Memorandum submitted by the RSPCA (C12)
1. The RSPCA welcomes the DEFRA Small Cetacean
Bycatch Response Strategy. There is already a clearly identified
threat to harbour porpoise populations from entanglement in bottom-set
gill nets, which DEFRA aims to address with the compulsory application
of acoustic deterrent devices. A commitment is needed to establish
a management plan for the implementation of the Strategy and for
the effective implementation of observer schemes in fisheries
where a bycatch problem has yet to be quantified. The DEFRA strategy
must not rely solely on a few quick-fix technical measures to
address currently identified problems, but should commit to research
into alternative fishing methods over longer time scales.
INTRODUCTION
2. The RSPCA is concerned by the high incidence
of cetacean bycatch in some fisheries operating around the UK.
As well as threatening the conservation of cetacean populations,
incidental death in fishing nets has the potential to cause extreme
suffering to these air-breathing mammals. When caught underwater
a cetacean can induce the "dive response"—a physiological
adaptation that conserves oxygen and enables the animal to remain
conscious though it cannot reach the air. Post-mortem examinations
have identified major traumas sustained by the animals during
this time, including lacerations, muscle haemorrhaging, and broken
teeth and jaws, indicating their violent attempts to escape.
3. Various cetacean species are known to
die through entanglement in fishing gear. Small cetaceans such
as harbour porpoises and, to a lesser extent common dolphins and
bottlenose dolphins, become entangled in bottom-set gill nets.
Common dolphins are known to die in towed trawl nets, which may
also incidentally capture species such as white-sided dolphins
and pilot whales. Larger whales such as the minke whale occasionally
become entangled in discarded nets or in the float ropes of lobster
pots, sustaining injuries or long-term entanglement, which may
cause death through disease or infection.
4. Under the Habitats' Directive the UK
has a responsibility to monitor incidental cetacean mortality
wherever such mortality is believed to potentially affect populations,
and to take remedial action if a problem is discovered.
SCALE OF
THE PROBLEM
5. Incidental mortality of harbour porpoises
in bottom-set gill nets is well documented and DEFRA's UK Small
cetacean bycatch response strategy provides a comprehensive summary
of known and extrapolated bycatch rates. The known rate of harbour
porpoise bycatch is believed to be unsustainable and to inhibit
population recovery.
6. There is a huge mortality of common dolphins
in winter fisheries each year, though the specific fisheries causing
the problem remain as yet unidentified. The only evidence of the
scale of the problem currently comes from the increasing number
of carcasses washing up on the coastlines showing evidence of
net injuries (65% of those post-mortemed under DEFRA contract
were clearly bycatch victims). Data on mortality rates of other
small cetacean species are limited, and DEFRA's strategy document
provides a comprehensive summary of all known cases.
ASSESSMENT OF
THE UK STRATEGY
7. DEFRA has prepared a Strategy document
that serves as a clear, well-illustrated presentation of current
information on, some solutions to, and obligations regarding small
cetacean bycatch in Europe. Sound recommendations include the
need for gear research and development, for regular surveying
of cetacean populations to determine trends, including a large
scale survey (SCANS II); and a "cetacean-friendly" fish
certification scheme. The RSPCA believes that a number of the
recommendations do not, however, go far enough to ensure effective
implementation of a bycatch reduction strategy.
ACOUSTIC DETERRENTS
8. The Strategy makes a clear commitment
to the use of acoustic deterrent devices ("pingers")
on bottom-set gill nets. These devices are known to be effective
in reducing porpoise entanglements. Concerns over their use include
both the potential for habituation by the animals and the potential
exclusion of porpoises from areas where pingers are used. Pingers
are widely acknowledged to be unsuitable as a long-term solution
for bycatch in gill nets. DEFRA has therefore acknowledged the
need for a programme of research to be carried out if pingers
are deployed intensively in coastal waters and the RSPCA would
like to see a commitment to this as part of a bycatch reduction
management plan.
