Report to American Bird Conservancy & Humane Society International (Australia) Ecuador Seabird Bycatch Project Aug/Sept 2011

Transcription

1 Report to American Bird Conservancy & Humane Society International (Australia) Ecuador Seabird Bycatch Project Aug/Sept 2011 Nigel Brothers Marine Ecology & Technology Recommendations Retention of Roberto and Jodie as an Equilibrio Azul team working on ABC project (considered a key to success for ABC work here). Preventing problems rather than solving them, should be a priority. Attention to be directed at influencing the development of the industrial longline fishery as a result of the demersal trawl fishery closure in June Focus on regulations for preventing additional seabird mortality in this developing fishery, (e.g. prohibiting line setting over a vessel s stern, night-setting only) Continuation of small-scale observer program directed specifically at identifying the association between bird capture events and operational factors in the artisinal fleet. Maintenance of observer coverage to obtain reliable evidence of the benefit of mitigation actions adopted. Periodic review of observer data to ensure that data being collected is adequate to answer critical questions. Development and implementation of Medina Setting system. Ongoing series of fisher-training workshops to include mitigation measure advice and live bird-release, and associated conservation education such as rubbish disposal at sea. Survey of albacore fleet to gauge attitude to lead-center swivels in gear. Assess feasibility of supply of swivels to the fleet. Coverage of fishing activity for merluza (Hake) by vessels from ports (other than Santa Rosa) and in particular to characterize the gear they are using. Accelerate the understanding of any relationship (if any exists in this particular fishery) between line weighting and seabird moralities, by agreeing to the 3 vessel manipulation trial outlined. 1

2 NOTE: For the work to continue in Ecuador it is necessary to make a clear decision to work either independently or collaboratively on the Waved Albatross fishery issue. ABC has two choices: a) to allocate adequate funds to secure key resources, and develop a specific work focus in Ecuador, (ignoring others). b) to integrate fully and collaborate with Birdlife on the Waved Albatross issue. Logistics Summary Table 1 provides a daily account of the work undertaken. A prohibition on small vessels leaving port was announced on the second evening after arrival and applied on the following four days. This delayed the commencement of the at-sea work but the majority of this time period was fully occupied in planning and equipment preparation. By returning from Guayaquil to Salinas on two occasions though the period of the ACAP meetings, additional at-sea work was completed. Jodie and Roberto did not falter in their enthusiasm and commitment to the work, were a pleasure to work with and their month-long reliability in meeting the endless time commitments was truly impressive. Solving the Problem Time-saving and increased profits are not high priority pursuits in this fishery (or in everyday life here). This is a key issue to remember in relation to predicting mitigation measure uptake in this fishery. In many other fisheries (in other cultures), innovations offering such benefits present a strong incentive to use mitigation measures. The preference of fishermen here in Ecuador appears to be to have no change to the method being used even though this may have fundamental inherent inefficiencies. However, fishermen were generally receptive to improvements suggested to existing methods. The Medina Setting system is considered to have a good chance of uptake because it does very much complement existing methods rather than altering them too much. The system is capable of overcoming the main causes of birds being killed. Santa Rosa fishing port There is still insufficient data available from the actual circumstances in which birds have been caught. This deficiency must be rectified. Therefore until this occurs, solving the bird catch problem is dependent on a certain amount of supposition. 1. Bird capture is a relatively rare and unpredictably erratic event, not easily or precisely described and it seems to have a peak season annually here. Opportunities are therefore somewhat limited to make substantial progress which means that this may not 2

