Final Report on Pilot Observer Programme in Irish Pelagic …on,the... · 2019-07-18 · Report on the Pilot Observer Programme in Irish Pelagic Trawl Fisheries: Implementing Council

Report on the Pilot Observer

Programme in Irish Pelagic Trawl

Fisheries: Implementing Council

Regulation (EC) No 812/2004

John Boyd, Ian O’Connor and Simon Berrow

Marine Biodiversity Research Group

Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology

Dublin Road

Galway

May 2012

Executive Summary

A pilot fisheries bycatch observer programme was carried out during the

2011-2012 pelagic fishing season in Ireland to meet the requirements of the EU

Bycatch Regulation.

A team of five observers carried out a total of 15 fishing trips ranging in

duration from two to 13 days. A total of 90 days at sea were accompanied

with 75 days fishing and 85 hauls. Vessels ranged from 22 to 62 meters in

overall length and the majority of coverage took place in ICES areas VIa, VIIj

2 and VIIk 2. Over 10% of albacore tuna national quota was observed, 6.2% of

the horse mackerel quota and 2.4% of the boarfish quota but less than 1% of

the mackerel quota.

No cetacean bycatch was observed during any of the fishing trips. Important

commercial bycatch recorded included three bluefin tuna and one swordfish.

Biological data on five fish species was collected including length-frequency

distributions which will contribute to national sampling targets for albacore

tuna.

A total of 59 cetacean sightings were recorded for 314 individuals of at least

eight species. Most sightings were of fin whales, with at least 18 sightings

with common dolphin being the most abundant species recorded. Most

sightings were of animals in the vicinity of the fishery though not considered

to be interacting with fishing operations. Two sightings of killer whales were

associated with the mackerel fishery in VIa north, and thought to be targeting

the same aggregations of fish.

The results of this study were consistent with a similar study carried out in

2010 and 2011. Over the course of the two studies no cetacean bycatch was

observed or reported for a combined total of 171 hauls.

The overall coverage achieved was 60% of that targeted. There were

difficulties in finding vessels to place observers on which could be attributed

to vessels operating from overseas ports and uncertainties as to which

overseas port landings would be made in. Other difficulties encountered

included shortage of berths and boat operators being unwilling to take

observers. To ensure full coverage, it is recommended that specific

undertakings to accommodate observers on a boat by boat basis should be

agreed prior to the start of each observer study. This should be done in

consultation with Fish Producers Organisations and other relevant

management bodies.

2

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................3

GMIT FISHERY OBSERVER TEAM PERSONNEL .........................................................4

METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................5

Observer placement on vessels...............................................................................5

Observer duties onboard vessels ............................................................................5

RESULTS .....................................................................................................................7

Spatial Coverage of Fisheries ...............................................................................10

Fisheries Coverage ...............................................................................................11

Incidental capture of cetaceans ............................................................................14

Avian and other megafauna bycatch....................................................................15

Sightings of Cetaceans .........................................................................................16

Separated Fish Bycatch, commercial and non-commercial..................................21

Non Separated Fish Bycatch................................................................................22

Fisheries Biological Data Collected......................................................................25

DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................34

APPENDIX 1. TRIP DATA SHEET...............................................................................38

APPENDIX 2: BYCATCH SAMPLING SHEET ..............................................................39

APPENDIX 3: LENGTH FREQUENCY SAMPLING SHEET ...........................................40

3

Introduction

Incidental capture in fisheries is acknowledged as a significant threat to many

populations of marine mammals worldwide (Northridge 1991). In the

northeast Atlantic concern has been expressed at the impact of both gillnet

and pelagic trawl fisheries on marine mammals, (Morizur et al. 1999; Ross

and Isaac 2004). This concern led to the EU agreeing Bycatch Regulation

(812/2004) which aimed to assess bycatch rate in a range of fisheries and

reduce bycatch of some species through the use of pingers.

In Ireland significant cetacean bycatch has been reported in gillnet fisheries

(Tregenza et al. 1997a 1997b; Rogan and Mackey, 2007) and some pelagic

fisheries (Couperus et al. 1995). Those pelagic fisheries operating in Irish

waters that which have been monitored include the Celtic Sea herring fishery

(Berrow et al. 1994; Morizur et al. 1999) and Dutch mackerel and horse-

mackerel fishery (Couperus et al. 1995). Although operating outside of Irish

waters, Irish registered vessels fishing albacore tuna have been monitored by

BIM (BIM 2000).

The current pilot programme is a continuation of the programme initiated in

2010 in response to EU Council Regulation No. 812/2004 addressing the

incidence of bycatch of small cetaceans in European fisheries (McCarthy et al.

2011). The regulation requires member states to monitor on an annual basis

the incidence of cetaceans taken as bycatch on pelagic trawl and gillnet

fisheries.

The aim of the current phase of the programme is to meet the legal

requirements of regulation EC 812/2004 through the use of independent

observers. For Irish pelagic trawl fisheries the required observer effort is 10%

of fishing effort in ICES subareas VI, VII and VIII from December to March.

Irish pelagic fisheries target a wide range of fish species including:

• albacore tuna Thunnus alalunga

• blue whiting Micromesistius poutassou

• boar fish Capros aper

• herring Clupea harengus

• mackerel Scomber scombrus

• horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus

• sprat Sprattus sprattus

• Sardine Sardinus pilchardus

4

The majority of landings for pelagic species by Irish fishing vessels are made

by vessels licensed as pelagic or polyvalent. For the purposes of this report a

pelagic vessel is considered to be one whose fish holding capacity is entirely

defined by refrigerated sea water tanks (RSW) while polyvalent vessels are

defined by vessels with both RSW tanks and a dry hold. In each case the

fishing method is with mid water trawls that are towed by a single vessel or

by a pair of vessels. Irish pelagic and polyvalent vessels prosecute fisheries for

allocated quotas in waters extending from the Bay of Biscay to the Norwegian

Sea.