COASTAL OR
LOW DENSITY
CETACEAN POPULATIONS
9. Whilst the UK Strategy focuses on clearly
identified bycatch problems in current fisheries, there appears
to be no consideration of heavily depleted small cetacean populations
and the Strategy lacks any recommendation on mechanisms to aid
their recovery. In the case of the eastern English Channel, and
waters within six miles of the coast, the cetacean population
densities and resultant detected bycatch rates are not perceived
to be high enough to warrant the application of mitigation methods
(ie pingers). The RSPCA believes that there are potential problems
with this: any inshore resident populations of cetaceans will
sustain relatively very high bycatch rates; and any area devoid
of cetaceans will not be repopulated if an animal entering such
an area risks a relatively high entanglement probability. This
may be particularly relevant if pinger placement elsewhere encourages
movement of porpoises into these areas. The UK must therefore
consider pinger deployment on all set nets that carry an entanglement
risk, within the six mile limit and within ICES area VIId, the
eastern English Channel.
BYCATCH RATE
TARGETS
10. As a welfare organisation, the RSPCA
believes that any level of cetacean bycatch carries with it an
associated level of animal suffering that must be regarded as
unacceptable. Therefore the ultimate aim of any strategy that
addresses bycatch must be to eliminate incidental deaths entirely.
However bycatch limits are necessary as targets against which
to measure the success of mitigation proposals, and to ensure
conservation of the cetacean species under threat.
11. The Agreement on the Conservation of
Small Cetaceans in the Baltic and North Sea (ASCOBANS) has agreed
that bycatch for harbour porpoise should be reduced to below 1.7%
of the best estimate of abundance for a population, whilst also
acknowledging that given the large uncertainties inherent in population
estimates for many small cetaceans, a precautionary objective
of reducing bycatch to below 1% should be recognised. These levels
are dependent on current knowledge of survival and reproductive
rates in healthy harbour porpoise populations and should not be
generalised to situations in which the general health (eg through
contaminant burdens) or size of a porpoise population is not well
known. The DEFRA Strategy suggests that "where practicable,
the strategy works towards the reduction of bycatch to the lowest
possible level". The RSPCA would prefer the caveat of "where
practicable" to be removed and for the UK to refrain from
formalising a single acceptable level of bycatch.
12. The concept of a mortality limit schedule
for cetacean bycatch does not satisfy the RSPCA's welfare aim
of eliminating suffering, however it is a strategy that has been
successfully adopted in other fisheries. To establish such a scheme
in the UK, a management plan must be formulated that details a
comprehensive observer programme to ensure any cetacean mortality
limit is strictly adhered to, and clearly identifies an enforcement
mechanism to close any fishery reaching its mortality limit.
OBSERVER SCHEME
13. Observer schemes are an essential component
of this strategy. DEFRA has chosen to adopt voluntary observer
schemes, which raises a number of concerns, for example that the
required observer coverage may not be met. Voluntary observer
coverage may diminish over time if bycatch levels reduce in the
short-term and the problem is regarded as overcome. However it
is essential to continue observer coverage to assess long-term
efficacy of the mitigation method.
14. Therefore DEFRA should prepare a formal
Observer Management Plan, based upon recommendations from a scientific
advisory group, and managed by a bycatch reduction management
group (as yet unidentified) to ensure regular review and assessment
of information. DEFRA should establish some mechanism by which
compulsory observer coverage is obtained if a voluntary scheme
proves ineffective.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENTS
15. The Strategy lacks any reference to
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Such assessment should
be obligatory for the fishing industry in the same way as it is
applied to other industries known to cause detrimental change
to the environment. When the ban on pelagic drift nets came into
effect, fishing effort was displaced into other metiers, for example
pelagic trawling. No EIA was carried out, resulting in the widespread
adoption of a fishing technique now suspected of being responsible
for large scale common dolphin mortalities. An EIA process should
ensure that problem fishing techniques are identified and mitigation
methods developed prior to widespread introduction.