3 be achieved in under 3-5 years. Therefore, if support for continuing work over at least this time period cannot be guaranteed, then it is likely to be a waste of resources supporting any further work of a shorter duration. This is particularly important if the success of mitigation uptake is to be verified, as it should be. 2. Improving line sink rate sufficiently may be impractical, unacceptable, and also of little actual benefit to birds here. The uncertainties surrounding the suitability and benefits of line weighting in this fishery must be resolved as a matter of priority. Remembering also that improving sink rate in this fishery could in fact result in more, not less birds actually dying after capture. 3. A focus on developing and evaluating the Medina setting system, a fast, trouble free setting method (which gets the hooks away from birds quickly) is highly recommended. The system will most likely over-ride any need to manipulate line sink rate. 4. Other than birds caught during line setting (which under the Medina Setting system should all be viable to release alive), there is most to be gained from a focus on improving survival prospects of caught birds via training workshops for fishermen. From direct observation it seems that fishermen are enthusiastic about releasing birds and as such would be receptive to suggestions such as always running back up a set-line to release a bird, and learning to handle birds better. There are no methods apparent that will assist reduction of bird capture during hauling, particularly because it is the unavoidable operational problems such as line tangling between boats which is most responsible for these capture events (continuous line weighting or at least weights at closer intervals is likely to be a benefit here-although the acceptability of changing existing line weighting practices enough for this is a big unknown ). 5. Subject to a survey of ʻmarket demandʼ the most efficient pathways to solving what could be the biggest problem for Waved albatross - pelagic longline hooks, would be an ongoing ʻfree to fishermenʼ supply of 60g lead centre swivels. These items are durable, seldom lost and so once equipped, each vessel is permanently as safe to seabirds as can be reliably achieved. This would be an expansion of the so far small scale successful program in Peru. A modest budget over a longer time-frame for this would be adequate, as opposed to the less likely comparatively large short-term budget requirement. There are no other seabird bycatch mitigation measures that would suit this fishery. (Configuring line setting to night-time would be effective but simply is an unrealistic operational change for many reasons). Jodie supervising fishing gear modifications 3

4 Fishery data obtained in the project All observations made during this study have, with the exception of the last day at sea, been entered by Jodie onto observer spreadsheets and the existing system modified accordingly to ensure that all subsequent observing becomes sufficiently comprehensive. The focus of observing needs to be on documenting bird interaction events and attempting to assess the specific cause of each event. To achieve this requires continuous focussed observation covering every aspect of line setting and line hauling. To-date this has been lacking. The final day of fishing observations have been scanned and sent to Jodie for inclusion in the database. Jodie now has (or will shortly have) sufficient data to start looking for answers to specific questions such as: The relationship between line weighting and bird interactions The relationship between bait type used and bird interactions The relationship between haul line tangles and bird interactions The relationship between setting line delays and bird interactions Viability of the fishery, trends in catch (this is relevant to the extent of mitigation effort expended - the fishing grounds accessible to artisinal vessels are very small and heavily fished). How extended would a season closure need to be to prevent the majority of Waved albatross captures. In addition to field data records, copies of all photographs and footage have been retained in Ecuador and also sent to ABC. Seabird Bycatch mitigation investigations undertaken Line Sink-Rate Improvement Having uniform line weights and heavier weights could prevent birds from accessing baited hooks during setting. Reducing the distance between weights may further assist in this. Quantities of pre-cast concrete (as opposed to the traditional stones of variable weight) line weights had been constructed, sufficient of each weight and class for a whole line (18 weights), 600g, 750g, 850g (and some 1000g). The distance between weights, typically around 30 hooks or 60m was shortened to 22 hooks or 50m. (Note this has been the sole focus of Birdlife mitigation and already sink rate determinations using TDRʼs had been made- see ACAP SWG4-Doc23). With manual haul of lines along with several other operational constraints in this fishery there are practical or acceptable limits on the amount of weight. However, the exact limit of weight seems not to have been determined, likewise for acceptable minimum line weight spacing. TDRʼs bought by ABC for this area of investigation did not function at all throughout the study. However, TDRʼs that had been used in the Birdlife work were deployed each day (on 47 occasions-see table 2) at selected positions (along a line and at specific points between each line weight). The sink rate measurements taken have not yet been evaluated or comparisons made between lines having different weighting regimes. And, most importantly, there remain insufficient observations to correlate seabird interaction 4

