{"title":"渔业观察员协议对海洋哺乳动物混获率估计值的影响","authors":"Kristin Precoda, Christopher D Orphanides","doi":"10.1093/icesjms/fsad202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Managing fishing operations’ threat to marine mammal populations hinges on accurate bycatch estimates, often derived from fishery observer or monitoring programmes. Much global marine mammal bycatch occurs in gillnets, and observer protocols that do not include watching the haulback of gillnets may miss animals that drop out of the net. We investigated whether trips using a fish-focused observer protocol (no requirement to watch the haulback) in US northwestern Atlantic gillnet fisheries from 1994 to 2019 had different observed bycatch rates from trips under a mammal-focused observer protocol (watching the haulbacks) for grey seals (Halichoerus grypus atlantica), harbour seals (Phoca vitulina vitulina), and harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena phocoena). We found that observer protocol was likely to affect observed drop-out and bycatch rates. Under the fish-focused protocol, the ratio of animals removed from the net to those that fell from the net was generally higher than under the mammal-focused protocol, suggesting fish-focused observers missed bycatch that fell. Bycatch rates of animals removed from the net by fishers differed significantly between observer protocols for seals, but not for harbour porpoise, perhaps because of differences in entanglement and manner of decomposition. We estimate bycatch was underreported by 3–25% because of unobserved drop-outs on fish-focused observer protocols.","PeriodicalId":51072,"journal":{"name":"ICES Journal of Marine Science","volume":"88 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of fishery observer protocol on estimated bycatch rates of marine mammals\",\"authors\":\"Kristin Precoda, Christopher D Orphanides\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icesjms/fsad202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Managing fishing operations’ threat to marine mammal populations hinges on accurate bycatch estimates, often derived from fishery observer or monitoring programmes. Much global marine mammal bycatch occurs in gillnets, and observer protocols that do not include watching the haulback of gillnets may miss animals that drop out of the net. We investigated whether trips using a fish-focused observer protocol (no requirement to watch the haulback) in US northwestern Atlantic gillnet fisheries from 1994 to 2019 had different observed bycatch rates from trips under a mammal-focused observer protocol (watching the haulbacks) for grey seals (Halichoerus grypus atlantica), harbour seals (Phoca vitulina vitulina), and harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena phocoena). We found that observer protocol was likely to affect observed drop-out and bycatch rates. Under the fish-focused protocol, the ratio of animals removed from the net to those that fell from the net was generally higher than under the mammal-focused protocol, suggesting fish-focused observers missed bycatch that fell. Bycatch rates of animals removed from the net by fishers differed significantly between observer protocols for seals, but not for harbour porpoise, perhaps because of differences in entanglement and manner of decomposition. We estimate bycatch was underreported by 3–25% because of unobserved drop-outs on fish-focused observer protocols.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ICES Journal of Marine Science\",\"volume\":\"88 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ICES Journal of Marine Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsad202\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FISHERIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ICES Journal of Marine Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsad202","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of fishery observer protocol on estimated bycatch rates of marine mammals
Managing fishing operations’ threat to marine mammal populations hinges on accurate bycatch estimates, often derived from fishery observer or monitoring programmes. Much global marine mammal bycatch occurs in gillnets, and observer protocols that do not include watching the haulback of gillnets may miss animals that drop out of the net. We investigated whether trips using a fish-focused observer protocol (no requirement to watch the haulback) in US northwestern Atlantic gillnet fisheries from 1994 to 2019 had different observed bycatch rates from trips under a mammal-focused observer protocol (watching the haulbacks) for grey seals (Halichoerus grypus atlantica), harbour seals (Phoca vitulina vitulina), and harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena phocoena). We found that observer protocol was likely to affect observed drop-out and bycatch rates. Under the fish-focused protocol, the ratio of animals removed from the net to those that fell from the net was generally higher than under the mammal-focused protocol, suggesting fish-focused observers missed bycatch that fell. Bycatch rates of animals removed from the net by fishers differed significantly between observer protocols for seals, but not for harbour porpoise, perhaps because of differences in entanglement and manner of decomposition. We estimate bycatch was underreported by 3–25% because of unobserved drop-outs on fish-focused observer protocols.
期刊介绍:
The ICES Journal of Marine Science publishes original articles, opinion essays (“Food for Thought”), visions for the future (“Quo Vadimus”), and critical reviews that contribute to our scientific understanding of marine systems and the impact of human activities on them. The Journal also serves as a foundation for scientific advice across the broad spectrum of management and conservation issues related to the marine environment. Oceanography (e.g. productivity-determining processes), marine habitats, living resources, and related topics constitute the key elements of papers considered for publication. This includes economic, social, and public administration studies to the extent that they are directly related to management of the seas and are of general interest to marine scientists. Integrated studies that bridge gaps between traditional disciplines are particularly welcome.