Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Third Report


7 Taking action in respect of pelagic fisheries

Recommendations contained in Defra's strategy document

Summary of proposals


Further trials should be carried out on the use and effectiveness of pingers in pelagic trawl fisheries with an identified by-catch of cetaceans. At present, this recommendation would appear to relate only to the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass: Defra states that, to date, this is the only pelagic trawl fishery in which cetacean by-catch has been seen.[95]

Further research is needed into separator grids, a device that is fitted inside a pelagic trawl net, with the aim of mitigating cetacean by-catch.[96]

Cetacean by-catch in the pelagic fishery for sea bass

78. Defra's strategy document concludes that, on the basis of current evidence, cetacean by-catch is a problem only in the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass. Defra summarises the evidence as follows:

Since 2000 … a number of surveys [have been carried out] to estimate the level of by-catch in UK pelagic fisheries … observers [were placed] on board thirteen UK vessels for a total of 190 days at sea, covering 206 trawling operations around the UK. The fisheries … covered include herring, mackerel, sprat, pilchard, blue whiting, anchovy and [sea] bass. To date, no cetacean by-catch has been seen in any of these fisheries, with the exception of the [sea] bass fishery.[97]

79. The strategy document proposes two measures to address the by-catch problem in this fishery:

  • further trials on the use and effectiveness of pingers in this fishery; and
  • further trials of separator grids in this fishery.

80. We discuss the separator grid trials in greater detail, below. However, based on data gathered by the Sea Mammal Research Unit (SMRU) between 2000 and 2003 (set out in paragraph 33 above), we agree with Defra that there is clear evidence that the sea bass fishery has been responsible for a significant number of deaths of common dolphins as a result of by-catch.

Trials of separator grids

81. A separator (or selection) grid is a device that is fitted inside a pelagic trawl net, with the aim of mitigating cetacean by-catch. It is designed to let targeted fish swim further down into the net, whilst deflecting larger animals such as dolphins. The nets are configured to allow dolphins to either turn round and exit the net or swim through an escape flap positioned in the net above the grid.[98] Defra states that separator grids are currently used in many fisheries around the world to exclude unwanted fish or other animals from the catch, including in New Zealand and Tasmania, where grids have been "successfully deployed" on an experimental basis to minimise catches of sea lions and fur seals in two hoki (blue grenadier) trawl fisheries and a squid trawl fishery.[99] The strategy document notes, however, that the New Zealand trials have been criticised on the basis that animals escaping through the grid may suffer trauma that may impact on their subsequent survival.[100]

82. Defra has funded the SMRU to carry out trials of separator grids, using a pair of Scottish trawlers prosecuting the pelagic sea bass trawl fishery during the 2001-02 and 2002-03 seasons.[101] In the 2002-03 trial, two animals died in 82 hauls over a seven-week period beginning in March 2003; in observations elsewhere in the fishery without the grid deployed, 28 dolphin casualties were recorded in 49 hauls. Defra considers that these results indicate that the separator grid system is effective in minimising dolphin mortality, although it notes that scientists are not yet entirely sure what part of the system is acting to deter dolphins.

83. Further trials of the grids are currently underway in the UK-registered fleet for the 2003-04 sea bass season, which are intended to focus on 'fine-tuning' the system and establishing which aspect of the system is responsible for deterring dolphins from entering the trawl net's cod end tunnel.[102] The Minister told us that, if these trials prove successful, the Government will make the use of separator grids mandatory for all UK vessels involved in this fishery.[103] We note that, under the EU FIFG grant programme, fishermen should be eligible for funding to cover the cost of purchasing separator grids.[104]

Criticism of separator grids

84. Linda Hingley strongly criticised the recent trials of separator grids, describing them as "virtually useless". She argued that the trials were not carried out at the peak of the sea bass season and that the data gathered was not properly recorded.[105] Ms Hingley believed that that the grids will not, in practice, work to reduce by-catch, and cited the New Zealand trials, referred to above, as providing evidence that animals risk being injured or killed when using the grid's escape flap.

85. Other witnesses suggested that more information on separator grids—in particular, more information about the animal welfare implications—is required before they can be regarded as an effective and safe means of mitigating cetacean by-catch. Nick Tregenza pointed out that, if the separator grid system is working because the noise of the equipment involved scares away the dolphins (a possibility that the scientists conducting the trials acknowledge), it may cease to work after a year or two, as the dolphins habituate to it.[106]

86. We have some hesitation in accepting some of the criticisms made of the 2002-03 trials. The grids used in Defra's trials have been modified specifically for these trials, so any evidence of grids killing or injuring sea lions in the New Zealand trials is not directly relevant. Two cameras were used during the trials, to monitor the grid and the escape hole from both inside and outside the net, so that scientists were able to observe underwater activity around the grid.[107] If dolphins other than the two reported caught had been killed or seriously injured in the process of escaping the net, it is likely that such instances would have been recorded on camera.