5 rates with line sink rates. DIrect observation of line setting suggest that any sink rate increase by adding more weight may not help to reduce the risk of bird capture much. Even with the heaviest (850g) weights, hooks still remained on the sea surface astern for 30m or more. Combine this with the frequency of events during each set that caused line sinking to be delayed (see table 2) and it is difficult to see any great benefit of adding weight up to the maximum amount that may be operationally acceptable. Observation of line setting characteristics suggests (and TDR should confirm) that only 5 or 6 hooks from the line weights are sinking fast. Most benefit may be achieved by reducing the distance between line weights but not necessarily increasing individual weight amount. (for example 500g hook spacing may perform much better than 1000g weights at 22 hook intervals; 1000g at 11 hook spacing even better but upper operational limit may apply. A TDR deployment protocol was suggested and from this a list of questions to be answered was provided/. My understanding is that both Roberto and Jodie have the TDR deployment data but I am uncertain as to whether this data is considered Birdlife, ABC or joint property. In relation to any effort that may be directed at improving line sink rate, unless the prevalence of line setting delays can be reduced bird catch rate may not change even with this improvement. To accelerate an understanding of the extent that increasing line weight or altering line weight spacing may benefit bird catch reduction the following was (is) recommended; It was assumed here that for the remainder of the current high bird abundance period (Sept-Dec) three or probably four observers are to be deployed by Jodie. Decide the upper acceptable limit of individual line weights and minimum weight spacing interval (let us say 1kg and 25m) Select three vessels, each one to be set up differently. At regular intervals swap the different gear between the boats: Vessel no.1 with 1kg weights at 22 hook intervals (50m) Vessel no. 2 with 500g weights at 11 hook intervals (25m) Vessel no. 3 with conventional weights and distance interval. Roberto to be aboard any boat in addition to the observer for TDR deployments and to continue development and ultimately full integration of Medina Setting on a fourth vessel, the performance of which to then be compared with the other vessels. TDR issues: 1. TDR data will be of quite limited usefulness. 2. Deploying TDRʼs accurately in this fishery can be quite time-consuming and compromises effort directed to more useful pursuits. 3. An obvious potential outcome of TDR work is changing the existing line weighting practices -the amount of weight, its spacing along a line, the source of weights. As it is, line weights cost nothing (beach stones picked up at random). If more and constant weight is going to be sufficiently beneficial then it is likely that a free access 5

6 manufactured weight at port depots would be necessary (allowing for 40 weights per vessel initially and around 5 weights per vessel loss daily -on the basis that a line will have 18 weights (but this may have to be 36) and certain boats may choose to set two different lines concurrently hence 40 per vessel (daily turnover for all hake vessels) 4. Feasibility of getting boats to change their weight spacing even if the amount of weight recommended is acceptable which may only be so if these are made available (point 3 above). New Line Setting System Evaluation The potential significance of line setting delays contributing to seabird capture was suggested in the first report provided (2010) on observations of fishing practices in Ecuador. In this report the recommendation that fishery observing must concentrate upon identifying the actual circumstances surrounding each bird capture (rather than simply quantifying rates of capture) does not appear to have resulted in much or any of this information to be detailed. Consequently, it is difficult to know where best to direct changes to fishing gear or method changes. Line setting preparation (old system) As can be seen from the information in Table 2, line setting delays are frequent. Setting delays tend to be much more prevalent in the first line set of each day because this set is made out of the hook box after all hooks have been baited by pulling branchlines tight to allow the hooks to be arranged for the set. Fortunately the set is often completed at or soon after daylight when few birds are present. Both of the bird captures that were observed during setting were considered to have been associated with a line setting delay. This is not surprising given a) the frequency of delays and b) the obvious impact each one has on the availability to birds of hooks astern. On a typical set, delays can be of sufficient duration to warrant boat setting speed and the captain will then hold onto the departing line in order to pull the set line straight. This causes 50 or more hooks to come to the surface and be prevented from sinking with obvious consequences to birds. Using first the Mitsu number 9 hooks obtained for this purpose, a new line setting system was prepared and on each fishing trip performance was assessed. Modifications and alternate types of new line setting systems were evaluated. The new systems trialled demonstrated that it is possible to conduct a line set with negligible line setting delays and more importantly to reduce the duration of a conventional set from around 15 minutes (table 3) to 4 minutes. The capability of achieving this using conventional hooks was also shown. Unfortunately fully developing the new setting system (now termed Medina Setting after Roberto) was considered reliant on sourcing supply of conventional hooks but with a metal ring (inside diameter approx.. 12mm) incorporated through the existing eye of the hook. This is necessary for two main reasons, one being to ensure all hooks on the hook rack system remain in correct order, the other for greatest departure (sliding) ability for maximum speed and minimum friction (see associated footage).the greatest challenge in 6

