Andrew B. Gill, Julie Bremner, Karen Vanstaen, Sylvia Blake, Frances Mynott, Susana Lincoln
{"title":"Limited Evidence Base for Determining Impacts (Or Not) of Offshore Wind Energy Developments on Commercial Fisheries Species","authors":"Andrew B. Gill, Julie Bremner, Karen Vanstaen, Sylvia Blake, Frances Mynott, Susana Lincoln","doi":"10.1111/faf.12871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The coexistence between offshore wind and fisheries has raised questions about potential impacts on species that are fished. We systematically evaluated the offshore wind farm (OWF) literature for evidence of effects leading to impacts on commercial fisheries species. First, we collated evidence of environmental effects of OWFs on fisheries species and then determined whether these could be interpreted as impacts using fishery-scale and organism-scale parameters for pelagic finfish, demersal and reef-associated roundfish, demersal flatfish, elasmobranchs and shellfish. We appraised consistency and level of agreement of direct evidence and explored the body of indirect evidence. A total of 1268 documents featured evidence of OWF effects on fisheries species, with only 60 documents (274 species records) providing direct evidence. Evidence on finfish far outweighed that for shellfish. Demersal and reef-associated roundfish were the best-studied group, while elasmobranchs were poorly evidenced. Most studies considered population rather than stock parameters. There was limited evidence of impacts, owing to inconclusive results and inconsistent effects within the parameters assessed—illustrating the importance of looking across the evidence base rather than focussing on individual studies. Hence, there is currently insufficient direct evidence to confidently determine OWF impacts on fisheries species. Overwhelmingly, the evidence deals with indirect effects, although these should not be disregarded as they can highlight plausible impacts on fisheries species, which could guide research and monitoring targeted at understanding the impacts of OWF—a pressing concern given the increased policy commitment of many nations to these two marine sectors sharing marine space.</p>","PeriodicalId":169,"journal":{"name":"Fish and Fisheries","volume":"26 1","pages":"155-170"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.12871","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fish and Fisheries","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12871","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The coexistence between offshore wind and fisheries has raised questions about potential impacts on species that are fished. We systematically evaluated the offshore wind farm (OWF) literature for evidence of effects leading to impacts on commercial fisheries species. First, we collated evidence of environmental effects of OWFs on fisheries species and then determined whether these could be interpreted as impacts using fishery-scale and organism-scale parameters for pelagic finfish, demersal and reef-associated roundfish, demersal flatfish, elasmobranchs and shellfish. We appraised consistency and level of agreement of direct evidence and explored the body of indirect evidence. A total of 1268 documents featured evidence of OWF effects on fisheries species, with only 60 documents (274 species records) providing direct evidence. Evidence on finfish far outweighed that for shellfish. Demersal and reef-associated roundfish were the best-studied group, while elasmobranchs were poorly evidenced. Most studies considered population rather than stock parameters. There was limited evidence of impacts, owing to inconclusive results and inconsistent effects within the parameters assessed—illustrating the importance of looking across the evidence base rather than focussing on individual studies. Hence, there is currently insufficient direct evidence to confidently determine OWF impacts on fisheries species. Overwhelmingly, the evidence deals with indirect effects, although these should not be disregarded as they can highlight plausible impacts on fisheries species, which could guide research and monitoring targeted at understanding the impacts of OWF—a pressing concern given the increased policy commitment of many nations to these two marine sectors sharing marine space.
期刊介绍:
Fish and Fisheries adopts a broad, interdisciplinary approach to the subject of fish biology and fisheries. It draws contributions in the form of major synoptic papers and syntheses or meta-analyses that lay out new approaches, re-examine existing findings, methods or theory, and discuss papers and commentaries from diverse areas. Focal areas include fish palaeontology, molecular biology and ecology, genetics, biochemistry, physiology, ecology, behaviour, evolutionary studies, conservation, assessment, population dynamics, mathematical modelling, ecosystem analysis and the social, economic and policy aspects of fisheries where they are grounded in a scientific approach. A paper in Fish and Fisheries must draw upon all key elements of the existing literature on a topic, normally have a broad geographic and/or taxonomic scope, and provide general points which make it compelling to a wide range of readers whatever their geographical location. So, in short, we aim to publish articles that make syntheses of old or synoptic, long-term or spatially widespread data, introduce or consolidate fresh concepts or theory, or, in the Ghoti section, briefly justify preliminary, new synoptic ideas. Please note that authors of submissions not meeting this mandate will be directed to the appropriate primary literature.