GMIT Fishery Observer Team Personnel

The GMIT observer team consists of administrative staff and a panel of

observers. The composition of this team is shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: GMIT fishery observer team personnel

Name

Role

John Boyd Project Coordinator

Dr Ian O Connor Project Advisor and Administrator

Dr Simon Berrow Project Advisor and Administrator

Aleksandra Borawska Observer

Randal Counihan Observer

Joan Hayes Observer

Enda McKeogh Observer

Conor Ryan Observer

Criteria for employment as an observer in the present project included

previous offshore experience on fishing or research vessels, experience in

identification of cetacean species in Irish waters and a third level qualification

in a marine related science. Observers were additionally required to hold a

personal survival techniques certificate (STCW 95) and a current ENG 11

medical certificate.

5

Methodology

Observer placement on vessels

Vessel contact details were obtained from the Irish South and West Fish

Producers Organisation (ISWFPO), the Irish Fish Producers Organisation

(IFPO) and the Killybegs Fisherman’s Organisation (KFO). The project

coordinator attended meetings with the representative of each of these

organisations to secure cooperation and to outline the duties of observers on

board fishing vessels. Resulting from these meetings, vessel and contact

details were obtained.

For vessels affiliated to the ISWFPO observers were placed onboard through

direct liaison with the ISWFPO. For KFO and IFPO members observers were

placed onboard through direct contact with the vessels concerned. Medical

(ENG 11 and Personal Survival Techniques (STCW 95) certification for each

observer were supplied to vessel owners prior to observers going onboard. To

ensure the anonymity of participating vessels it was agreed to ascribe to each

vessel a numeric code.

Observer duties onboard vessels

The principal duties of the observer were to record spatial and temporal data

on fishing operations, incidences and identification of cetacean bycatch,

estimates of catches of targeted species and record incidences of non cetacean

bycatch including fish and megafauna. Additional duties included catch

sampling of commercial catches and conducting watches for the incidence of

cetaceans while in transit, searching for fish and in area surrounding fishing

operations.

Spatial and temporal data was taken from the wheelhouse GPS and consisted

of the time of shooting and hauling and global position of each of these events

and other environmental data.

Observation of catches was made from the deck or the wheelhouse of the

vessel according to which station offered the most comprehensive view. This

is an important point with safety and practical considerations. Safety

considerations take into account the dangers of heavy machinery on an

unstable platform and the demands that the safe operation of these make on

crew and observers alike. Practical considerations dictate that a deck

segmented by raised hatches and machinery may not afford the best view of

fishing operations to an observer who must by necessity stand apart from

them. On all vessels that took observers onboard deck operations were either

6

visible directly from the wheelhouse or by closed circuit television monitors

in the wheelhouse. Fishing took place with single pelagic trawls and pair

pelagic trawls. For catches taken by the partner vessel to the observer vessel,

observations were made from the wheelhouse of the observer vessel and

through radio contact with the other vessel.

Observers were supplied with personal protective equipment, identification

keys for marine mammals and fish, measuring boards for length sampling of

catches and data collection sheets for recording details of each fishing

operation on the trip. (Data collection sheets are shown in Appendices 1-4).

For the albacore tuna fishery catch at length data collected are to be included

in the national fishery report to International Commission for the

Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the assessment body for Atlantic

tunas.

7

Results

Fishing Effort Observed

Observations were made for a total of 19 vessels over 15 trips on pelagic pair

trawl teams or single pelagic trawlers. This encompassed 90 days at sea and

75 days fishing. A total of 85 fishing events or hauls were observed either

directly or indirectly. There were 58 hauls made to an observer occupied

vessel, the primary vessel, and 27 hauls made to the partner vessel in a pair

trawl team (PPT). Only three of the vessels operated as single pelagic trawlers

(SPT). Vessel lengths ranged from 22 to 62 meters overall length. ICES sub-

areas covered extended from VIa southwards to VIIg with observer effort in

these areas being dictated by availability of berths on boats and development

of fishing effort in each area. The coverage of observer objectives is shown in

Table 2. Details of hauls are shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Total coverage by month targeted and achieved.

Month

Area

Targeted

Days at Sea

Achieved

Days at Sea

% Coverage

Achieved

Aug-Oct Albacore 30 34 113%

Oct-Nov VIIg - 7 -

Dec VIa, VIIb, VIIh+j 25 16 64%

Jan VIa, VIIb, VIIh 30 20 67%

Feb-Mar VIa,b, VIIc,g,h+j, VIIIa 65 13 20%

Total

150 90 60%

Table 3: Summary table of GMIT observer coverage of pelagic fisheries from August 2012 to March 2013

Trip

Number Duration Year Primary Vessel Partner Vessel

Days

at

Sea

Days

Fishing

No.

Hauls

Primary

Vessel

No.

Hauls

Partner

Vessel

Target

Vessel

ICES

area

Gear

Type

Cetacean

Bycatch

Observed/

Reported

1 Aug 9th to Aug 17th 2011 Vessel 1 Vessel 4 9 8 4 3 Albacore

Tuna VIIk2 PPT 0

2 Aug 11th to Aug

19th 2011 Vessel 6 Vessel 15 9 7 5 0*

Albacore

Tuna VIIk2 PPT 0

3 Aug 25th to Aug 31st 2011 Vessel 3 Vessel 16 7 7 6 5** Albacore

Tuna

VIIj2,

VIIk2 PPT 0

4 Aug 25th to Sep 2nd 2011 Vessel 4 Vessel 1 9 9 6 7 Albacore

Tuna

VIIj2,

VIIk2 PPT 0

5 Oct 30th to Nov 1st 2011 Vessel 11 Vessel 17 3 2 3 1 Herring VIIg PPT 0

6 Oct 31st to Nov 1st 2011 Vessel 9 Vessel 13 2 2 1 1 Herring VIIg PPT 0

7 Nov 6th to Nov 8th 2011 Vessel 13 Vessel 9 3 2 1 1 Herring VIIg PPT 0

8 Dec 9th to Dec 11th 2011 Vessel 10 none 3 2 2 NA Horse

Mackerel

VIa,

VIIb SPT 0

9 Dec 14th to Dec 20th 2011 Vessel 5 Vessel 19 7 7 5 3** Horse

Mackerel VIa PPT 0

9

Table 3 continued: Summary table of GMIT observer coverage of pelagic fisheries from August 2012 to March 2013

* haul was split between vessels

** Positional data not available

Trip

Number

Duration Year Primary

Vessel

Partner Vessel Days

at

Sea

Days

Fishing

No.