7 developing a new system for this fishery is the fact that the hook preferred is so small and vessel motion readily makes a mess of lines and hooks. the Medina Setting will accommodate these issues. New setting system preparations The most sensible and economical next step to finalizing Medina Setting is to first obtain around 1000 stainless steel fishing hook split rings (these are unavailable in Ecuador) which can be manually attached to conventional hooks. This split ring will attach the hook to the setting rack. Limited setting trials will then help resolve the following factors of design: 1 Minimum ring and hook rack diameter 2 Whether it will be better to stay with the hook and ring concept or have produced the same hook, although one with a larger diameter eye and dispense with the ring altogether. 3. If the latter option (2) is preferred then decide which eye orientation relative to the end curve of the hook will perform better - either 0 degrees or 90 degrees. 4. If retaining the hook and ring concept, (costs and supply issues in Ecuador), either continue adding rings to existing hooks or source a supply of ready made hook with eye ring. (the options are currently being discussed with hook manufacturers). Why is rapid setting advantageous? Most importantly for birds rapid setting will substantially reduce the opportunity for access to hooks during setting. This is further assisted by the fact that invariably a number of boats work in close proximity. It is during the hauling stage that birds focus most foraging attention on a vessel. Therefore with a set of a very short duration it is unlikely that any birds will be in the vicinity of the setting vessel during that time, preferring as they do to be around those vessels hauling instead.) Also, a bird caught during a set of this short duration can usually be released before the bird is dragged under by line weight and drowned (this takes 8 minutes if line weights are 750g). It is therefore important that fishermen are encouraged to check along set lines. A typical duration set does not accommodate release of bird before they are dragged under, and most or all hooked birds will die. Total daily fishing effort per vessel is limited by the time and effort required to haul, not by the setting of lines, so it is considered unlikely that a faster setting time would result in vessels increasing daily fishing effort. In addition, because the fast setting system retains, as much as possible, all other traditional characteristics of the fishing gear and method, most likely vessels would simply retain the multiple daily set systems of one line containing 400 hooks. This line is re-made ashore after each fishing day (more so an entirely inefficient, time consuming and traditional, social practice in which common sense is unlikely to ever prevail, along with alternate better means). Once the required hooks have been obtained these will be sent to Ecuador (subject to ABC approval and price compatibility with existing hooks) and further development of Medina Setting system should be possible. While in Ecuador hook rack and hook box 7

8 designs were discussed, drawings provided and basic models built. These are simple and easily constructed from fiberglass and several 500mm lengths of 6mm SS rods. In the 2010 Ecuador fishing Report a recommendation was made to investigate the possibility that a less troublesome, more efficient and faster setting system may already be in use in a limited way in this fishery. However, I do not know if this recommendation was pursued. During the 2011 fishing trips several vessels Roberto ready to test Medina Setting system from the port of Anconcito were also present and were using a different setting method, one that seemed to have some advantages for reducing bird bycatch. The incidence of bird captures are however, so unpredictably variable that an attempt to measure relative catch performance of different setting systems would require considerable time and resources. However, to simply compare those aspects of setting that increase bird capture risk, duration of setting and frequency of line setting delays in these different setting systems would be indicative of likely bird capture rates and this undertaking would be worthwhile. Mitsu no.9 hooks (new hook evaluation) These hooks were a useful tool for the development of Medina setting method. The other likely benefits from the use of a different design, heavier hook were also evaluated. Conventional hooks weigh less than 1g which is one reason why hooks with bait float. Mitsu number 9 hooks weigh 7g, which is sufficient to ensure each baited hook will start to sink immediately on entering the water. Conventional hooks are not designed to minimize the likelihood of target fish floating off during hauling and this source of food is a major attractant to the albatrosses. However, although the Mitsu number 9 hooks served their purpose well in the new setting method experiments, it became rapidly apparent that this hook was not a suitable alternative in this fishery for various reasons. It is not economically viable because the choice of branchline material has a very low breaking strength, which results in a high loss of hooks. Since Mitsu 9 hooks cost 10 times as much as conventional hooks, the cost of the loss of the new hook would be unacceptably high. (A change to a different branchline material in addition to a new hook type was considered highly unlikely in this fishery). The MItsu hooks are also a different shape (being more circular) and the use of these would be dependent on a widespread change to an altered (Medina style) setting method. Line Hauling roller evaluation In the 2010 Ecuador fishing Report the potential benefit to the fishermen and to birds of improving the system for line hauling was outlined. Noted was that between the 2010 visit and the 2011 work the majority of vessel operators seem to have recognized this line-haul issue and most now utilize a 2.5m length of split PVC pipe encasing the gunwale as a bearing surface over which the line is pulled. The benefit of using a line roller (Lindgren Pittman-old style), was evaluated. The line roller was originally designed for a different application but was simply modified to suit this 8

