International audienceMarine recreational fishing (MRF) is a high-participation activity with large economic value and social benefits globally, and it impacts on some fish stocks. Although reporting MRF catches is a European Union legislative requirement, estimates are only available for some countries. Here, data on numbers of fishers, participation rates, days fished, expenditures, and catches of two widely targeted species were synthesized to provide European estimates of MRF and placed in the global context. Uncertainty assessment was not possible due to incomplete knowledge of error distributions; instead, a semi-quantitative bias assessment was made. There were an estimated 8.7 million European recreational sea fishers corresponding to a participation rate of 1.6%. An estimated 77.6 million days were fished, and expenditure was €5.9 billion annually. There were higher participation, numbers of fishers, days fished and expenditure in the Atlantic than the Mediterranean, but the Mediterranean estimates were generally less robust. Comparisons with other regions showed that European MRF participation rates and expenditure were in the mid-range, with higher participation in Oceania and the United States, higher expenditure in the United States, and lower participation and expenditure in South America and Africa. For both northern European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax, Moronidae) and western Baltic cod (Gadus morhua, Gadidae) stocks, MRF represented 27% of the total removals. This study highlights the importance of MRF and the need for bespoke, regular and statistically sound data collection to underpin European fisheries management. Solutions are proposed for future MRF data collection in Europe and other regions to support sustainable fisheries management

International audienceFrench regulations concerning the mitigation of development impacts have been progressively strengthened with offsets now required for impacts on forests, wetlands, and protected species, among others. In 2012, following a national consultative process called Grenelle de l’Environnement, legal requirements in terms of monitoring and effective implementation of measures aimed at avoiding, reducing and offsetting impacts were strengthened. This has created strong “demand” for offsets.The workability of these new requirements has come under scrutiny, not least because of their strong legal and financial implications for developers. In this context, official government guidance on implementing the mitigation hierarchy was published in 2012. Under this guidance, the aim of the mitigation hierarchy is to achieve no net loss (NNL) of biodiversity, and preferably a net gain for currently threatened biodiversity and ecosystems. We discuss what NNL means in this context, and highlight some of the technical and governance issues raised by the French approach to NNL.Our analysis shows that the French guidance, in spite of its laudable ambition, does not address the institutional arrangements and science base needed to reach the policy's objective of NNL. The burden of designing and building adequate institutional arrangements is shifted down to local and regional permitting authorities, and even developers themselves. Consequently, and in spite of the increasing demand for offsets, the result is a highly variable and often ineffective project by project approach to offset supply, with minimal commitments. Unless the institutional and scientific challenges are tackled, the likely outcome will be an expansion of “paper offsets”

No abstract

International audienceCitizen science, defined as participation of the general public in scientific research, could significantly help scientists to address biodiversity issues, through (i) monitoring the state of biodiversity, (ii) framing indicators which synthesise and communicate information on the state of biodiversity, (iii) building scenarios to evaluate the plausible consequences of different policies. A key asset of citizen science is that participating citizens disseminate the information they gain, thereby increasing the profile of issues being researched. We review further benefits associated with biodiversity monitoring, indicators and policy scenarios, envisioned as collaborative tools between scientists and citizens. Such collaboration promotes both the scientific adequacy and social legitimacy of these tools, so that they can meaningfully inform debates and decisions on public policy

No abstract

International audienceAccording to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), states have to provide indicators in order to assess the performance of their initiatives for halting the loss of biodiversity. Sixteen headline indicators have been identified for monitoring the CBD targets. Of these indicators only one, "Trends in the abundance and distribution of selected species," is a direct headline indicator of "non-exploited" biodiversity. In France, the implementation of this indicator is completely dependent on data collected by volunteers. Since this investment of volunteer time is equivalent to savings in administrative costs, we attempt in this paper to assign it a monetary value. This enables us to estimate how much the French administration saves thanks to volunteer efforts and how much public funding would have to be invested if volunteers were no longer willing to participate in these biodiversity monitoring schemes. We estimate this amount to be between 678,523 and 4,415,251 euros per year, depending on the scenario selected. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

No abstract

While catch-and-release (C&R) is a well-known practice in several European freshwater recreational fisheries, studies on the magnitude and impact of this practice in European marine recreational fisheries are limited. To provide an overview of the practice and magnitude of C&R among marine recreational anglers in Europe, the existing knowledge of C&R and its potential associated release mortality was collected and summarized. The present study revealed that in several European countries over half of the total recreational catch is released by marine anglers. High release proportions of . 60% were found for Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax), pollack (Pollachius pollachius), and sea trout (Salmo trutta) in at least one of the studied European countries. In the case of the German recreational Baltic Sea cod fishery, release proportions varied considerably between years, presumably tracking a strong year class of undersized fish. Reasons for release varied between countries and species, and included legal restrictions (e.g. minimum landing sizes and daily bag limits) and voluntary C&R. Considering the magnitude of C&R practice among European marine recreational anglers, post-release mortalities of released fish may need to be accounted for in estimated fishing mortalities. However, as the survival rates of European marine species are mostly unknown, there is a need to conduct post-release survival studies and to identify factors affecting post-release survival. Such studies could also assist in developing species-specific, best-practice guidelines to minimize the impacts of C&R on released marine fish in Europe.