87. Consequently, we are encouraged by the results obtained to date from the separator grid trials, and we commend Defra for funding these trials over several seasons of the sea bass fishery. However, we remind Defra that it is important not to treat separator grids as the "silver bullet" solution to cetacean by-catch problems. If the grids are to be implemented more widely in the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass, it is important that ongoing monitoring of their efficacy continues to be carried out, over a number of years.

Addressing cetacean by-catch in the sea bass fishery at the European level

88. Even if separator grids are successfully deployed on all UK-registered vessels prosecuting the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass, this will be insufficient to address the wider cetacean by-catch problem. Under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the UK can regulate only its own vessels, and the evidence indicates that the majority of vessels working this fishery are not UK vessels. The National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO) estimated that the fishery is prosecuted by approximately 60 French vessels (working as 30 pairs), fewer than ten Dutch vessels, although these are large vessels and do not work in pairs, and between two and six Scottish pair teams.[108] The Wildlife Trusts estimated that the fishery was prosecuted by around 40 French vessels, six to eight Scottish vessels, and around 15 Danish and Dutch vessels. Linda Hingley pointed out that the Scottish trawl vessels are larger than the French vessels: "I have always said that one Scottish pair team equals about three or four French teams because [the French vessels'] gear is smaller and they work it slightly differently."[109]

89. Consequently, if by-catch of small cetaceans is to be addressed effectively, action must be taken at European Community level. The Government accepts this point: the Minister told us that "until we can persuade our fellow European countries—and the Commission is making progress with this, coming up with its own proposals—the problem is not going to be solved by [the UK] alone."[110] Acting unilaterally, the UK Government is prevented by the CFP from imposing restrictions on other non-UK-registered vessels that are more stringent than any restrictions already imposed by the European Commission.

90. We recommend that the Government should aim to reduce by-catch of the common dolphin in the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass to within the ASCOBANS interim target of 1.7% by the end of 2005-06 sea bass season—that is, by April/May 2006. To achieve this target, we recommend that the Government takes the following action:

(a)  If the current separator grid trials do prove successful, we urge the Government to direct its best efforts towards convincing those other member states that are also prosecuting the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass to adopt mandatory use of the grids.

(b)  If other member states do not agree to deploy separator grids, or to take other effective mitigating action to reduce levels of cetacean by-catch, we recommend that the Government makes a formal request to the European Commission, asking it to impose emergency measures in the form of closing the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass. We consider that the criteria under which such a request can be made are met in respect of this fishery: there is sufficient evidence of a serious threat to the conservation of living aquatic resources—that is, the common dolphin—as well as sufficient evidence of a serious threat to the marine eco-system resulting from fishing activities that requires immediate action. The Government should time its request to the Commission so as to ensure that the six-month closure requested will coincide with the season for sea bass—that is, from November/December to April/May.

91. We consider that a six-month closure of this fishery would provide a most useful indication of the extent of cetacean by-catch in the fishery: if significantly fewer common dolphins showing signs of having died as a consequence of by-catch were to be washed ashore on the south-west English coast, then this would constitute compelling evidence against the continuation of the fishery. We are pleased to note that our position would appear to have the support of the NFFO, who told us:

We are prepared to take a fairly firm line by saying that the technical solutions, the grids and the acoustic deterrent devices, should be given a period to work, but ultimately we cannot support a fishery that has a demonstrable adverse impact on cetaceans and, consequently, our public image as an industry.[111]

Cetacean by-catch in other pelagic fisheries

92. As we have discussed above, we agree with Defra that the pelagic trawl fishery for sea bass is responsible for a significant amount of cetacean by-catch, and we consider that immediate action is required in respect of this fishery. However, we have also considered whether there may be a problem with cetacean by-catch in other pelagic fisheries that needs to be addressed.

