Skip to main content
Home

 

Register/Add a study

Menu

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Search The Database

Search The Database

Search Database Menu

  • View All Articles
  • Techniques Glossary
  • Fishing Gear Types
  • Add a Study
Displaying 161 - 170 of 568
Location Gear Catch Technique Bycatch species Type Results

North Carolina

Gillnets
Spanish mackerel, menhaden, spot
Tensioning gillnet
Sharks Field study in the wild
Summary:

Gillnets with three difference mesh sizes (2 7/8", 3" and 4") were modified to use 200 lbs/200 yard lead line and 11 oz buoyancy floats (versus 50lbs/200 yard lead line and 3 oz floats) to increase the tension in the net. Catch rates of Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead sharks were significantly lower in the 4" modified net. The proportion of hammer-wrapped bonnethead sharks was significantly higher in the 4" unmodified net and significantly less blacktip sharks were wrapped in the 3" modified net. Selectivity of blacknose sharks varied between the modified and unmodified nets. Catch rates of targeted Spanish mackerel and spot were not significantly different between modified and unmodified nets.

Effect on Bycatch: Catch rates of bonnethead sharks were significantly lower in the 4" modified net
Reference:
Thorpe, T., Pabst, D.A., Beresoff, D. , 2001 , Assessment of modified gillnets as a means to reduce bycatch in southeastern North Carolina coastal waters

North Carolina

Gillnets
Spanish mackerel, menhaden, spot
Tensioning gillnet
Sharks Field study in the wild
Summary:

Gillnets with three difference mesh sizes (2 7/8", 3" and 4") were modified to use 200 lbs/200 yard lead line and 11 oz buoyancy floats (versus 50lbs/200 yard lead line and 3 oz floats) to increase the tension in the net. Catch rates of Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead sharks were significantly lower in the 4" modified net. The proportion of hammer-wrapped bonnethead sharks was significantly higher in the 4" unmodified net and significantly less blacktip sharks were wrapped in the 3" modified net. Selectivity of blacknose sharks varied between the modified and unmodified nets. Catch rates of targeted Spanish mackerel and spot were not significantly different between modified and unmodified nets.

Effect on Bycatch: The proportion of hammer-wrapped bonnethead sharks was significantly higher in the 4" unmodified net
Reference:
Thorpe, T., Pabst, D.A., Beresoff, D. , 2001 , Assessment of modified gillnets as a means to reduce bycatch in southeastern North Carolina coastal waters

North Carolina

Gillnets
Spanish mackerel, menhaden, spot
Tensioning gillnet
Sharks Field study in the wild
Summary:

Gillnets with three difference mesh sizes (2 7/8", 3" and 4") were modified to use 200 lbs/200 yard lead line and 11 oz buoyancy floats (versus 50lbs/200 yard lead line and 3 oz floats) to increase the tension in the net. Catch rates of Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead sharks were significantly lower in the 4" modified net. The proportion of hammer-wrapped bonnethead sharks was significantly higher in the 4" unmodified net and significantly less blacktip sharks were wrapped in the 3" modified net. Selectivity of blacknose sharks varied between the modified and unmodified nets. Catch rates of targeted Spanish mackerel and spot were not significantly different between modified and unmodified nets.

Effect on Bycatch: Significantly less blacktip sharks were wrapped in the 3" modified net
Reference:
Thorpe, T., Pabst, D.A., Beresoff, D. , 2001 , Assessment of modified gillnets as a means to reduce bycatch in southeastern North Carolina coastal waters

North Carolina

Gillnets
Spanish mackerel, menhaden, spot
Tensioning gillnet
Sharks Field study in the wild
Summary:

Gillnets with three difference mesh sizes (2 7/8", 3" and 4") were modified to use 200 lbs/200 yard lead line and 11 oz buoyancy floats (versus 50lbs/200 yard lead line and 3 oz floats) to increase the tension in the net. Catch rates of Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead sharks were significantly lower in the 4" modified net. The proportion of hammer-wrapped bonnethead sharks was significantly higher in the 4" unmodified net and significantly less blacktip sharks were wrapped in the 3" modified net. Selectivity of blacknose sharks varied between the modified and unmodified nets. Catch rates of targeted Spanish mackerel and spot were not significantly different between modified and unmodified nets.

Effect on Bycatch: The selectivity of blacknose sharks varied between the modified and unmodified nets
Reference:
Thorpe, T., Pabst, D.A., Beresoff, D. , 2001 , Assessment of modified gillnets as a means to reduce bycatch in southeastern North Carolina coastal waters

Northern Australia

Trawls
Prawns
Excluder devices
Sea Turtles Field study in the wild
Summary:

The catches from five experimental trawls (TED + fisheye BRD, upward facing TED, downward facing TED, bigeye BRD and square-mesh panel BRD) were compared to those of the standard twin Florida Flyer prawn trawl. Nets with a combination of a TED and BRD reduced sea turtle catches by 100%, large sponges by 85.3%, sharks by 36.3% and rays by 17.7% and reduced the proportion of soft and damaged prawns by 41.6% and catches of tiger prawns by 6.5%. Upward and downward facing TED's reduced sea turtle bycatch by 99% and 100% respectively and large sponges by 81.6% and 95.9% respectively. Catches of tiger prawns were reduced by 6.3% with the use of TED's. The BRD's had little impact on the catch of either the target or bycatch species.

