Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea

More documents

Recommendations

Info

194 Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present, Rossing, Booth and Zeller Seal-damaged discard rates for salmon in subdivision 32 were compared to the default boat-based discard rates, and the higher rates between the two categories were used to estimate discards in subdivision 32 only (Table 3). For all other subdivisions and years prior to 1980, the default boat-based discard rates were used. For herring, seal-damaged discard rates from subdivision 32 were compared to the default boat-based discards for the period 1980-2007 (Table 4). As boat-based discards for herring were assumed to be zero for the entire study period, the seal-damaged discard rate was used from 1981- 2007 as it was the higher rate. Seal-damaged discard data for pikeperch and European perch, derived from FGFRI, were applied to Russia‘s landings of these species in subdivision 32 when the seal-discard rate was higher than the default boatbased discard rate. Seal-damaged discard rates were higher than the default boat-based discard rates from 2005-2007 for both species (see Appendix Table A1 and A2). Recreational catches a less than 0.01. Reports of recreational catches for Russia were mostly lacking throughout the time period considered. Reported recreational catch totals were available for Vistula lagoon in Leningrad oblast and Curonian lagoon in Kaliningrad oblast for 2005/2006 (Anon., 2006b; 2007c). Catches in these two recreational fishing areas were presented as the total number of recreational fishers and the total tonnage of fish caught, for all species combined. Anchor points were established for the number of fishers in 1980 and 1950 using an assumption-based approach. We assumed that in 1980 there were half the numbers of recreational fishers as in 2005, and in 1950 there were a quarter of the fishers as in 2005. To obtain a complete time series of number of fishers from 1950-2007, a linear interpolation was done between anchor points. We derived a catch rate of 5 kg∙fisher -1 ∙year -1 from the number of fishers and the total recreational catch for 2005/2006. This catch rate was held constant back in time to 1950 and combined with the number of fishers to estimate the total recreational catch. The same methodology was applied to Vistula lagoon and Curonian lagoon to estimate total recreational catch. To estimate the catch by taxon for each of the two recreational fishing areas, information was obtained regarding the recreational catch composition of the nearest neighboring country that reported recreational catches. For recreational catches in Vistula lagoon, the species composition of recreational catches was assumed to be similar to that of Finland, which is the nearest neighboring country that reported recreational catches (Rossing et al., this volume). The catch composition included 17 taxonomic groups. For each of these taxonomic groups, the average proportion of the Finnish recreational catches from 1980- 2007 were applied to the estimated recreational catches for Vistula lagoon. For Curonian lagoon, recreational catch composition was based on Germany‘s recreational catch composition (Rossing et al., this volume). Germany is the nearest neighboring country to Kaliningrad that provides detailed data on its recreational catches. The average proportion of cod, herring and flounder that were caught in Germany‘s recreational fisheries were applied to the estimated recreational catches for Curonian lagoon. Overall, total reconstructed catches were obtained as the sum of ICES landings statistics, adjustments, and estimates of unreported landings, discards and recreational catches. The estimated total reconstructed catch was then compared to the officially reported data, defined here as the ICES landings statistics. RESULTS Table 4. Seal-damaged discard rates for herring in Subdivision 32, derived from Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute (FGFRI) data, were used in place of boat-based discards from 1981- 2007. Boat-based discards were assumed to be zero from 1950-2007. Dashed (-) line indicates an interpolated rate. Year Seal-damaged 1980 0.00 1981-1999 - 2000 0.00 2001 0.00 2002 0.02 2003 0.01 2004 0.00 2005 0.12 2006 0.00 a 2007 0.38 ICES landings statistics only exist for the Russian Federation (Russia) from 1992 onward. Prior to 1990, Russia was part of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and landings for Russia were reported to ICES as part of the overall USSR landings, which also included landings for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. For the period between 1990 and 2007, ICES landings statistics reported a total of 739,288 t for Russia
Catch ( t x 10 4 ) Catch ( t x 10 5 ) Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present, Rossing, Booth and Zeller 195 (Figure 2). The time series of ICES landings showed a decrease in landings from 50,000 t in 1992 to around 37,000 t in 1994. Landings increased again around 1998, reaching a high of almost 60,000 t in 2001. Landings decreased to an average of approximately 44,000 t∙year -1 in the period from 2004-2007 (Figure 2). Here, we treat the ICES landings statistics as the officially reported data foundation, as it is the only readily available and publicly accessible fisheries data source that covers all countries, all years, all taxa and all statistical areas. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) catches All catches (and landings) that are not reported in the ICES landings statistics were considered here as IUU catches and were added to the ICES landings statistics to form our estimate of total reconstructed catch. These IUU components included: a) ‗adjustments‘ to ICES landings statistics from other reliable data sources of reported landings, including ICES stock assessment working group data and national data sources; b), ‗unreported‘ (‗unallocated‘) landings; c) ‗discards‘; and d) ‗recreational‘ catches. Combining the estimated IUU components with the ICES landings statistics formed the total catch reconstruction for 1950-2007. See Appendix Tables B1-B7 for complete time series data on all additions to taxonomic catch data, by catch component Adjustments to ICES landings statistics 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Adjustments 0.0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Year Figure 2. ICES landings statistics and adjustments to ICES landings statistics for Russia, 1950-2007. Table 5. Total adjustments (tonnes) to ICES landings of commercially targeted species in Russia from 1950-2007. Common name 1950- 1959 1960- 1969 1970- 1979 1980- 1989 1990- 1999 2000- 2007 Cod a 142,250 35,730 45,114 159,770 8,274 -489 Herring 184,400 214,250 353,267 351,244 66,342 0 Sprat 16,040 158,430 411,235 96,654 27,184 0 Flatfishes 1,710 1,770 1,615 3,242 772 4 Salmon 660 40 54 827 211 27 ‘Others’ 67,130 76,000 116,782 112,544 11,068 436 a eastern stock only. Additional landings data for Russia were obtained from the Latvian Fish Resources 1.4 Flatfish Agency (LATFRA), from ICES stock 1.2 Cod assessment working group reports and 1.0 from national sources (see methods for source details). These provided the 0.8 Others information to make adjustments to the 0.6 ICES landings statistics. Landings for the 0.4 Herring period 1950-1989 were adjusted from zero using the obtained from the LATFRA, as 0.2 Sprat there were no officially reported ICES 0.0 landings for Russia during this period 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 (which were part of the ‗former USSR‘ ICES category). Thus, adjustments were Year quite substantial for the early period from Figure 3. Russia‘s unreported landings by taxa, 1950-2007. 1950-1990, after which only minor adjustments were made to the reported landings (Figure 2, Table 5). Cod, herring and sprat were the largest contributors to these adjustments (Table 5). The total tonnage of adjustments to ICES landings was approximately 2,660,000 t over the study period (1950-2007), with the majority from 1950-1990. ICES
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 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
10 Total marine fisheries extractio
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Catch ( t x 10 6 ) 18 Total marine
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Catch (t x 10 6 ) Catch ( t x 10 6
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
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:
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: 144 Total marine fisheries extracti
Page 150 and 151: . 146 Total marine fisheries extrac
Page 154 and 155: Catch ( t x 10 4 ) 150 Total marine
Page 156 and 157: Catch (t) 152 Total marine fisherie
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?