No abstract

Mapping trawling pressure on the benthic habitats is needed as background to support an ecosystem approach to fisheries management. The extent and intensity of bottom trawling on the European continental shelf (0–1000 m) was analysed from logbook statistics and vessel monitoring system data for 2010–2012 at a grid cell resolution of 1 × 1 min longitude and latitude. Trawling intensity profiles with seabed impact at the surface and subsurface level are presented for 14 management areas in the North-east Atlantic, Baltic Sea and Mediterranean Sea. The footprint of the management areas ranged between 53–99% and 6–94% for the depth zone from 0 to 200 m (Shallow) and from 201 to 1000 m (Deep), respectively. The footprint was estimated as the total area of all grid cells that were trawled fully or partially. Excluding the untrawled proportions reduced the footprint estimates to 28–85% and 2–77%. Largest footprints per unit landings were observed off Portugal and in the Mediterranean Sea. Mean trawling intensity ranged between 0.5 and 8.5 times per year, but was less in the Deep zone with a maximum intensity of 6.4. Highest intensities were recorded in the Skagerrak-Kattegat, Iberian Portuguese area, Tyrrhenian Sea and Adriatic Sea. Bottom trawling was highly aggregated. For the Shallow zone the seabed area where 90% of the effort occurred comprised between 17% and 63% (median 36%) of the management area. Footprints were high over a broad range of soft sediment habitats. Using the longevity distribution of the untrawled infaunal community, the seabed integrity was estimated as the proportion of the biomass of benthic taxa where the trawling interval at the subsurface level exceeds their life span. Seabed integrity was low (<0.1) in large parts of the European continental shelfs, although smaller pockets of seabed with higher integrity values occur. The methods developed here integrate official fishing effort statistics and industry-based gear information to provide high-resolution pressure maps and indicators, which greatly improve the basis for assessing and managing benthic pressure from bottom trawling. Further they provide quantitative estimates of trawling impact on a continuous scale by which managers can steer.

This study assesses the seabed pressure of towed fishing gears and models the physical impact (area and depth of seabed penetration) from trip-based information of vessel size, gear type, and catch. Traditionally fishing pressures are calculated top-down by making use of large-scale statistics such as logbook data. Here, we take a different approach starting from the gear itself (design and dimensions) to estimate the physical interactions with the seabed at the level of the individual fishing operation. We defined 14 distinct towed gear groups in European waters (eight otter trawl groups, three beam trawl groups, two demersal seine groups, and one dredge group), for which we established gear “footprints”. The footprint of a gear is defined as the relative contribution from individual larger gear components, such as trawl doors, sweeps, and groundgear, to the total area and severity of the gear's impact. An industry-based survey covering 13 countries provided the basis for estimating the relative impact-area contributions from individual gear components, whereas sediment penetration was estimated based on a literature review. For each gear group, a vessel size–gear size relationship was estimated to enable the prediction of gear footprint area and sediment penetration from vessel size. Application of these relationships with average vessel sizes and towing speeds provided hourly swept-area estimates by métier. Scottish seining has the largest overall gear footprint of ∼1.6 km 2 h −1 of which 0.08 km 2 has an impact at the subsurface level (sediment penetration ≥ 2 cm). Beam trawling for flatfish ranks low when comparing overall footprint size/hour but ranks substantially higher when comparing only impact at the subsurface level (0.19 km 2 h −1 ). These results have substantial implications for the definition, estimation, and monitoring of fishing pressure indicators, which are discussed in the context of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management.

No abstract

Marine ecosystems evolve under many interconnected and area-specific pressures. To fulfil society's intensifying and diversifying needs while ensuring ecologically sustainable development, more effective marine spatial planning and broader-scope management of marine resources is necessary. Integrated ecological-economic fisheries models (IEEFMs) of marine systems are needed to evaluate impacts and sustainability of potential management actions and understand, and anticipate ecological, economic and social dynamics at a range of scales from local to national and regional. To make these models most effective, it is important to determine how model characteristics and methods of communicating results influence the model implementation, the nature of the advice that can be provided and the impact on decisions taken by managers. This article presents a global review and comparative evaluation of 35 IEEFMs applied to marine fisheries and marine ecosystem resources to identify the characteristics that determine their usefulness, effectiveness and implementation. The focus is on fully integrated models that allow for feedbacks between ecological and human processes although not all the models reviewed achieve that. Modellers must invest more time to make models user friendly and to participate in management fora where models and model results can be explained and discussed. Such involvement is beneficial to all parties, leading to improvement of models and more effective implementation of advice, but demands substantial resources which must be built into the governance process. It takes time to develop effective processes for using IEEFMs requiring a long-term commitment to integrating multidisciplinary modelling advice into management decision-making. K E Y W O R D Sbio-economic models, comparative model evaluation, fisheries management advice, integrated ecological-economic fisheries models, marine spatial planning and cross-sector management, performance criteria and scales and risks, use and acceptance and implementation and communication and flexibility and complexity | INTRODUCTIONThere is a growing need for tools to evaluate policies and assess tradeoffs in management of marine resources and provision of ecosystem services such as fishing, aquaculture, renewable energy, shipping, conservation and recreation (Cormier, Kannen, Elliott, & Hall, 2015;Degnbol & Wilson, 2008;EU 2014;Langlois, Fréon, Steyer, Delgenés, & Hélias, 2014;White et al., 2012). It is necessary to elaborate and apply common principles and broader, interdisciplinary management evaluation in the use of marine space involving several types of activities and sectors Soma et al., 2013;Stelzenmüller et al., 2013;Sundblad et al., 2014). Policymakers need to know the costs and benefits of conserving ecosystem goods and services to manage them sustainably. Moreover, according to an ecosystembased approach to management, specific pressures, associated uncertainties and risks need to be taken into account (Douvere, 2008;Ehler & Douvere, 2009;Gi...