TECHNICAL MEASURES IN ORDER TO DECREASE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN DOLPHINS AND FISHERMEN: PINGERS

Abstract

Almost all marine mammal species are in interaction with fishing activities and this interaction frequently results with the death of marine mammals in gillnet fisheries. This situation which results with the death of thousands of harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) is defined as by-catch ( non-target catch) in gillnet fisheries and in this way it is legalized at least partially. These inreactions between fisheries and dolphins cause ecologic and social concerns, while that means much more economic losses from the perspective of fishermen. In most of studies which aim to determine necessary measures to reduce by-catch of dolphins, gillnet fisheries is taken as basis and dolphin deterrent devices called pingers are used. In this subject many studies have been carried out in world, while only a few in Black Sea. However, it is still difficult to make an assessment for effectiveness of pingers. In addition to this, many studies including those of performed in Black Sea outline that pingers can keep harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) away from gillnets for 1-2 years but it is vital that monitoring the situation after this period.

Keywords

• Dolphins,Pingers,Fisheries,Black Sea

Kaynakça

1. Au, W.W.L. (1993). The sonar of dolphins. Springer, New York, 277pp. ISBN 13:978-1-4612-8745-2 Au, W.W.L. & Jones, L. (1991). Acoustic reflectivity of nets: implications concerning incidental take of dolphins. Marine Mammal Science, 7, 258–273. Barlow, J. & Cameron, G.A. (2003). Field experiments show that acoustic pingers reduce marine mammal bycatch in the California drift gillnet fishery. Marine Mammal Science, 19, 265-283. Bordino, P., Kraus, S., Albareda, D., Fazio, A., Palmerio, A., Mendez, M. & Botta, S. (2002). Reducing incidental mortality of Franciscana dolphin Pontoporia blainvillei with acoustic warning devices attached to fishing nets. Marine Mammal Science, 18(4), 833-842. Díaz López B. & Fernando M. (2011). A trial of acoustic harassment device efficacy on free-ranging bottlenose dolphins in Sardinia, Italy. Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology, 44(4), 197-208, Buscaino, G., Buffa, G., Sara, G., Bellante, A., Tonello, A.J., Hardt, F.A.S. & Mazzola, S. (2009). Pinger affects fish catch efficiency and damage to bottom gill nets related to bottlenose dolphins. Fisheries Science, 75(3), 537-544. Caddell, R. (2005). By-catch mitigation and the protection of cetaceans: recent developments in EC law. Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy, 8(2-3), 241-259. Carlström, J., Berggren, P. & Tregenza, N.J. (2009). Spatial and temporal impact of pingers on porpoises. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 66(1), 72-82. Carretta, J.V., Barlow, J. (2011). Long-term effectiveness, failure rates, and “dinner bell” properties of acoustic pingers in a gillnet fishery. Marine Technology Society Journal, 45(5), 7-19. Cox, T.M., Read, A.J., Solow, A., Tregenza, N. (2001). Will harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) habituate to pingers? Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 3, 81-86. Culik, B.M., Koschinski, S., Tregenza, N. & Ellis, G.M. (2001). Reactions of harbor porpoises Phocoena phocoena and herring Clupean harengus to acoustic alarms. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 211, 255-260. Dawson, S.M. (1991). Incidental catch of Hector’s dolphin in inshore gillnets. Marine Mammal Science, 7(3), 283–295. Dawson, S.M. 1994. The potential for reducing entanglement of dolphins and porpoises with acoustic modifications to gillnets. Report to the International Whaling Commission (Special issue), 15, 573-578. 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. Dawson, S.M., Northridge, S., Danielle, W. & Read, A.J. (2013). To ping or not to ping: the use of active acoustic devices in mitigating interactions between small cetaceans and gillnet fisheries. Endangered Species Research, 19, 201-221. Franse, R. (2005). Effectiveness of acoustic deterrent devices (pingers). Leiden, the Netherlands: Universiteit Leiden, Centrum voor Milieuwetenschappen. 33 p. Gearin, P.J., Gosho, M.E., Laake, J.L., Cooke, L., DeLong, R.L. & Hughes, K.M. (2000). Experimental testing of acoustic alarms (pingers) to reduce by-catch of harbour porpoise, Phocoena phocoena, in the state of Washington. