Assessing broad life cycle impacts of daily onboard decision-making, annual strategic planning, and fisheries management in a northeast Atlantic trawl fishery

Abstract

Purpose Capture fisheries are the only industrial-scale harvesting of a wild resource for food. Temporal variability in environmental performance of fisheries has only recently begun to be explored, but only between years, not within a year. Our aim was to better understand the causes of temporal variability within and between years and to identify improvement options through management at a company level and in fisheries management. Methods We analyzed the variability in broad environmental impacts of a demersal freeze trawler targeting cod, haddock, saithe, and shrimp, mainly in the Norwegian Sea and in the Barents Sea. The analysis was based on daily data for fishing activities between 2011 and 2014 and the functional unit was a kilo of landing from one fishing trip. We used biological indicators in a novel hierarchic approach, depending on data availability, to quantify biotic impacts. Landings were categorized as target (having defined target reference points) or bycatch species (classified as threatened or as data-limited). Indicators for target and bycatch impacts were quantified for each fishing trip, as was the seafloor area swept. Results and discussion No significant difference in fuel use was found between years, but variability was considerable within a year, i.e., between fishing trips. Trips targeting shrimp were more fuel intensive than those targeting fish, due to a lower catch rate. Steaming to and from port was less important for fuel efficiency than steaming between fishing locations. A tradeoff was identified between biotic and abiotic impacts. Landings classified as main target species generally followed the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) framework, and proportions of threatened species were low, while proportions of data-limited bycatch were larger. This improved considerably when reference points were defined for saithe in 2014. ConclusionsThe variability between fishing trips shows that there is room for improvement through management. Fuel use per landing was strongly influenced by target species, fishing pattern, and fisheries management. Increased awareness about the importance of onboard decision-making can lead to improved performance. This approach could serve to document performance over time helping fishing companies to better understand the effect of their daily and more long-term decision-making on the environmental performance of their products.Recommendations Fishing companies should document their resource use and production on a detailed level. Fuel use should be monitored as part of the management system. Managing authorities should ensure that sufficient data is available to evaluate the sustainability of exploitation levels of all harvested species.

Expanding the concept of sustainable seafood using Life Cycle Assessment

“…A recent study based on daily data showed that the landings of a trawler had highly different biotic and abiotic environmental impacts depending on both fisheries management and short‐ and long‐term decision‐making about fishing operations (Ziegler et al . ).…”

“…Several of these indicators were recently applied in a case study of the fishing activities of a demersal trawler (Ziegler et al . ).…”

“…Lower abundance leads to lower catch rates (target catch per time spent fishing) which has been shown to be the main determinant of fishing efficiency, also in terms of fuel use, (Ziegler et al . ).…”

“…; Ziegler et al . ), decreasing the rate of fuel consumption per landing is often an effective method to reduce overall supply chain impacts of seafood products.…”

Preface: Recognizing management in LCM

“…Several speakers during plenary sessions at LCM2013 pointed to a tendency for tool development in the field at the expense of other types of activity. Or, as Rob Jenkinson, CSO of SKF, aptly phrased it: BLCM should be more of a contact sport and less about tools.^The need to look more broadly at management can even be shown with LCA, as does Ziegler et al (2017) who show that management, not just technology, impacts environmental performance.…”