CERTIFICATION SCHEME
16. The concept of a certification scheme
is a good one: the success of the "Dolphin-friendly"
tuna fisheries in the Eastern Pacific was brought about by consumer
choice for a clearly identifiable product. DEFRA should develop
this concept further, by allocating funds to a dedicated responsible
body to establish, administer and monitor the scheme. Promotion
of the scheme should be widespread, with responsibility for this
falling to all stakeholders.
MANAGEMENT OF
THE STRATEGY
17. To progress this Strategy, it is essential
that a clearly identified coordination process is established.
The involvement of stakeholders and their various responsibilities
must be formalised and timetables established to ensure that the
Strategy progresses efficiently. Project areas that the RSPCA
believes should come under the management framework, which do
not yet have lead partners identified in the DEFRA strategy, include:
the observer scheme; environmental impact assessment process;
cetacean population monitoring scheme; technological research
and development into alternative gear types (a priority issue);
and fish certification scheme. A management group for this process
has not been identified in the DEFRA Strategy and should be done
so as a priority, ensuring the involvement of all relevant bodies
from industry, Government, research institutes and animal care
and conservation groups representing the general public.
TIMETABLE
18. The Strategy lacks an overall timetable
and the RSPCA believes that some of the proposed timescales are
very generous. The target of purchasing and attaching pingers
to set nets on the Celtic Shelf should be achievable within one
to two years rather than the three years specified. Precise timetabling
is required for various parts of this Strategy as part of an overall
management plan.
19. DEFRA makes no reference to the need
for a medium-term management plan: the RSPCA believes that such
a plan should be drafted and finalised by autumn 2004. It should
clearly identify, with temporal targets where appropriate: the
number and composition of groups necessary to oversee various
components of the Strategy; a management plan for an observer
scheme; identification of areas for technological advance; and
a management plan for a certification scheme.
OTHER MARINE
WILDLIFE
20. Whilst fisheries impacts have been clearly
identified as having significant impact on small cetaceans around
the UK, other species such as marine turtles and baleen whales
also occasionally incur injuries or death through entanglement.
Any strategy for small cetaceans should, wherever possible, take
an inclusive approach to providing guidance, monitoring and recommendations
on gear modification to reduce all incidental wildlife bycatch.
INTEGRATION WITH
EU STRATEGY
21. The European Commission has recently
prepared a draft Regulation on incidental catches of cetaceans
in fisheries (COM(2003) 451 final). Some of the proposed measures
are not covered by the DEFRA strategy and the RSPCA believes that
this should not lead to conflict. Rather, the UK should encourage
adoption of those measures in the draft Regulation that are more
precautionary than its own strategy.
22. The draft Regulation calls for compulsory
observer monitoring of fisheries with a suspected cetacean bycatch
problem. The levels of observer coverage specified in the draft
Regulation are more limited than those recommended by the EU Scientific,
Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) report
(SEC(2002)1134). Though the DEFRA Strategy states that its bycatch
monitoring scheme will be expanded to a "statistically valid
level", an assurance from DEFRA should be sought that the
levels applied will concur with the recommendation from STECF.
23. The DEFRA Strategy may cause conflict
between the UK and other Member States over the proposed scale
of pinger deployment. The RSPCA welcomes the Commission's draft
Regulation and notes that it calls for the application of pingers
to all bottom-set gill nets or tangle nets in ICES area VIId.
This area is specifically omitted from the UK Strategy. The RSPCA
believes that DEFRA should support and adopt the recommendation
on pinger deployment in the Commission's draft Regulation in full.
CONCLUSION
24. DEFRA must not view the Strategy as
a "quick fix" for currently identified bycatch problems
for which potential mitigation methods are known. Instead, it
must develop a mid- to long-term plan to evaluate and reduce cetacean
bycatch problems through the development of alternative fishing
gear technology and bycatch mitigation methods. Such commitments
will require funding.
25. Additionally, DEFRA can play a role
in raising awareness in the fishing industry of the need for responsible
management of the marine environment, rather than viewing cetacean
bycatch as a short-term problem that will be addressed through
the adoption of simple technical measures.
12 September 2003
| 