9 fishery. There were 3 trials which followed each new modification. A fourth modification is considered necessary, but has not yet been completed or tested. This is planned. During the testing, the advantages of the roller system for hauling were obvious. However, existing hauling practices or habits may not accommodate certain restriction that the roller system imposes. Crew have a tendency to want to move the point of hauling forward and aft along the side of the boat rather than remain at a fixed position. It is hoped that by completing the planned modifications and re-installing the roller, optimum performance (for birds and fishermen) can be proven. Fishermen may come to fully accept and adapt to the equipment through this process. Considering the economics of this fishery, improved hauling via the installation of the inexpensive and simple PVC sleeve (which had been invented locally) may be the likely extent of improvement to this aspect of the fishing. Line hauler roller (adapted for hake fishery) Line hauler roller testing 9

10 Seabird Behavioral Observations Regular counts of all seabird species were maintained throughout every set and haul (see field notes). All occasions when any seabird species attempted, successfully or otherwise to take bait and fish from hooks were documented. This included occasions when fish lost from the line were taken or discarded offal was consumed. Observations made indicated that the following seabird species are at risk of capture in the artisinal hake fishery. Waved albatross The most vulnerable of all the species interacting in this fishery, the albatross are presented with considerable opportunities to be caught on hooks. In fact, it remained a constant source of amazement that many more of this species do not get caught. They are generally wary of hooks and deal with them with apparent caution. Compared to the abundance of baited hooks that remain accessible to albatrosses during line setting, few attempts to take baited hooks during this interval occur and usually result in the bait being safely removed from the hook by the bird. Having said this, of only four baited hooks successfully taken by albatrosses during setting, two resulted in capture of the bird. In just one of 17 sets did any hooks with bait get taken at all by albatrosses. One of these birds was caught, but subsequently escaped when the nylon line snapped. The other was successfully released moments before disappearing underwater due to the weight of the line. Waved albatrosses feeding on discarded hake gills One of the reasons why baited hooks tend to be left alone is invariably due to the fact that line hauling activity of nearby boat(s) at this same time offers much greater source of preferred food. This preferred food is hake and other fish, either on hooks which become available when lines get tangled between boats and float up, or when such fish disengage from hooks and float away. The only other instances of bird capture were two additional albatrosses during hauling, both having swallowed whole hake on hooks. One subsequently managed to disgorge the fish together with hook and line, the other flew off with the line to the fish trailing out of the birds beak (presumably line snapped or was cut). On other occasions during hauling, albatrosses regularly pursued hake and baited hooks, as these were being hauled aboard or were otherwise accessible near the surface due to tangles with another boatʼs gear. There was one other occasion (see notes 26/08 line haul number 2 at 1055) when an albatross was observed to be caught, this time on the line of a nearby boat - the bird subsequently became unhooked and was last seen sitting quietly. The next most attractive activity to this species, (in fact to all the seabird species) is the stage during the final haul when any bait remaining on hooks is progressively thrown overboard. If squid has been used, this can be a considerable quantity (although fish 10

11 pieces used for baiting hooks is preferred by the birds). The maximum count of Waved albatrosses was 39, but typically there were 10 or less birds directly associated with activity at any one boat. This species of albatross is fortunately comparatively placid, disinclined to engage in prolonged disputes over food and is either incapable or disinclined to fully submerge in attempts to seize baits on hooks from underwater. These characteristics protect it to some extent from getting caught while interacting with hooks. Parkinsonʼs petrel Less abundant than albatrosses at this time of year (up to 16 but typically 3 or less associated with any one vessel). This petrel is bold and a proficient deep diver, recovering bait off hooks during hauling right alongside the boat or astern during setting. Only one instance of successfully taking bait from a hook was observed -this during setting. All other successful bait or fish takes did not involve hooks. Considerable opportunities are provided by the fishery for this species to be caught on hooks during both setting and hauling. Their preference does seem to be to wait for smaller scraps including discarded baits to become available. This is usually reliant on these having sunk below the surface after being missed by frigates. Pink-footed shearwater This species is similar to Parkinsonʼs in vulnerability to being caught on hooks but is (so far) present intermittently through sets and hauls with just 1 to 3 birds. Not quite as bold as Parkinsonʼs but will on occasions dive deep over the line tending to focus on baits remaining on hooks or pulled off hooks during hauling. There were no observations made of the species pursuing hooks during setting but undoubtably this does occur and result in a high risk of capture. Blue-footed booby 3 to 5 individuals intermittently present throughout sets and hauls. No line setting interactions were observed, but there was regular deep diving to recover bait or fish on hooks during hauling. High risk of capture. Magnificent frigate Always present during sets and hauls, usually less than 10 but up to 20. Confines its activity exclusively to on surface- seizing discarded items, particularly the discarded gills torn from hake, which are floating right alongside the boat.there were 94 such occasions and a further 25 of this species taking floating, discarded small fish of several species. Out-competes all other species for such items. Can get inadvertently caught on a hook. One observation of a bird having nylon line trailing from its wing where the the hook was presumably embedded. Low capture risk because the species is focussed on floating items and not so much on items attached to hooks. All other species observed did not interact with fishing and are considered to be at minimal or no risk. This included 3 gull species, 1 tern species, 4 storm petrel species, galapagos petrel and phalaropes. Brown pelicans were seen on just one occasion and were not distracted by fishing activity but, being a large and very capable diver they are considered to be at risk of being caught. 11