Evidence of by-catch in these fisheries

93. There is some evidence that other pelagic fisheries may also be responsible for some by-catch of common dolphins, although few observer studies of by-catch in these fisheries appear to have been carried out. The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) and Nick Tregenza both note that, during the 1990s, observer studies of by-catch in pelagic trawl fisheries recorded dolphin catches in three other fisheries, those for mackerel, horse mackerel, hake and tuna:

Defra itself cites an example of an experimental fishery involving pair trawling for tuna which was conducted by the Republic of Ireland in 1998 and 1999, during which period it recorded a total catch of 180 cetaceans.[114]

94. The WDCS also pointed out that a number of other pelagic fisheries share common characteristics with the pelagic sea bass fishery: other fisheries also use trawling and pair trawling gear and operate in the Celtic Sea/Bay of Biscay area during the winter months, when dolphin strandings occur on the south-west coast. In addition to the fisheries named above, they also cited the herring, blue whiting, pilchard, sardine and anchovy fisheries, and the albacore tuna fishery, which operates during the summer months but uses pair trawling gear.[115] The WDCS considers that, until these fisheries are properly monitored, it is reasonable to assume that some, if not all, may be responsible for some cetacean by-catch.

95. We acknowledge the evidence of the SMRU, which considers that any by-catch in other pelagic fisheries is unlikely to be very high. On the basis of what it has so far observed in other pelagic fisheries, the SMRU calculates that cetacean by-catch rates in the UK pelagic trawl fisheries for mackerel, herring, sprat, horse-mackerel and pilchard "are very unlikely to exceed 457 dolphins per year in total".[116]

Need for monitoring in other pelagic fisheries

96. We are concerned that Defra has not properly taken into account the consideration, neatly summarised by Nick Tregenza, that "the current generalisation, from a small data set, that it is only the bass fishery [that is responsible for cetacean by-catch] is unreliable … because of the variable and clumped distribution of the fish and the cetaceans it is to be expected that years will differ greatly in their catch rates in different fisheries."[117] From the evidence we have received, it seems clear to us that a "steady flow" of by-catch cannot be expected, and that rates of by-catch are likely to vary between fisheries and between years. For example, we have received evidence suggesting that, because common dolphins tend to travel in groups, they also tend to be caught in groups—a single trawl tends to catch either no dolphins, or a significant number of dolphins.[118] In 1999, the Irish study referred to by Defra recorded 145 cetaceans caught in 313 observed hauls, of which only 31 hauls had a cetacean by-catch. Of the 145 cetaceans caught, 98 were taken in just ten hauls.[119]

97. Consequently, we recommend that, in implementing its strategy document, the Government places much greater emphasis on moving quickly to set up long-term observer monitoring programmes for other pelagic fisheries that take place off south-west England, particularly in the winter months, such as those for mackerel, horse mackerel and tuna. It would be most unfortunate if, on the basis of fairly recent evidence only, the Government were to conclude that the trawl fishery for sea bass is the only pelagic fishery requiring immediate attention. Bearing in mind that rates of by-catch are likely to vary between fisheries and between years, we urge the Government to focus on gathering more conclusive evidence about rates of cetacean by-catch in these other fisheries.


95   Defra strategy, para 112 Back

96   Defra strategy, para 114 Back

97   Defra strategy, para 36 Back

98   See page 18 of Defra's strategy document for a diagram showing the operation of a separator grid. Back

99   Defra strategy, paras 60 and 61 Back

100   Defra strategy, para 62 Back

101   The 2002-03 trial ran from 14 March to 25 March 2003. The first stage of the trial was originally scheduled to commence in December 2002, but had to be postponed to March because one of the trial boats was involved in a collision. Following the "official" end of the trial, in March, the skippers concerned voluntarily continued using the selection grid system, until 8 May when they ceased prosecuting the fishery. Back

102   Defra final project report, "Further development of a dolphin exclusion device", 25 November 2002 to 31 March 2003 Back

103   Q 252 [Ben Bradshaw MP] Back

104   Defra strategy, para 91 Back

105   Ev 49 [Linda Hingley] Back

106   Q 81 [Nick Tregenza] Back

107   Although there were no camera images available for three nights (but not days) during the trial, due to defective cameras; unfortunately, it was during one of these nights that the two dolphins were caught in the net and died: Defra final project report, "Further development of a dolphin exclusion device", 25 November 2002 to 31 March 2003, p 7  Back

108   Qq 143-47 [National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations] Back

109   Q 205 [Linda Hingley] Back

110   Q 213 [Ben Bradshaw MP] Back

111   Q 143 [National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations] Back

112   Ev 26 [Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society] Back

113   Ev 11 [Nick Tregenza] Back

114   Defra strategy, para 44 Back

115   Q 90 [Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society] Back

116   Ev 77 [Natural Environment Research Council] Back

117   Ev 11 [Nick Tregenza] Back

118   Q 205 [Linda Hingley] Back

119   Defra strategy, para 44 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 30 January 2004