Dip Solungaç Ağlarında Afalina (Tursiops truncatus) Yunuslar İçin Kullanılan Yunus Kovucu Cihazların İncelenmesi ve Ekonomik Performansı

Öz

Bu çalışma Sinop liman bölgesinde Eylül 2015 ve Ocak 2017 periyodu içerisinde her ay cihaz kullanan ve kullanmayan balıkçılardan veriler alınarak, dip uzatma ağlarına yunus kovucu cihazlar (pinger) takılmasının akılcı bir uygulama olup olmadığını belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Balıkçıların kullandıkları fanyasız dip uzatma ağlarının göz açıklığı 34 mm, uzunlukları 1,1 km’dir. Cihazlı ağlarda kullanılan yunus kovucu cihazların frekansı 1-500 kHz olup, etkili mesafeleri 200m’dir. Cihazların şarj edilebilir ve total ömrünün 2-2,5 ay olması ayırt edilebilir özelliğidir. Cihazlı ağlarda (Eylül-Aralık 2015) ilk dört aylık dönemde ortalama 15,34±1,22 kg olan av miktarının ikinci (Ocak 2016-2017) dönem de yaklaşık %56 oranda azalarak 6,83±0,31 kg a düşmesi çalışmanın önemli bulguları arasında yer almaktadır. Her iki ağ grubuna ait diğer bulgulara göre birim çabada av miktarı cihazlı ağlarda 0,67±0,02 kgkms-1, kontrol ağlarda ise 0,63±0,02 kgkms-1 olarak gerçekleşmiştir. Avlanan balıklardan elde edilen toplam gelir cihazlı ağlarda 22.259,65 TL, kontrol ağlarda ise 20.880,90 TL olarak hesaplanmıştır. Ağlardaki hasar-donatım durumuna ve özellikle (2 adetx1500 TL) yunus kovucu cihaz alımına bağlı olarak değişiklik gösteren giderler; cihazlı ağlar için 6400 TL’na ulaşırken, kontrol ağlar için 4000 TL olarak hesaplanmıştır. Buna göre avlama yapılan periyodda cihazlı ağlardan elde edilen net gelirin 15.859,65 TL olduğu hesaplanırken, kontrol ağlardan elde edilen net gelirin bundan %6 daha fazla gerçekleşerek 16.879,90 TL olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak çalışmada kullanılan yunus kovucu cihazların bölgedeki balıkçı tarafından kullanılmasının önerilmesi mümkün görünmemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Karadeniz,Dip solungaç ağı,Yunus kovucu cihaz,Etkileşim,Ekonomik performans

Investigation and Economic Performance of Acoustic Detterent Devices Used in Bottom Gillnets (Pingers) for Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)

Abstract

The study was performed in Sinop between September 2015-January 2017 to investigate whether it is a profitable application to attach pinger devices to bottom-gillnets used in coastal fisheries. Gear specifications of both fishermen group were same as follows; mesh size: 34 mm, length: app. 1,1km. The frequency range of the pinger device is 1–500 kHz and effective up to 200m. The most important distinctive feature of those devices is having a built-in rechargeable 1,6 Ah NiMH battery pack but limited up to 2-2,5 months (1000-1500h) total lifetime. In experimental group; average fish catch in the first periods (September-December 2015) was 15,34±1,22 kg and it decreased by 56% to 6,83±0,31 kg between January 2016–2017. According to results obtained from both control and experimental group, Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) was calculated as 0,63±0,02 kgkms-1 and 0,67±0,02 kgkms-1, respectively. Total incomes from the sale of fish were 20880,90 TL and 22259,65 TL for control and experimental groups. The fishermen in control group spent 4000 TL to repair nets damaged due to dolphin presence while other fishermen spent 3400 TL to repair nets. Considering the device expenses for the experimental group (2x1500 TL), total cost was calculated as 6400 TL for experimental group and 4000 TL for control group. Therefore, net income was calculated as 16879,90 TL in control group while it decreased to 15859,65 TL in experimental group, representing 6% decline.

Keywords

• Black Sea,Bottom gillnet,Pinger,Interaction,Economic performance

Kaynakça

1. Ayadi, A., Mohamed, G., Bradai, M.N. 2013. Do pingers reduce interactions between bottlenose dolphins and trammel nets around the Kerkennah Islands (Central Mediterranean Sea) Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 54(3):375-383.
2. Bearzi G., Fortuna C.M., Randall, R. R., 2008. Ecology and conservation of common bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus in the Mediterranean Sea. Mammal Review. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2907.2008.00133.x
3. Birkun, A.Jr. 2002. Interactions between cetaceans and fisheries in the Black Sea. In: G. Notarbartolo di Sciara (Ed.), Cetaceans of the Mediterranean and Black Seas: state of knowledge and conservation strategies. A report to the ACCOBAMS Secretariat, Monaco, February 2002. Section 10, 11p.
4. Birkun, A.Jr., Cañadas, A., Donovan G., Holcer, D., Lauriano, G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Panigada, S., Radu, G., van Klaveren, M.-C. 2006. Conservation Plan for Black Sea Cetaceans. ACCOBAMS, Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area. 49 pp.
5. Brotons, J.M., Grau, A. M., Rendell L., 2008a. Estimating the impact of interactions between bottlenose dolphins and artisanal fisheries around the Balearic Islands Society for Marine Mammalogy, 24(1): 112–127. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-7692.2007.00164.x
6. Brotons, J.M., Munilla, Z., Grau M. A., Rendell, L., 2008b. Do pingers reduce interactions between bottlenose dolphins and nets around the Balearic Islands? Endangered Specıes Research Vol. 5: 301–308, 2008. doi: 10.3354/esr00104
7. Burke, E.K. 2004. The effect of acoustic deterrent devices on bottlenose dolphin depredation in the Spanish mackerel gillnet fishery. Msc Dissertation. Duke University, Nicholas, USA.
8. Buscaino, G., Buffa, G., Sarà, G., Bellante, A., Tonello, A.J.J., Hardt, F.A.S., Cremer, M. J., Bonanno, A., Cuttitta A., Mazzola, S. 2009. Pinger affects fish catch efficiency and damage to bottom gill nets related to bottlenose dolphins. The Japanese Society of Fisheries Science, 75:537-544.