12 Capture and release of live birds The greatest risk of catching a bird is during line hauling, not setting. This is principally because hooks with bait or floating fish attached frequently become exposed on the sea surface for long periods whenever lines from two boats become entangled. In 17 observed line hauls, this occurred 18 times and as many as 4 times in one haul alone (table 2). There were 40 occasions (mainly during these line entanglement events), when albatrosses made contact with food items associated with a hook and on 2 such occasions birds were caught (table 2). The albatrosses are also at risk of capture when they occasionally attempt to grab fish or bait remaining on hooks right alongside the boat. It is here that boobies, Parkinsonʼs petrels and Pink-footed shearwaters dive on the line, chasing bait pieces (primarily) that have come off the hook. They also attempt to remove items from the hooks as they come up to the sea surface during hauling. The prevalence of the events outlined above highlights the need to improve survival prospects of hooked birds by encouraging the adoption of correct release procedures. If the Medina Setting system becomes widely used, far less birds would be caught, and these birds, because of their short duration on the line, could be released in very good condition. Recommended procedures for handling and releasing birds caught need to be provided to fishermen. This would be best done through specific practical demonstrations but also by trained observers when the situation arises at sea (there are currently few if any observers that know more about correct release procedures than the fishermen) They need to understand such best practices for safety of bird-handlers as well as birds. Waved albatrosses eating hake from hooks 12

13 Other potential fishery problems for Waved albatross in Ecuador waters Albacore Longline fishery Of all the hook fisheries in Ecuador this one is most likely the greatest threat to seabirds because it is such a large and widespread one using gear that would potentially make baited hooks available to birds. A negligible per vessel bird catch rate could still amount to a serious level across the whole fishery. There are obvious difficulties and costs of assessing this and associated logistic constraints (hazards). -small boats traveling very long distances for relatively long fishing trips are all factors to consider. Wh y bother doing this evaluation if the bird catch potential can be simply reduced? From checking the fishing gear on these boats in port and discussion about this with Roberto and Jodie, it is apparent that if birds are being caught it is because, with no weight (only an 18g tuna hook) baits sink slowly and these remain accessible to birds for too long. Also, once set, without weights incorporated, baited hooks are likely to remain or re-enter surface waters where sea turtles spend most time. The choice to not incorporate a weight in Ecuador fisheries (in other tuna fisheries this would be a lead -centre swivel) is most likely an economic one. This is despite the fact that a lead swivel is recognized (by the fishermen) as a desirable improvement to overall fishing efficiency. It is recommended that a survey be conducted to gauge the response of the fishery to the incorporation of a 60g lead-centre swivel, preferably not more than 1m away from the hook. (obtain sample weights from Jeff & Joanna). If response is positive then evaluate costs associated with fishery-wide supply of swivels. This is still considered to be one of the best uses to which seabird bycatch avoidance funds could be directed. A quick, easy and permanent fix. Industrial longline fishing for hake in Ecuador Th current President of Ecuador has apparently stated that all Demersal trawl fishing in Ecuador waters must cease by June This fishery comprises some 260 relatively large (20m or more) mechanized vessels. As a means of offsetting this politically unpopular move and making provision for ongoing employment, government has been asked to embark on a developmental project of converting trawl vessel to demonstrate viable longlining for merluza. The first experimental fishing trip undertaken by a ʻconvertedʼ trawler occurred on the Discussion on aft deck of industrial longline vessel 18th August. Roberto and I were aboard the vessel on this trip. Several more trips have now been made. At this stage it is unknown how many of the 260 vessels will be offered the opportunity (or how many will take the opportunity) to convert to longlining. However, any that do so will 13