Hauls

Primary

Vessel

No.

Hauls

Partner

Vessel

Target

Vessel

ICES

area

Gear

Type

Cetacean

Bycatch

Observed/

Reported

10 Dec 14th to Dec 18th 2011 Vessel 7 none 5 4 4 NA Horse

Mackerel

VIa SPT 0

11 Jan 7th to Jan 10th 2012 Vessel 2 none 4 4 4 NA Horse

Mackerel

VIa,

VIIb

SPT 0

12 Jan 8th to Jan 16th 2012 Vessel 7 none 9 8 6 NA Horse

Mackerel

VIa SPT 0

13 Jan 11th to Jan 14th 2012 Vessel 8 Vessel 14 4 3 3 1 Mackerel VIa PPT 0

14 Jan 17th to Jan 19th 2012 Vessel 12 Vessel 18 3 2 1 1 Mackerel VIa PPT 0

15 Feb 26th to Mar 9th 2012 Vessel 5 Vessel 19 13 8 7 4 Boarfish VIIb,

VIIj2

PPT 0

Totals 90 75 58 27 85 tows in total

10

Spatial Coverage of Fisheries Spatial Coverage extended to five ICES areas and 27 statistical rectangles (Fig.

1). The majority of coverage took place in ICES areas VIa, VIIj 2 and VIIk 2,

the areas where fishing for horse mackerel, albacore and boar fish was

concentrated (Fig. 2).

Figure 1. ICES Areas and ICES statistical rectangles covered during GMIT

observer coverage of pelagic fisheries from August 2012 to March 2013

11

Fisheries Coverage

Horse mackerel and albacore were the most the effectively monitored

fisheries. In the case of albacore we were greatly assisted by the direct

intervention of the fish producer’s organisation. For both albacore and horse

mackerel, trips had the same ports as points of departure and landing and this

facilitated placing observers on board.

The albacore tuna fishery operated from Castletownbere, Co Cork and Dingle,

Co Kerry with fishing taking place in ICES areas VIIk 2 and VIIj 2 from the 9th

of August to the 2nd of September. The location of observed fishing hauls and

catches are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

Horse mackerel trips were secured through direct contact with boat owners

and skippers with all trips departing from and finishing in Killybegs, Co

Donegal. Fishing operations were concentrated in ICES area VIa and VIIb in

December and January.

One trip of thirteen days in February was observed for boarfish with the point

of departure being Killybegs and the landing port being Skagen in Denmark.

Fishing operations took place in ICES areas VIIb and to a much lesser extent

in VIIj 2.

Three observed trips for herring were made from Cork in October and

November to ICES area VIIg.

Mackerel trips were limited to two trips of three and four days in January in

ICES subarea VIa.

Difficulties in achieving the targeted coverage stemmed primarily from:

• Boats operating from overseas ports for extended periods with

consequent difficulty in maintaining communications.

• Short notice of departure.

• Shortage of berths for observers on individual boats

• Unwillingness to take observers onboard.

12

Figure 3. All observed fishing hauls, by species, covered during GMIT observer

coverage of pelagic fisheries from August 2012 to March 2013.

13

Figure 4. Distribution of observed fishing catch during GMIT observer coverage of

pelagic fisheries from August 2012 to March 2013.

Mackerel

Celtic Sea herring

Albacore tuna Horse mackerel

Mackerel

14

Figure 4 (cont). Boarfish hauls observed during GMIT observer coverage of

pelagic Fisheries from August 2012 to March 2013.

Incidental capture of cetaceans

No cetacean bycatch was observed during any of the 80 hauls reported. This

zero rate of bycatch comprises an indicative 2.9% of the combined national

quotas for all fisheries for which there was observer coverage. Coverage was

highest for albacore and horse mackerel at 11.5% and 6.2% of national quotas

respectively. Coverage for boarfish was 2.4% of the national quota but this is

in the context of an increase of 148% from 2011 to 2102.

Herring coverage was 1.3% of the quota for the Celtic Sea. This is in a context

where for technical reasons on one of the three trips observed no catch was

landed. These technical reasons are described as errors in targeting and gear

malfunctioning.

Observer coverage of the mackerel fishery was less than one percent of the

national quota of almost 55,000 tonnes.

These data are presented in Tables 5 and 6.

15

Table 5: Observer coverage as percentage of quotas for each species.

Quota

Year

2011

quota

2012

quota

2011 quota 2012

quota

2011/2012

quota1

Month Albacore Boarfish CS Herring Mackerel Horse

Mackerel

Grand

Total

1 445 742 1187

2 340 340

3 1000 1000

8 351 351

9 57 57

10 252 252

11 155 155

12 1510 1510

Est. Catch

tonnes

408 1340 155 445 2504 4852

Quota 3553 56666 12115 54956 40361 167651

% Quota 11.48 2.36 1.28 0.81 6.20 2.89

Bycatch 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 average of 2011 and 2012 season

Table 6. Fishing effort over hauls with complete data sets.

Species Albacore Boar Fish Herring Mackerel Scad Total

No. Hauls 22 12 8 6 21 69

Catch (tonnes) 408 1340 155 445 2504 4852

Total Decimal

Hours Towed 66 41 10 8 87 211

Average catch

per haul tonnes 18.6 111.7 19.4 74.2 119.2

mean 68

t/haul

Average catch per

decimal hour tonnes 6.2 32.9 15.1 55.0 28.9

mean

55t/dh

Cetacean bycatch 0 0 0 0 0 0

Avian and other megafauna bycatch

There was no avian or other megafauna bycatch observed. Other bycatch of

ETP (Endangered, Threatened or Protected) species such as large marine

turtles, that have previously been recorded as bycatch in pelagic fisheries,

were not observed.

16

Sightings of Cetaceans

A total of 59 sightings of at least eight cetacean species were recorded during

this study comprising an estimated 314 individuals. Sightings were

concentrated around the Porcupine Seabight where albacore catches were

made in August. Sightings data is displayed in Table 7 and Figures 5 and 8.