9. CIESM, 2004. Investigating the roles of cetaceans in marine ecosystems. CIESM Workshop Monograph no 25, pp. 144, Monaco
10. Cox, T.M., Read A.J., Swanner, D., Urian, K., Waples, D. 2003. Behavioral responses of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, to gillnets and acoustic alarms. Biological Conservation, 115:203–212.
11. Dede, A., 2001. Estimation of dolphin population size in the Turkish Straits System. European Association for Aquatic Mammals. 10 s.
12. Dawson, S.M., Read, A.J., Slooten, E., 1998. Pingers, porpoises and power; uncertainties with using pingers to reduce bycatch of small cetaceans. Biological Conservation 84: 141–146.
13. EUCR, 2004. No 812/2004 of 26.4.2004, Laying down measures concerning incidental catches of cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98.
14. Gazo, M., Fernandez-Contreras, M., Brotons, J.M., and Aguilar, A., 2001. Interactions between bottlenose dolphins and artisanal fisheries in the Balearic Islands: may acoustic devices be a solution to the problem? Eur. Res. Cetaceans [Abstracts] 15:156-157. [Proceedings of the fifteenth annual conference of the European Cetacean Society, Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2001].
15. Gazo M. and A. Aguilar, 2002. Are pingers useful to reduce damage produced by bottlenose dolphins in trammel nets? a test in the Balearic Islands. Paper presented to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission, Shimonoseki, May 2002, SC/54/SM11. 6pp.
16. Gazo, M. Gonzalvo, J., Aguilar A., 2008. Pingers as deterrents of bottlenose dolphins interacting with trammel nets. Fisheries Research, 92: 70–75.
17. Gönener, S., Bilgin S., 2007. Sinop Yarımadası Civarında (Karadeniz, Türkiye) Dip Uzatma Galsama Ağlarında Yunusların Balıkları Çalmaları Üzerine Akustik Pingerlerin Etkisi. Fırat Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 19, (2), 121-127.
18. Gönener, S., Bilgin, S., 2009. The Effect of Pingers on Harbour Porpoise, Phocoena phocoena Bycatch and Fishing Effort in the Turbot Gill Net Fishery in the Turkish Black Sea Coast Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 9, (2), 151-158.
19. Gönener, S., Özdemir, S. 2012. Investigation of the Interaction Between Bottom Gillnet Fishery (Sinop, Black Sea) and Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Terms of Economy. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 12:115-126.
20. Lauriano, G., Fortuna, C.M., Moltedo, G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G. 2004. Interactions between common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and the artisanal fishery in Asinara Island National Park (Sardinia): assessment of catch damage and economic loss. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 6(2):165–173.
21. LIFELINDA, 2007. Estimation des variations de production dans les filets de peche en cas d’interaction avec le grand dauphin et definition avec les pecheurs professionnels de strategies potentielles d’evitement des dauphins. Life Linda. Office de L’environnement de la Corse : Réserve Naturelle des Bouches de Bonifacio. Rapport Final 15 Avril 2007., Université De Corse, 69 P.
22. López, B.D., Mariño, F. 2011. A trial of acoustic harassment device efficacy on free-ranging bottlenose dolphins in Sardinia, Italy. Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology, 44:197–208.
23. Maccarone, V., Buffa, G., Stefano, V.D., Filiciotto, F., Mazzola, S., Buscaino, G. 2014. Economic Assessment of Dolphin Depredation Damages and Pinger Use in Artisanal Fisheries in the Archipelago of Egadi Islands (Sicily). Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 14: 173-181.
24. Orphanides, C.D., Palka, D.L. 2013. Analysis of harbor porpoise gillnet bycatch, compliance, and enforcement trends in the US northwestern Atlantic, January 1999 to May 2010. Endang Species Research, 20: 251–269.
25. Öztürk, B., 1999. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Turkey. GEF Black Sea Environmental Programme, United National Publications, Newyork, 144 p.
26. Öztürk, B., Öztürk, A.A. and Dede, A., 1999. Cetacean bycatch in the western coast of the Turkish Black Sea in 1993- 1997. In: .G.H. Evans, J. Cruz and J.A. Raga (Eds.), European research on cetaceans – 13 (Proc. 13th Annual Conf. European Cetacean Society, Valencia, Spain, 5-8 April). ECS, Valencia, 484 pp.
27. Sümbüloğlu K. & Sümbüloğlu V. 2017. Biyoistatistik (18.Baskı). Hatipoğlu Yayınevi, Ankara, 270 s.
28. Zahri, Y., Abid, N., Elouamari, N. & Abdellaoui, B., 2004. Étude de l’interaction entre le grand dauphin et la pêche á la senne coulissante en Méditerranée marocaine. INRH Report, Casablanca, 52 pp.