14 have the capability of fishing to 700m depth or more (compared to artisinal fishing to a maximum of 300m), and over a much greater area as well. The larger vessels, being mechanized will also be capable of considerably greater fishing effort (hooks set per day) with extended trip duration as well. If segregating of artisinal and industrial vessels does not occur then the viability of artisinal operations in the future is unlikely. This effort capacity combined with the uncertainty over how vessels will be converted raises concerns over the potential impact these vessels will have on seabird populations. I was in a position to provide conversion suggestions that would best suit these types of boats, particularly in relation to preventing seabird interactions occurring from the outset. The key advice is to ensure that the line-setting departure point is as far forward on vessel as is practicable. This precludes seabird access to baits as they enter the water. The extent to which such advice will be taken up, particularly on a vessel by vessel basis is unknown. This needs to be closely monitored, and influenced as much as possible. Jodie and Roberto are involved in this government project and now understand the importance of specifying design aspects of vessel conversion which are directed at circumventing inevitable high bird mortality rates. Progress of this experimental fishery needs to be closely watched. TDRʼs & mitigation uptake incentive Using TDRʼs to measure the sink rate of hooks and measuring different line weighting regimes tells us nothing about how seabird capture rates respond. Measuring response reliably in this fishery will take a long time. It is likely that improving sink rate to the upper limit of practicality or general acceptance (willingness to use) will not reduce bird catch risk very much. Providing fishermen with some incentive (not catching birds is not an incentive here) to add more weight or reduce spacing is a necessity. TDR data can be used to measure the fishing time lost when less weight is used. Likewise, if a bird does get caught during setting this will slow sink rate and reduce the fishing time of a certain section of the line. (This also means that it is worthwhile to return along a line and release birds that have been caught.) Suggestions for work using TDRʼs: 1. Compare time difference from sea surface to ocean floor when line weighting is altered (more weight, more fishing time) 2. Reattach a dead bird (not a waterlogged bird) to a line being set and deploy TDRʼs at the position of the bird and also away from it on each side for several sections. By doing so, demonstrate how much fishing time is lost if a bird caught during setting is not released. 3. Increasing line weight at the same intervals (50m) along a line does not seem to much alter the proportion of hooks between weights that still sink too slowly. Compare the potential benefit of retaining the same overall weight but having this at closer intervals. Can a higher proportion of hooks in each line section be made to sink at a faster rate? (The delay to sinking because of the time it takes for the weight to influence the descent of furtherest away hooks is the main problem. 20g at every hook would be better than having the equivalent amount of weight at 50m intervals). Interestingly, in artisinal net fisheries (with similar economic forces to the Ecuador Hake fishery) having 14

15 20-40g lead line weights at one or two metre intervals is common practice.it can only be assumed that it is not the economics of a lead weighted hook line but an operational benefit that has lines weighted as they are in the Hake fishery. Presumably the aim is to allow each section of line (between weights) to remain floating above the sea-bed (better access for fish and less hook-ups or tangling on the rough sea-bed). Do TDRʼs confirm this profile? Compare set depth of hooks at the line weight compared to hook no. 11 midway, which should theoretically be off the sea-bed. 4. What is the sink rate performance of a ʻfully weightedʼ line, one having typical net line leads incorporated? Operational acceptance issue- catch rate, hook loss rate comparison, tangle/foul up rate when hauled (jammed on sea-bed) etc. It is worth noting that in other Demersal longline fisheries hook sink rate to reduce seabird mortality is achieved by having as much as 5kg at around 40m intervals, which is probably well over the acceptable limit of this artisinal fishery. Putting a similar amount of weight onto the line but more uniformly (such as in the integrated-weight line material) may achieve a sink rate objective and still be within acceptable operational limits provided no impact on catch rate, gear loss rate etc occurs. Constructing and testing a fixed lead style line would be a very useful exercise. Waved albatross conservation and the politics of involved organizations There are three organizations to consider: ABC with Equilibro Azul, Birdlife with Ecuador Birdlife partner, and Ecuador government. All are observing in the fishery. The government position seems to be that because the fishery which catches albatrosses (hake fishery) is only small it is not really a problem. The focus is just on measuring catchrate and far removed from mitigation or even data-collection appropriate to facilitating mitigation. Longline and net boats - Santa Rosa Harbour Observing by NGOʼs is viewed as unnecessary duplication and there seems to be failure to acknowledge the potential mitigation or fishery performance benefit offered by NGOʼs. (Note, I did not have the opportunity to participate in the Waved albatross Recovery meeting held as part of ACAP6 in which a different perspective to the above may have emerged). Birdlife is focussed on two things. Measuring the magnitude of the problem via the observer program which it runs and a single approach to mitigation. This approach is measuring sink-rate performance of modified lines using TDRʼs. There is a high risk that this single approach to mitigation will fail, because the changes required are not practical, 15