Most sightings were of fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), with at least 18

sightings, but many of the unidentified large baleen whales and large whales

were most likely of this species. The only other mysticetes positively

identified were minke whales, (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) with four sightings.

The most frequently sighted odontocete was common dolphin (Delphinus

delphis) with seven sightings of a total of 194 individuals. Long-finned pilot

whales, (Globicephala melas), were the second most frequently recorded species

but five other odontocete species were also recorded including killer whales,

(Orcinus orca), and sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus). Only killer whales

were recorded interacting with the target fishery, feeding it is thought on

mackerel being targetted by the observed fishery. Common dolphins were

reported bow-riding fishing vessels but not interacting with the fishery. All

other sightings of cetaceans were observed either in transit to the fishing

grounds or on the fishing grounds, but not interacting with the boat or

apparently with the fishery.

Other species positively identified included harbour porpoise, (Phocoena

phocoena), and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). The sightings of

harbour porpoise were notable in that neither were coastal with one sighting

made off the shelf edge at the Porcupine Seabight.

Observed fishery interactions were restricted to a pod of killer whales

(estimated at 20 animals) on 17 December 2011 associating with a large fleet of

pelagic trawlers and pelagic factory trawlers targeting mackerel north of the

Butt of Lewis. Elsewhere in much less favourable sighting conditions killer

whales were in sighted from the 7 January to 10 January 2012 again in the

vicinity of the mackerel fleet. This confirmed fishing industry information of

killer whales associating with mackerel fleets in this area at this time of year.

Images of killer whales with pelagic freezer trawlers in the background from

the 17 December 2011 are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7.

For boarfish there were no sightings associated with fishing activity or indeed

throughout the trip and this was with and a highly experienced observer and

under favourable fishing conditions.

17

There were no reported sightings of cetaceans during herring fishing

operations. Bottlenose dolphins were sighted in transit from the fishing

grounds. These were short trips where a considerable portion of the time

onboard was during hours of darkness or in otherwise unfavourable sighting

conditions.

Table 7. Observer sightings of cetaceans by odontocete and mysticete species

Species No.

sightings

Est. no. of

animals

Group size

(mean)

Area Comments

Odontocetes

Harbour

porpoise 2 5 5

Offshore from

Dingle and

Porcupine Seabight

Definite id

Common

dolphin 7 194 4-100 (36)

Coastal to

Porcupine Seabight

Sighted in passage and

bowriding while in

passage

Bottlenose

dolphin 1 5 5

Coastal Mine Head

Area Sighted in passage

Long-finned

pilot whale 4 24 1-10 (6)

Porcupine Seabight

and shelf south of

Cork

On fishing grounds but

not interacting with fishing

Killer whale 1 20 20 Shelf Edge, West of

Donegal

Associating with mackerel

fishery

Sperm

whale 1 1 1 Porcupine Seabight



Mysticetes

Fin whale 18 28 1-5 (1.6) Porcupine Seabight On fishing grounds but


Minke

whale 4 4 1 Porcupine Seabight



Unidentified

large whale 1 1 1 Porcupine Seabight

Very large blow from long

range

Unidentied

large whale 13 20 1-3 (1.5)

Porcupine Seabight

and Shelf west of

Kerry



Unidentified

whale 7 12 1-23 (1.7)

Porcupine Seabight

and Shelf west of

Kerry

Passage and fishing

grounds but not

interacting with fishing

Totals 59 314

18

Figure 5: Observer sightings of odontocete species August 2011 to January

2012. Species include common dolphins, long finned pilot whale, bottlenose

dolphin, killer whale and sperm whale. Please note scaling differences

between maps.

19

Figure 6. Killer whales with pelagic freezer trawlers in the background

north of the Butt of Lewis at approximate location is 59°18’N, 6°20'W on 17

December 2011.

Figure 7. The same killer whale pod as above with block from observer vessel

in foreground on 17 December 2011.

20

Figure 8. Observer sightings of mysticete species August 2011. The most

frequently sighted species were fin whales with a smaller number of sightings

for minke whales. Sightings of unidentified large whales are also presented.

21

Separated Fish Bycatch, commercial and non-commercial

Commercial bycatch separated and retained from the target catch was

restricted to bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) and swordfish (Xiphias gladius).

Bluefin tuna bycatch was in compliance with the regulations of the EU multi-

annual recovery plan for blue fin tuna1.

Separated non commercial bycatch from the albacore fishery was composed

of sun fish (Mola mola), black fish (Centrolophus niger) and rough pomfret

(Taractes asper). Incidences of such bycatch were low. This confirms the

related experience of fishermen that when targeting is effective the incidence

of bycatch of any kind is low. It is worth noting that observers onboard

commercial fishing vessels provide information on the spatial and temporal

distribution of these species and other species that might not otherwise be

recorded and that this in itself is a considerable justification for observer

schemes. Two blue shark (Prionace glauca), described as small were caught

and discarded in the Celtic Sea herring fishery. Data for separated bycatch is

presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Separated fish bycatch from GMIT observer programme

1 Council Regulation (EC) No 302/2009 of 6 April 2009 concerning a multiannual recovery plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, amending Regulation (EC) No 43/2009 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1559/2007

Separated Bycatch Target

Species

Date

Shoot

ICES

Area

ICES

Rectangle

Catch

in

Tonnes Species Description

Albacore 26/08/11 VIIj2 30D8 14 Taractes asper 1 rough pomfret

Albacore 30/08/11 VIIk2 31D7 15 Xiphias gladius

Centrolophus niger

1 swordfish

retained, 1 black

fish, 9 damaged

albacore discarded

Albacore 12/08/11 VIIk2 29D5 55 Xiphias gladius

Mola mola

1 swordfish

retained, sunfish

discarded

Albacore 13/08/11 VIIk2 29D5 25 Thunnus thynnus , Bluefin x2 retained

Albacore 27/08/11 VIIj2 30D8 20 Thunnus thynnus

Mola mola

Bluefin x1

retained, sunfish

discarded

Herring 31/10/11 VIIg 31E3 0 Prionace glauca 2 blue shark,

described as small

discarded

22

Non Separated Fish Bycatch

Small quantities of non target species were observed in 17 hauls. All catches

these observations were made of were landed indicating that they were

considered as unlikely to detract significantly from allocated quotas for the

targetted species. The most commonly observed non separated bycatch was

small mackerel described by operators as pencil or seed mackerel. Other

species which occurred were boarfish, whiting, gurnard, haddock, hake and

monkfish. These observations are indicative and do not infer a total absence

of such bycatch on other hauls. In pelagic fishing operations low incidences

of small non targeted species may well go unrecorded due to the large bulk of

target catch. These observations are presented in Table 8.

