag purse seine fishing vessels that use drifting fish aggregating devices (FADs)
|
From page 123... ...
(b) View of a drifting FAD from the surface (reprinted with permission from David Itano)
|
From page 124... ...
. Fish Aggregating Devices as Marine Debris The above description of how FADs are used illustrates some of the ambiguities that arise in considering their transformation into DFG.
|
From page 125... ...
Within international legal frameworks, the United States should encourage IMO and RFMOs to provide similarly explicit definitions of "accidental losses" and "rea sonable precautions" to clarify the circumstances under which FADs constitute illegal discharges of marine debris. Recommendation: RFMOs should devise regulations to exert greater control on the use, deployment, and retrieval of FADs to reduce the potential for FADs to become DFG.
|
From page 126... ...
vessels fishing any where are held accountable to these standards. Regional Fisheries Management Organizations Within the past decade, there has been an increasing concern that derelict or lost FADs are contributing to the marine debris problem and some evidence exists to support this claim (Donohue, 2005)
|
From page 127... ...
is still opportunistically used as a FAD when encountered, ETP fishermen almost exclusively fish on man-made drifting FADs. FADs have been widely used in the ETP purse seine fishery for almost 15 years, and their relative importance has increased during this period, while that of flotsam has decreased, as shown by the data in Figure 4.2b.
|
From page 128... ...
(b) Estimated number of sets on floating objects, by type of object, e ncountered by the purse seine fleet in the eastern Pacific Ocean.
|
From page 129... ...
. There are about 225 purse seine vessels fishing in the western and central Pacific Ocean; however, this estimate does not include Indonesian and Filipino domestic purse seine/ringnet fleets which together account for over 1,000 vessels (Williams and Reid, 2006)
|
From page 130... ...
While WCPFC does not have any regulations specific to the use of FADs, the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean contains language that specifically requires measures to minimize "catch by lost or abandoned gear" and could also be applied to derelict FADs: adopt measures to minimize waste; discards; catch by lost or aban doned gear; pollution originating from fishing vessels; catch of non t arget species, both fish and non-fish species;…and impacts on associated or dependent species, in particular endangered species and promote the development and use of selective, environmentally safe, and cost e ffective fishing gear and techniques (Article 5(e)
|
From page 131... ...
. Indian Ocean Tuna Commission Since the 1990s, FAD usage by European Union purse seine fleets has increased significantly in the Indian Ocean (Morón et al., 2001)
|
From page 132... ...
. Skipper surveys from French and Spanish purse seine vessels operat ing in the western Indian Ocean estimated the total number of actively monitored FADs at approximately 2,100 at any given time (Moreno et al., 2007)
|
From page 133... ...
Other Impacts While the committee's charge was to evaluate the role of drifting FADs in the generation of marine debris, the concern over FADs is pri marily focused on their ecological impact, both on target fisheries species and on pelagic species overall. These broader concerns do not go away after FADs have been lost or otherwise abandoned -- FADs as DFG can be expected to exercise an ecological impact on target and nontarget species and on benthic and littoral ecosystems when they sink or wash ashore.
|
From page 134... ...
. Improving the Understanding and Management of Fish Aggregating Devices To date, very little is known about the total number of FADs in the world's oceans, the number of vessels that fish on or use FADs, the number of FADs deployed by fishing vessels, whether and with what frequency FADs are recovered, the frequency with which individual FADs are set upon, the total number of sets on FADs, and the expropriation and loss
|
From page 135... ...
The resolu tion would prohibit FAD fishing between either July through September or October through December in the EEZs and the areas beyond national jurisdiction within the area bounded by 20ºN and 20ºS. The resolution has an exemption for purse seiners home ported in the Philippines and operating on the high seas off the coast of the Philippines, which are entirely dependent on FAD sets, but requires the Philippines to imple ment its national tuna plan, which limits the number of FADs to 25 FADs per purse seine vessel and to provide the national tuna plan for review and endorsement in 2008 by WCPFC.
|
From page 136... ...
IATTC FIR 08/2005 FIGURE 4.5 IATTC Flotsam Information Record (FIR) card (reprinted with p ermission from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission)
|
From page 137... ...
DERELICT FISHING GEAR AND FISH AGGREGATING DEVICES 137 I.a.OVERHE VIEW AD (Include dimensions)
|
From page 138... ...
Information collected from FAD management plans could be used to more effectively evaluate the role of FADs in the generation of marine debris. In 1999, IATTC considered (but failed to adopt)
|
From page 139... ...
Finding: Replacement of plastic components and synthetic ropes and webbing used to construct FADs with readily degradable materials such as natural fibers would lessen the adverse impacts of FADs that become marine debris. Recommendation: RFMOs should support the development of FAD designs that do not incorporate persistent synthetic or scrap materials but instead include materials that will self-destruct, readily bio degrade, mitigate entanglement, and provide an incentive for FADs to be maintained and regularly retrieved.
|
From page 140... ...
Inadequate port facili ties and high disposal costs are an impediment to disposal of waste and DFG. Overarching Recommendation: MARPOL Annex V (and correspond ing domestic law)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.