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 2, 1-10. Gönener, S. & Bilgin, S. (2007). The Effects of Acoustic Pingers on Dolphins Depredation around Sinop Peninsula (Black Sea, Turkey) in Bottom-Set Gillnets. Fırat University Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(2), 121-127. 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. 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(1), 115-126. Goodson, A.D., Mayo, R.H., Klinowska, M. & Bloom, P.R.S. (1994). Field testing passive acoustic devices designed to reduce the entanglement of small cetaceans in fishing gear. Report to the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue 15, 597-605. Gordon, J. & Northridge, S. (2002). Potential impacts of Acoustic Deterrent Devices on Scottish Marine Wildlife. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report F01AA404. Kastelein, R.A., Au, W.W.L., Rippe, H.T. & Schooneman, N.M. (1999). Target detection by an echolocating harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105(4), 2493-2498. Kastelein, R.A., Bunskoek, P., Hagedoorn, M., Au, W.W.L. & de Haan, D. (2002). Audiogram of a harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) measured with narrow-band frequency-modulated signals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 334-344. Kastelein, R. A., van der Heul, S., van der Veen, J., Verboom, W.C., Jennings, N., de Haan, D. & Reijnders, P.J. (2007). Effects of acoustic alarms, designed to reduce small cetacean bycatch in gillnet fisheries, on the behaviour of North Sea fish species in a large tank. Marine Environmental Research, 64(2), 160-180. Kraus, S. (1999). The once and future ping: challenges for the use of acoustic deterrents in fisheries. Marine Technology Society Journal, 33(2), 90-93. Kraus, S.D., Read, A.J., Solow, A., Baldwin, K., Spradlin, T., Anderson, E. & Williamson, J. (1997). Acoustic alarms reduce porpoise mortality. Nature, 388(6642), 525-525. Laake, J., Rugh, D. & Baraff, L. (1998). Observations of harbor porpoise in the vicinity of acoustic alarms on a set gill net. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-AFSC-84. Lifelinda. (2007). Estimation des pertes de production selon différents types de filets, selon différentes techniques de pêche et impact des interactions sur les engins de pêche (2007 Rapport Final). Retrieved from: http://www.lifelinda.org/upload/tele/rapport_final_oec.pdf Monteiro-Neto, C., Avila, F.J.C., Alves, T.T. Jr., Araujo, D.S., Campos, A.A., Martins, A.M.A., Parente, C.L., Furtado-Neto, M.A.A. & Lien, J. (2004). Behavioral responses of Sotalia fluviatilis (Cetacea, Delphinidae) to acoustic pingers, Fortaleza, Brazilian. Marine Mammal Science, 20, 145–151. Read, A.J., Drinker, P. & Northridge, S.P. (2006). By-catches of marine mammals in US fisheries and a first attempt to estimate the magnitude of global marine mammal by-catch. WWF-UK. Reeves, R.R., Read, A.J. & Notarbartolo di Sciara, G. (2001). Report of the Workshop on Interactions between Dolphins and Fisheries in the Mediterranean: Evaluation of Mitigation Alternatives. Istituto Centrale per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica Applicata al Mare, Rome, Italy. 44 pp. Richardson, W.J., Greene Jr, C.R., Malme, C.I. & Thomson, D.H. (1995). Marine mammals and noise. Academic press, 576pp. ISBN 978-0-08-057303-8 Rowe, S.J. (2007). A review of methodologies for mitigating incidental catch of pro-tected marine mammals Science & Technical Publishing Department of Conservation PO Box 10420, The Terrace Wellington 6143, New Zealand. ISBN 978-0-478-14315-7 Taylor, V.J, Johnston, D.W. & Verboom, W.C. (1997). In: Proceeding Symposium on Biosonar and Bioacoustics, Loughborough University U.K. pp. 267-275. Trippel, E.A., Strong, M.B., Terhune, J.M. Conway, J.D. (1999). Mitigation of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) by-catch in the gillnet fishery in the lower Bay of Fundy. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 56, 113-123. Wilson, B. & Dill, L.M. (2002). Pacific herring respond to simulated odontocete echolocation sounds. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 59, 542–553. Zaharieva, Z., Spasova, V., & Gavrilov, G. (2016). First attempt to understand the effect of pingers on static fishing gear in Bulgarian Black Sea coast. ZooNotes, 1(91), 1-3.