Lost and slipped catches

Lost catches were those that could not be taken onboard because of gear

failure. Gear failure in addition to leading to loss of a catch can be potentially

catastrophic and a reminder of operational hazards for both fishermen and

the observer. On the 17 December 2011 up to 500 tonnes of horse mackerel

were lost at the bulwark due to the bag ropes snapping. Another incidence of

gear failure was on 16 December 2011 when the pump detached from the net

causing an estimated 50 tonnes of horse mackerel to be lost.

Slipped catches were observed to occur mainly as a consequence of errors in

targeting. As such they are likely to continue to occur until greater resolution

in fish finding technologies is achieved. Errors in targeting occurred

primarily during horse mackerel fishing trips when marks of boar fish were

mistaken for horse mackerel resulting in a discarded catch. This occurred on

two occasions. Other incidences of errors in targeting occurred in the Celtic

Sea herring fishery when fishing on inconclusive marks lead to discarded

mixed catches of mackerel, sprat and herring. Data on lost and slipped

catches is presented in Table 9.

23

Table 8. Commercial bycatch species landed as part of the target catch

Bycatch Target

Species

Date ICES

Area

ICES

Rec.

Catch

ts Species Description

Boar Fish 29/02/12 VIIj2 33D8 150 Scomber scombrus

Trisopterus luscus

Small nos. seed

mackerel

Boar Fish 01/03/12 VIIb 34D8 180 Scomber scombrus Small nos. seed

mackerel

Boar Fish 02/03/12 VIIb 34D8 200 Scomber scombrus

Eutriglia gurnardus

Small nos. seed

mackerel


mackerel


mackerel


mackerel

Horse

mackerel

15/12/11 VIa 39E0 220 Scomber scombrus

Capros aper

Melanogrammus aegelfinnus

Small nos. of

mackerel, boarfish,

and haddock

Horse

mackerel

08/01/12 VIIb 36D8 150 Merlangius merlanga Small nos. of

Whiting

Horse

mackerel

09/01/12 VIa 39E0 100 Eutriglia gurnardus grey gurnard

Horse

mackerel

10/01/12 VIa 40E0 N/A Eutriglia gurnardus

Merluccius merluccius

Small nos. of grey

gurnard and hake

Horse

mackerel

15/12/11 VIa 43E0 120 Scomber scombrus Small nos. of

mackerel

Horse

mackerel

12/10/11 VIIb 35D8 250 Capros aper Small nos. of

boarfish and whiting

Horse

mackerel

11/01/12 VIa 43E0 80 Scomber scombrus seed mackerel

Horse

mackerel


Horse

mackerel

12/01/12 VIa 43E0 25 Scomber scombrus seed mackerel,

boarfish grey

and red gurnards

Horse

mackerel


Horse

mackerel

14/1/12 VIa 39E0 100 Scomber scombrus Small nos. of

mackerel

Herring 07/11/11 VIIg 31E3 70 Merlangius merlanga

Scomber scombrus

Small nos. of

mackerel and whiting

Herring 01/11/11 VIIg 31E3 45 Merlangius merlanga Small nos. of

whiting

24

Table 9. Observed lost and slipped catches

Lost or discarded catches Target

Species

Date

Shoot

ICES

Area

ICES

Rectangle

Tonnes

Species Description

Horse

mackerel

17/12/11 VIa 43E0 500 Horse

mackerel

Estimate of up to

500t lost due to

ropes snapping

Horse

mackerel

16/12/11 VIa 43E0 350 Horse

mackerel

Estimate of 50 t lost

due to pump

disconnecting

Horse

mackerel

18/12/11 VIa 43E0 50 Boarfish Estimate of up to 50

t discarded due to

error in targetting

Horse

mackerel

12/10/11 VIa 39E1 20 Boarfish Estimate of up to 50

t discarded due to

error in targetting

Herring 31/10/11 VIIg 32E3 20 Herring,

sprat, and

mackerel,

Estimate of up to

10t of small herring

mackerel and sprat

discarded

Herring 31/10/11 VIIg 31E3 20 Herring,

sprat,

mackerel,

and two

blue shark

Estimate of up to

10t of small herring

mackerel and sprat

discarded

25

Fisheries Biological Data Collected

Albacore tuna: Albacore tuna data collection extended to 1818 fork length

measurements taken over seventeen hauls and shows a multi modal length

frequency distribution with a range from 50cm to 88cm. This data is displayed

in Table 10 and Figure 8.

Albacore length frequency distribution August 2008 (n=1818)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88

cm

Nu

mb

er

Figure 8. Albacore length frequency distribution

26

Table 10: Catch numbers at length for albacore tuna 14 to 16 August ICES Area VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2