16 are unacceptable to fishermen or else of little actual benefit. It appears that the Birdlife observer data is also inadequate for identifying a better approach to effective mitigation. All three groups are in direct competition for one scarce resource; that of competent observers. Of greater value to all groups is the potential involvement of Roberto Medina, not as an experienced observer as much as for his technical skills, commitment to bycatch mitigation and his wide acceptance by the fishing community. ABC work here is dependent on maintaining the opportunity for Roberto and Jodie to remain working as a team and being provided with sufficient resources to keep observers functioning. It is difficult to envisage how ABC and Birdlife can collaborate to offset costs, avoid duplication and achieve results more quickly unless a specific effort is made to ʻmergeʼ projects. Failing this, and assuming ABC continues its involvement here, the best strategy is securing Roberto (salary around $850 per month), Jodie plus 3 observers, as well as the extra budget to develop the new setting system, and hold fisher training workshops etc. It is necessary to consider ways to improve the current uncertainties associated with the different organizations involved in Waved Albatross fishery issue. Address the difficulties arising for individuals in Ecuador, competition for competent observers, duplication of work, poorly coordinated objectives and conflicting programs. Options: Allocate adequate funds to secure key ʻresourcesʼ, develop a specific work focus and ignore others entirely. This would largely cause a halt to Birdlife on-ground activity in the fishery. Integrate fully and collaborate with Birdlife. Birdlife did seem amenable to full cooperation but also gave the impression that they felt that separate projects could work in a complementary way (UK Birdlife opinion only). Many thanks to ABC and to HSI for the opportunity to assist with this project in Ecuador, to help consolidate seabird bycatch reduction efforts made in the fishery to-date and to contribute to future directions for the work. 16

17 Table 1 Schedule of work Date Time Start Time End Activity 08/08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /08/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ In transit to Ecuador 2330 In transit to Ecuador Preparation for fishing Santa Rosa Preparation for fishing Santa Rosa (Tsunami warning delays fishing u Preparation for fishing Santa Rosa Preparation for fishing Santa Rosa (industrial vessel conversion) Preparation for fishing Santa Rosa (industrial vessel conversion) Fishing trip Preparation for fishing Fishing trip Preparation for fishing, data entry Preparation for fishing industrial vessel conversion Fishing trip Preparation for fishing Fishing trip Data entry Data entry Travel to Guayaquil ACAP6 meeting ACAP SWG4 Meeting ABC meeting ACAP SWG4 Meeting ABC meeeting ACAP SWG4 Meeting Travel to Salinas Data entry Fishing trip Industrial vessel visit, no more fishing Preparation for fishing Santa Rosa holiday Data entry Travel to Guayaquil ACAP6 meeting ACAP6 meeting ACAP6 Meeting ACAP6 meeting Travel to Salinas prepare for fishing Fishing trip Travel to Guayaquil ACAP6 Meeting 2100 Travel from Ecuador to Australia (+1 day delay Buenos Aires 0100 Arrive Australia 17

18 Table 2 Duration of line setting and hauling Setting Hauling Start End Duration (min) Start End Duration (hrs + min) Table 3 Daily fishing summary Date Fishing Ground Boat Name Line Sets Hooks Set Traditional Hooks Set New System Line Setting Delays Hauling Tangles TDR s Used Line Wt (g) Bird Hook Contact Set Bird Hook Contact Haul Birds Caugh t Set 15/08/201Manteka Williams /08/201 Yerbita Williams /08/201 Yerbita Williams /08/201 Yerbita Williams /08/201 Yerbita William /09/201MantekaPedro Andre Birds Caught Haul 18