Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10 Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present, Rossing, Booth and Zeller METHODS ICES maintains two different publicly accessible databases that provide time series data of fisheries statistics. The ‗ICES catch statistics database’ describes countries‘ reported landings by species (or higher taxonomic grouping), ICES statistical reporting area and year (in two parts: 1950-1972 and 1973-present). Throughout the present report, data from this database are referred to as ‗ICES landings statistics’. The second ICES database, officially called ‗ICES stock assessment results database’, describes countries‘ catches by stock and year, and presents data used by the ICES stock assessment working groups for their annual stock assessments. Hence, this database only presents data on cod, herring, sprat, brill (Scophthalmus rhombus), dab (Limanda limanda), turbot (Psetta maxima), plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) and flounder (Platichthys flesus) and no data on the remaining 145 taxa being caught. As we utilize some of these data, generally in conjunction with information taken directly from the ICES stock assessment working group reports (e.g., ICES Working Group on Baltic salmon and trout 2008 [ICES, 2008a]), we refer to the combined data source (i.e., ‗ICES stock assessment results database’ and ICES stock assessment working group reports) as ‗ICES stock assessment working group data’. In addition to the reported landings by stock, the ‗ICES stock assessment reports’ also contain some data on unallocated (unreported) catches of cod, salmon and Riga herring. Both databases are available electronically from ICES (ICES, 2009a) as are recent ICES stock assessment reports (ICES, 2009b). As the aim of this study is to estimate total catches (as opposed to reported landings) taken in the Baltic Sea for the time period considered here, all fisheries components were estimated for the nine Baltic countries. The ‗reported data‘ baseline is represented by ‗ICES landings statistics‘. To this, we added four IUU components: ‗adjustments‘ to ICES landings statistics (i.e., data source adjustments to reported landings), unreported landings‘, ‗discards‘, and ‗recreational catches‘. ‗ICES landings statistics‘ formed the baseline for estimating total catches, and estimates of IUU catches were added to these. Discard estimates were applied to the sum of ICES landings, adjustments, and estimates of unreported catches. Recreational catch estimates were also made for each country, allowing estimates of total catches taken from the Baltic Sea from 1950-2007 to be derived. Catches reported by ICES on behalf of non-Baltic countries were presented here, but excluded from this catch reconstruction as they amounted to only 60,000 t over the entire time period considered. The basic methodological approach used here consisted of utilizing as wide a range of information and data sources as possible. Information and data for each catch component that were considered usable were transformed to create so-called ‗anchor points‘, and, when time series were lacking, expansion methods, including linear interpolations between anchor points in time, were done to create full time-series coverage for each catch component (Zeller et al., 2006; Zeller et al., 2007). ICES landings statistics (ICES, 2009a) 2 are available as two data sets covering the time periods 1950-1972 and 1973-2007, and describe the annual commercial landings data by each country for each taxon and statistical reporting area (Figure 1). ICES landings data were adjusted with information provided by our Baltic collaborators, from national sources, or from other ICES documents (e.g., ICES working group reports), and the adjustments plus ICES landings statistics represent what we consider to be the best estimate of reported landings. Unreported catches were generally transformed into anchor points by considering the available data as a proportion of corresponding reported landings per year (e.g., unreported landings data for cod for Denmark was related to the reported landings of cod by Denmark) in order to expand unreported catch estimates to time periods when data were lacking. The same method was used for discards; however, discard rates were applied to the sum of ICES landings statistics, adjustments, and unreported landings. In order to expand to time periods when there was no neighboring anchor point to interpolate to, an assumption-based approach was used. These methods allowed for a complete time series of catch data to be estimated for each catch component for each country that participates in Baltic Sea fisheries. The general methods presented here represent the default approach for each component for each country. However, whenever country specific data on any of the components were available, such specific data were utilized in preference to the default approach. Each individual country report (this volume) describes such details. To account for some political and economic differences between countries, we accounted for catch components by considering groupings of countries. Western countries were considered to include Denmark, Finland, West Germany (1950-1990) and Germany (after re-unification, 1991-2007), and Sweden; former eastern bloc countries included East Germany (1950-1990), Poland, Russia Federation, 2 ICES refers to these data as ‗catch statistics‘.
Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present, Rossing, Booth and Zeller 11 and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Non-Baltic countries that have had fishing access to the Baltic Sea as reported in ICES landings statistics include Faeroe Islands, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, England and Wales. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) catches Here, we consider that adjustments to ICES landings statistics, unreported landings, discards and recreational catches all form components of IUU catches. Each of these components was treated separately in both a taxon- and country specific manner when information was available, or a country‘s IUU components were estimated with assumed default methods, when information was not available. Adjustments to ICES landings statistics Adjustments to ICES landings statistics were taken from ICES stock assessment working group data (e.g., ICES, 2008a), the ‗ICES stock assessment results‘ database (ICES, 2009a), and nationally reported data. These adjustments were incorporated to present the best estimate of reported landings. National data were used for some countries in the early time periods (1950s) to fill gaps from the first year of ICES reported data back to 1950 (i.e., some countries data time series in ICES reported landings statistics do not start until after 1950, even though data are reported in national documents). Landings reported by the ICES stock assessment working groups were generally used for cod and flatfishes, as the stock assessment working group data provided specific landings data for the eastern and western cod stocks (ICES, 2007; 2008a), while the stock assessment working group data for flatfishes (ICES, 2008a) provided a better taxonomic breakdown. Unreported landings The foundation for our estimates of unreported landings was guided by what ICES calls ‗unallocated‘ catches and which we refer to as unreported landings throughout this report. The ICES stock assessment working group data only contain Baltic-wide summary data of unreported landings for the western and eastern cod stocks, salmon, and Riga herring. 3 Unreported landings of both cod stocks and salmon were Table 1. Default anchor points (%) used for estimating unreported landings from the western cod stock in the Baltic Sea based on ICES (2007, Table 2.4.1). Dashes (-) indicate years of linear interpolation between anchor points. Countries Year Western Eastern 1950 5.00 a 0.00 b 1951-1979 - 0.00 b 1980 20.10 c 0.00 b 1981-1990 - 0.00 b 1991-1992 - - 1993 40.20 40.20 1994 39.64 39.64 1995 - - 1996 5.34 5.34 1997-1999 - - 2004 0.07 0.07 2005 0.04 0.04 2006-2007 0.04 d 0.04 d a assumption of 5% of reported landings; b assumption of zero unreported landings; c assumption of ½ the 1993 rate; d 2005 value carried forward. converted into percentages of the Baltic-wide reported landings for salmon and each cod stock (as reported in the respective working group reports) to form anchor points. Unfortunately, the ICES source did not provide country-specific transparency in regards to unreported landings. The Baltic-wide percentage rates, which were adjusted if a country was known to not report unallocated landings to ICES (see cod below), were then applied to the sum of each country‘s ICES landings statistics and adjustments. As it is known that not all countries provide data on unreported landings (or even estimates thereof) to stock assessment working groups, the resulting unreported landings totals obtained through our approach are minimal estimates at least at the aggregated level. Cod: Anchor points for unreported catches of western cod were available for 1993, 1994, 1996, 2004, and 2005 (Table 2.4.1 in ICES, 2007) as a total for all countries, while the eastern cod stock had anchor points developed for 1993-1996, and from 2000-2007 (Table 2.3.1 in ICES, 2008a). However, these anchor points were adjusted by excluding Sweden‘s reported landings from the total landings because Sweden does not report any unallocated cod landings to the ICES working groups (Persson, this vol.). Despite repeated requests to ICES to obtain information on which countries did not contribute data, we were not permitted access to that knowledge (Table 1). The adjusted rate was estimated as, 3 For details regarding unreported catches of Riga herring, see reports on Estonia (Veitch et al., this volume) and Latvia (Rossing et al., this volume), which are the countries that exploit this stock.
Page 1 and 2: ISSN 1198-6727 Fisheries Centre Res
Page 3: Fisheries Centre Research Reports 1
Page 6 and 7: 2 Total marine fisheries extraction
Page 8 and 9: Catch ( t x 10 5 ) 4 Total marine f
Page 16 and 17: 12 Total marine fisheries extractio
Page 22 and 23: Catch ( t x 10 6 ) 18 Total marine
Page 26 and 27: Catch (t x 10 6 ) Catch ( t x 10 6
Page 64 and 65:
60 Total marine fisheries extractio
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Landings (t x 10 4 ) 70 Total marin
Page 76 and 77:
Catch ( t x 10 5 ) Catch ( t x 10 5
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
. 86 Total marine fisheries extract
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Catch (t x10 5 ) Catch ( t x 10 5 )
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
100 Total marine fisheries extracti
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
. 108 Total marine fisheries extrac
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Catch ( t x 10 5 ) 116 Total marine
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Catch (t) Catch (t x 10 3 ) 134 Tot
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Catch (t) 152 Total marine fisherie
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Catch (t x 10³) Thousands Thousand
Page 242 and 243:
Catch (t) Catch (t x 10³) Thousand
Page 244 and 245:
Catch (t) Catch (t) 240 Total marin
Page 246 and 247:
Catch (t x 10³) Thousands Thousand
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Catch ( x 10 3 t) 258 Total marine
Page 264 and 265:
Catch ( x 10 3 t) 260 Total marine
Page 266 and 267:
show all

Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?