Ices Rectangle

29D5 29D5 29D5 30D5 29D5 29D5 29D5 29D5

Length Number Number Number Number Number Number Number Number

50 1 1

51 0

52 1 1 1 3

53 1 1 2

54 1 2 1 4

55 1 3 1 5

56 1 2 2 5

57 0 1 2 3

58 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 7

59 1 1 2 1 2 3 10

60 4 3 4 11

61 2 9 2 12 3 1 4 33

62 4 2 4 9 1 5 1 3 29

63 11 10 7 20 3 10 2 5 68

64 5 1 7 8 4 10 2 3 40

65 2 2 9 1 11 6 8 39

66 4 2 3 6 1 8 3 6 33

67 2 0 3 1 2 2 2 12

68 2 1 1 3 1 2 7 4 21

69 2 3 2 5 6 8 26

70 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 3 15

71 3 1 2 1 1 3 8 19

72 4 4 3 5 1 6 6 29

73 4 5 7 5 2 3 4 4 34

74 5 8 7 4 8 4 2 7 45

75 11 10 11 5 5 3 7 6 58

76 5 5 5 3 10 13 1 5 47

77 7 3 3 1 9 6 9 8 46

78 7 2 1 3 5 3 11 4 36

79 4 1 1 7 4 2 5 24

80 7 2 2 2 13

81 1 1 3 4 9

82 1 1 2

83 1 1

84 3 3

85 0

86 1 1

87 0

88 1 1

89 0

Total 82 76 73 120 77 108 87 112 735

Est. ts 15 3 10 25 40 55 25 40 213

Catch t 15 3 10 22 40 108 25 112

Total 14.08.11

to 16.08.11

27

Table 10 (cont). Catch numbers at length for albacore tuna 27 August to 2

September

Date Hauled 27.8.11 28.8.11 28.8.11 30.8.11 31.8.11 31.8.11 31.8.11 1.9.11 2.9.11

ICES Area VIIj2 VIIj2 VIIj2 VIIj2 VIIj2 VIIj2 VIIk2 VIIk2 VIIk2

Ices Rectangle

30D8 30D8 30D8 30D8 31D8 30D8 31D7 31D7 31D7

Length Number Number Number Number Number Number Number Number Number

50 1 1 2

51 1 2 1 4 4

52 3 3 6 9

53 1 3 2 6 8

54 1 3 1 1 6 10

55 1 1 1 2 3 1 9 14

56 2 1 2 4 1 3 13 18

57 1 1 7 6 15 18

58 1 5 9 10 25 32

59 1 1 11 2 7 16 38 48

60 1 2 9 1 13 16 2 1 45 56

61 3 4 5 1 2 19 15 1 50 83

62 2 3 4 1 13 21 3 1 48 77

63 4 3 7 1 11 13 11 2 52 120

64 1 3 8 2 4 5 17 9 4 53 93

65 1 3 7 1 5 8 10 10 3 48 87

66 1 6 6 1 4 6 7 8 1 40 73

67 2 6 6 3 10 6 9 42 54

68 3 2 8 2 2 5 4 6 32 53

69 3 3 9 3 15 10 3 2 48 74

70 12 5 21 3 4 14 9 1 69 84

71 14 8 11 3 6 13 1 56 75

72 11 8 9 1 2 6 4 2 43 72

73 14 9 12 6 12 12 2 67 101

74 8 6 13 1 7 10 8 3 4 60 105

75 9 12 5 2 7 7 4 6 1 53 111

76 3 13 5 2 11 5 1 5 45 92

77 4 15 2 2 12 6 2 4 47 93

78 1 6 3 2 8 4 1 1 26 62

79 2 5 4 3 14 38

80 1 3 1 4 1 10 23

81 2 3 1 6 15

82 0 2 1 3 5

83 1 1 2 3

84 1 1 4

85 0 0

86 0 1

87 0 0

88 0 1

89 0 0

Total 104 132 173 24 99 212 223 90 26 1083 1818

Catch t 14 20 15 6 10 15 24 12 57 173 386

Total all trips

Total 27.08.11

to 02.08.11

28

Horse mackerel: Horse mackerel were length sampled over eighteen hauls with

1312 length measurements taken with a range from 20cm to 43cm. These data

are displayed in Table 11 and Figure 9.

Horse Mackerel Length Frequency Distribution

December '11 to January '12 (n=1312)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

cm

Nu

mb

ers

Figure 9. Horse mackerel length frequency distribution.

29

Table 11. Horse mackerel catch numbers at length.

Date 10.12.11 11.1.11 12.1.11 13.1.12 15.12.11 18.12.11 19.12.11 8.1.12 9.1.12 12.1.12 13.1.12 14.1.12

ICES Area

VIIb VIa VIa VIa VIa VIa V Ia VIa VIa VIa VIa VIa

Ices Rectangl

e 35D8 43E 0 43E0 38E0 39E0 43E 0 42E0 39E0 39 44E0 43E0 39E 0

Length cm number number number number number number number number number number number number number

20 1 1

21 3 1 1 3 8

22 4 1 2 10 1 4 22

23 1 1 6 3 7 11 3 5 37

24 4 9 3 2 3 15 2 2 1 8 49

25 1 11 12 2 7 13 6 5 4 13 7426 3 8 13 27 11 14 3 8 8 8 103

27 1 4 7 25 13 15 10 23 4 7 109

28 2 1 6 5 20 13 21 19 22 4 4 117

29 9 2 3 11 9 18 7 10 19 16 7 111

30 19 4 5 20 2 6 5 4 10 22 3 17 117

31 33 10 12 24 2 7 4 12 27 7 11 149

32 28 7 14 17 6 2 1 5 35 21 13 149

33 9 10 7 15 1 4 34 14 14 108

34 5 11 1 6 2 2 1 1 11 10 4 54

35 3 13 4 4 7 3 2 36

36 2 2 8 3 6 0 21

37 15 4 2 2 1 1 25

38 2 4 1 3 10

39 2 2 1 5

40 3 1 1 1 6

41 0 0

42 0 0

43 1 1

110 87 89 148 113 86 90 101 116 186 68 118 1312

250 180 25 27 220 100 120 150 220 200 40 100 1632

Total

Totals

30

Boarfish: Data was collected from seven hauls resulting in 2191 length

measurements ranging from 11cm to 16cm. This data had a pronounced

modal distribution around 13cm. Data is displayed in Table 12 and Figure 10.

Boarfish length frequency distribution February and

March 2012

(n=2191)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

cm

Nu

mb

ers

Figure 10. Boarfish length frequency distribution.

Table 12. Boarfish catch numbers at length.

Time 10:30 21:05 15:45 09:00 13:54 08:47 15:40

Date 29.29.12 1.3.12 2.3.12 3.3.12 3.3.12 4.3.12 4.3.12

ICES Area VIIj2 VIIb VIIb VIIb VIIb VIIb VIIb

Ices Rectangle 33D8 34D8 34D8 34D8 34D8 35D8 35D8

Total

cm number number number number cm number number number

10

11 8 7 4 5 14 7 45

12 122 90 76 85 73 139 83 668

13 151 164 131 113 129 172 108 968

14 65 58 66 37 65 56 27 374

15 15 30 26 6 18 15 3 113

16 6 4 7 4 1 22

17 1 1

Total 367 353 307 245 294 397 228 2191

31

Herring: Data was collected from two hauls in November. Lengths ranged for

20cm to 26cm.This data is displayed in Table 13 and Figure 11.

Celtic Sea Herring Length Frequency Distribution November 2011 (n=498)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

20 20.5 21 21.5 22 22.5 23 23.5 24 24.5 25 25.5 26

cm

Nu

mb

ers

Figure 11. Length frequency distribution for Celtic Sea Herring.

Table 13. Catch numbers at length Celtic Sea Herring.

Date 1.11.2011 07.11.2011

ICES

Area VIIg VIIg

Ices

Rectangle 31E3 31E3

Totals

Length number number number

20 2 3 5

20.5 1 6 7

21 6 21 27

21.5 9 21 30

22 22 32 54

22.5 34 32 66

23 46 50 96

23.5 41 23 64

24 39 17 56

24.5 33 17 50

25 23 9 32

25.5 5 2 7

26 3 1 4

Totals 264 234 498

32

Table 14: Catch numbers at length of mackerel.

Date 8.1.12 9.1.12 10.1.12 12.1.12 13.12.12

ICES Area VIa VIa VIa VIa VIa

Ices Rectangle 39E0 40E0 44E0 44E0 43E0

Length number number number number number

Total

14 1 3 4

15 4 39 43

16 3 71 74

17 5 28 33

18 16 16

19 8 8

20 5 5

21 1 1 2

22 14 5 19

23 4 2 6

24 7 1 2 1 11

25 8 1 5 4 18

26 9 2 8 19

27 11 4 4 19

28 13 7 4 24

29 15 6 4 16 41

30 10 7 1 22 3 43

31 3 3 27 7 40

32 1 35 21 57

33 34 14 48

34 11 10 21

35 7 3 10

36 6 6

37 2 1 3

38 1 3 4

39 1 1

Total 107 31 185 185 67 575

Mackerel: Mackerel data was collected from fish separated from horse

mackerel catches and from targeted mackerel catches. Lengths range from 14

to 31 cm. This data is displayed in Table 13 and Figure 12.

33

Mackerel length frequency distribution December and January 2012 (n=575)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

cm

Num

ber

Figure 12. Mackerel length frequency distribution Mackerel, January 2012.

34

Discussion

Pelagic trawl fisheries were monitored during this project in accordance with

EU Bycatch Regulation 812/2004. No cetacean bycatch was recorded and thus

the requirement that annual estimates of bycatch for commercial species

should have a coefficient of variation not greater than 0.30 cannot be

achieved. Failure to record cetacean bycatch during this study does not imply

that it does not occur in these fisheries but may indicate that it is a

catastrophic rather routine occurrence. The proportion of the fisheries

monitored relative to national quotas varied from 0.8% (mackerel) to 11.48%

(albacore tuna) with a mean coverage of 4.2% of national quota achieved.

With an increase in observer coverage incidences of cetacean and ETP species

bycatch might well be recorded.

A large body of fisheries data was collected on the fishery including length-

frequency distributions, slippage and the catch and landings of non-target

commercial fish species.

This study compliments a similar pilot study carried out in 2010-2011

(McCarthy et al. 2011). The main result of this study that no cetacean bycatch

was observed or reported during 80 hauls was consistent with this previous

study, which reported no cetacean bycatch in 91 hauls. Thus between the two

studies no cetacean bycatch was observed in 171 hauls. This supports the

experiences related by vessel operators and owners prior to placing observers

onboard their fishing vessels that cetacean bycatch is infrequent.

Cetacean prevalence on fishing grounds was highest in the Porcupine

Seabight during the albacore tuna fishery but interactions with fishing

operations were negligible. Confirmed incidences of interactions with fishing

vessels were restricted to either bow-riding or competing with the vessels for

fish (e.g. killer whales on the mackerel fishery), however none of these

interactions led to bycatch. The limited number of cetacean observations

recorded on other fishing grounds may be in part be due to shorter day length

and less favourable winter sea conditions.

The Irish Whale and Dolphin Group has reported an increase in cetacean

stranding records between January and March 2012, especially of common

dolphins, harbour porpoise and long-finned pilot whales2. Of the 23 common

dolphin strandings reported during this period at least 27% had lesions

consistent with fisheries bycatch, especially along the south coast. This

follows a similar increase in common dolphin strandings reported in January

2 http://www.iwdg.ie/iscope/strandings/

35

2011 (O’Connell and Berrow, 2012). A similar increase in common dolphin

strandings, which has been associated with fisheries bycatch, has recently

been reported from Cornwall3 with 46% of strandings showing distinct signs

of incidental capture. In the present observer programme all observations

from December to March were made west and north of Ireland on shelf edge

fisheries.

The overall coverage was only 60% of that targeted. Coverage at the start of

the pelagic season was good, with 11.5% of the albacore tuna quota observed

but was very poor during the mackerel fishery. Horse mackerel coverage

amounted to 6.2% of the national quota. Boarfish coverage was 2.4% though

in the context of a large quota increase in 2012 of 148% from the previous

year. Despite a large, flexible team of observers there were difficulties in

finding vessels which would participate and this was particularly true of the

mackerel fishery. To some extent failure to provide coverage of this fishery

can be attributed to vessels operating from overseas ports and uncertainties as

to which overseas port landings would be made into. This lead to difficulties

in establishing and maintaining communications with fishing vessel skippers

who were frequently overseas. Posting observers in overseas ports in the

Shetlands, Scotland or Norway was considered but could not be

accommodated within the budgetary constraints of the project if targets were

to be met.

Other difficulties encountered centred on shortage of berths onboard trawlers

and boat operators being unwilling to take observers onboard. Unwillingness

to take observers onboard may have been motivated more by concerns about

data collection on discarding and slipping rather than cetacean bycatch.

Unwillingness to take observers onboard, or an inability to accommodate

observers, created a perception among those skippers who did facilitate

observers that they were carrying an unfair share of the project burden. This

points to the necessity of developing cooperative mechanisms to ensure

future observer programmes achieve a minimum observation of 10% of

fishing quota for the major pelagic fisheries in Ireland. To ensure this level of

coverage, it is recommended that specific undertakings to accommodate

observers should be agreed prior to the start of each observer study, and that

these should be binding. Undertakings should be on a vessel by vessel basis

and weighted to the share of the quota allocated to each vessel. This should be

done in consultation with Fish Producers Organisations and other relevant

management bodies.

3 http://www.cornwallwildlifetrust.org.uk

36

The possibility of utilising supporting data collected on parallel fisheries

observer schemes should be examined in order to ensure full compliance with

the directive without compromising the independence of observations.

Observer schemes have an important role to play in establishing the

sustainability of important and strategic fishery resources and in achieving

environmental and ecosystem certification. Achieving good environmental

status (GED) is a key requirement of the Marine Strategy Framework

Directive4 and delivery has been identified as a constraint by the Our Ocean

Wealth Consultation Process5. Fisheries certification is important to ensure

maximum returns on landings. Therefore it is essential to develop an efficient

and cost effective system of monitoring fisheries environmental impact,

including cetacean bycatch, with the full participation and co-operation of

stakeholders.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Ronan Cosgrove of BIM, Gavin Power of the Irish

South and West Fish Producers Organisation, Ted Breslin of the Killybegs

Fishermen’s Organisation and John Ward of the Irish Fish Producer’s

Organisation. We would especially like to thank all the skippers, boat owners

and fishing companies who accommodated observers onboard their vessels.

We extend our gratitude to the observers who carried out trips, often at short

notice and under difficult conditions.

4 EU Directive 2008/56/EC 5 http://www.ouroceanwealth.ie/Pages/Briefing-Documents.aspx

37

References

Berrow, S.D., O'Neill, M. and Brogan, D. (1998) Discarding practices and

marine mammal bycatch and in the Celtic Sea Herring Fishery.

Biology and Environment. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy (1)1-

8.

BIM. (2000) Diversification trials with alternative tuna fishing techniques

including the use of remote sensing technology. Final Report to the

Commission of the European Communities. EU contract No. 98/010.

Bord Iascaigh Mhara (Irish Sea Fisheries Board), Dun Laoghaire, Co.

Dublin.

BIM. (2004) Report on the development of prototype cetacean deterrent

systems for the albacore tuna pair pelagic fishery 2002-2003. Bord

Iascaigh Mhara (BIM). Report No. 2.04. Issued April 2004, 1-11.

Couperus, A.S. (1995) Interactions between Dutch midwater trawl and

Atlantic white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus acutus) Southwest of

Ireland. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science (22), 209-218.

McCarthy, A., Pinfield, R., Enright, J. and Rogan, E. (2011). Pilot observer

programme in Irish pelagic trawl and gillnet fisheries: Implementing

Council Regulation (EC) No 812/2004. Final Report to Bord Iascaigh

Mhara. University College, Cork.

Morizur, Y., Berrow, S.D., Tregenza, N.J.C., Couperus, A.S., and Pouvreau, S.

(1999) Incidental catches of marine mammals in pelagic trawl

fisheries of the Northeast Atlantic. Fisheries Research 41, 297-307.

Northridge, S. (1991) An updated world review of interactions between marine

mammals and fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 2, Suppliment J.

58pp.

O’Connell, M. and Berrow, S. (2012) Report of the Cetacean Strandings

Scheme: January–December 2011. Final Report to the Department of

Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.

Rogan, E., and Mackey, M. (2007) Megafauna by-catch in drift nets for

albacore tuna (Thunnus alalunga) in the NE Atlantic, Fisheries Research.

Ross A, Isaac S. The Net Effect? A review of cetacean bycatch in pelagic trawls

and other fisheries in the north-east Atlantic. Chippenham, UK:

WDCS, 2004, p. 13-17.

Tregenza, N.J.C., Berrow, S.D., Leaper, R. and Hammond, P.S. (1997a)

Harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena L., bycatch in set gill nets in the

Celtic Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 54, 896-904.

Tregenza, N.J.C., Berrow, S.D., Leaper, R. and Hammond, P.S. (1997b)

Common dolphin, Delphinus delphis L., bycatch in bottom set gillnets

in the Celtic Sea. Report to the International Whaling Commission. 47,

835-839.

38

Appendix 1. Trip Data sheet

Observer Vessel SkipperPort

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Tow No.

DateTime Shoot

GIS shoot Time Haul

GIS Haul Bycatch

Nos. Measure

Nunbers/Tonnes

Cetacean Fish Commercial Fish Discard Others

Catch

Comments (use over leaf to elaborate):Observer Vessel Partner Vessel Trip Start Date Trip End Date

39

Appendix 2: Bycatch Sampling Sheet

Observer Vessel SkipperPort

Bycatch No. LengthSexSpecies

Observer Vessel Partner Vessel

Trip End Date

Comments (use over leaf to elaborate):

Sample Y/NPhoto Y/NTow No.Date

Trip Start Date

Comments

40

Appendix 3: Length Frequency Sampling Sheet

Total Total

50 90

51 9152 9253 93

54 9455 95

56 9657 97

58 9859 99

60 10061 101

62 10263 103

64 10465 105

66 10667 107

68 10869 109

70 11071 111

72 11273 113

74 11475 115

76 11677 117

78 11879 119

80 12081 121

82 12283 123

84 12485 125

86 12687 127

88 12889 129

GIS ShootGIS Haul

Count at Length

GearObserverDate Shoot Sea StateDate Haul Water Depth

Pilot Pelagic Observer Scheme Council Regulation 812/2004

Catch Estimate Cetacean Bycatch (Numbers)

Vessel Time Haul

TemperatureTime Shoot

Others

No. Measured

Nos. Caught Est.

Ts, Caught Est.

Common Dolphins

Striped Dolphins

Comments: (use overleaf if necessary)

Species

Numbers est. Other Fish Bycatch

Count at LengthLength in cm

Length in cm

41