Effect on Bycatch: Downward facing TEDs reduced sea turtle catches by 100%
Reference:
Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B., Jones, P., 2006 , The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia's northern prawn trawl fishery

Northern Australia

Trawls
Prawns
Excluder devices
Sharks Field study in the wild
Summary:

The catches from five experimental trawls (TED + fisheye BRD, upward facing TED, downward facing TED, bigeye BRD and square-mesh panel BRD) were compared to those of the standard twin Florida Flyer prawn trawl. Nets with a combination of a TED and BRD reduced sea turtle catches by 100%, large sponges by 85.3%, sharks by 36.3% and rays by 17.7% and reduced the proportion of soft and damaged prawns by 41.6% and catches of tiger prawns by 6.5%. Upward and downward facing TED's reduced sea turtle bycatch by 99% and 100% respectively and large sponges by 81.6% and 95.9% respectively. Catches of tiger prawns were reduced by 6.3% with the use of TED's. The BRD's had little impact on the catch of either the target or bycatch species.

Effect on Bycatch: Reduced shark catches by 36.3%
Reference:
Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B., Jones, P., 2006 , The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia's northern prawn trawl fishery

Northern Australia

Trawls
Prawns
Excluder devices
Skates/Rays Field study in the wild
Summary:

The catches from five experimental trawls (TED + fisheye BRD, upward facing TED, downward facing TED, bigeye BRD and square-mesh panel BRD) were compared to those of the standard twin Florida Flyer prawn trawl. Nets with a combination of a TED and BRD reduced sea turtle catches by 100%, large sponges by 85.3%, sharks by 36.3% and rays by 17.7% and reduced the proportion of soft and damaged prawns by 41.6% and catches of tiger prawns by 6.5%. Upward and downward facing TED's reduced sea turtle bycatch by 99% and 100% respectively and large sponges by 81.6% and 95.9% respectively. Catches of tiger prawns were reduced by 6.3% with the use of TED's. The BRD's had little impact on the catch of either the target or bycatch species.

Effect on Bycatch: Reduced ray catches by 17.7%
Reference:
Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B., Jones, P., 2006 , The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia's northern prawn trawl fishery

Northern Australia

Trawls
Prawns
Excluder devices
Invertebrates Field study in the wild
Summary:

The catches from five experimental trawls (TED + fisheye BRD, upward facing TED, downward facing TED, bigeye BRD and square-mesh panel BRD) were compared to those of the standard twin Florida Flyer prawn trawl. Nets with a combination of a TED and BRD reduced sea turtle catches by 100%, large sponges by 85.3%, sharks by 36.3% and rays by 17.7% and reduced the proportion of soft and damaged prawns by 41.6% and catches of tiger prawns by 6.5%. Upward and downward facing TED's reduced sea turtle bycatch by 99% and 100% respectively and large sponges by 81.6% and 95.9% respectively. Catches of tiger prawns were reduced by 6.3% with the use of TED's. The BRD's had little impact on the catch of either the target or bycatch species.

Effect on Bycatch: Upward facing TED's reduced large sponge catches by 81.6%
Reference:
Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B., Jones, P., 2006 , The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia's northern prawn trawl fishery

Northern Australia

Trawls
Prawns
Excluder devices
Invertebrates Field study in the wild
Summary:

The catches from five experimental trawls (TED + fisheye BRD, upward facing TED, downward facing TED, bigeye BRD and square-mesh panel BRD) were compared to those of the standard twin Florida Flyer prawn trawl. Nets with a combination of a TED and BRD reduced sea turtle catches by 100%, large sponges by 85.3%, sharks by 36.3% and rays by 17.7% and reduced the proportion of soft and damaged prawns by 41.6% and catches of tiger prawns by 6.5%. Upward and downward facing TED's reduced sea turtle bycatch by 99% and 100% respectively and large sponges by 81.6% and 95.9% respectively. Catches of tiger prawns were reduced by 6.3% with the use of TED's. The BRD's had little impact on the catch of either the target or bycatch species.

Effect on Bycatch: Downward facing TEDs reduced large sponge catches by 95.9%
Reference:
Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B., Jones, P., 2006 , The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia's northern prawn trawl fishery

Northern Australia

Trawls
Prawns
Excluder devices
Elasmobranchs, Invertebrates, Sea Turtles Field study in the wild
Summary:

The catches from five experimental trawls (TED + fisheye BRD, upward facing TED, downward facing TED, bigeye BRD and square-mesh panel BRD) were compared to those of the standard twin Florida Flyer prawn trawl. Nets with a combination of a TED and BRD reduced sea turtle catches by 100%, large sponges by 85.3%, sharks by 36.3% and rays by 17.7% and reduced the proportion of soft and damaged prawns by 41.6% and catches of tiger prawns by 6.5%. Upward and downward facing TED's reduced sea turtle bycatch by 99% and 100% respectively and large sponges by 81.6% and 95.9% respectively. Catches of tiger prawns were reduced by 6.3% with the use of TED's. The BRD's had little impact on the catch of either the target or bycatch species.

Effect on Bycatch: Little effect
Reference:
Brewer, D., Heales, D., Milton, D., Dell, Q., Fry, G., Venables, B., Jones, P., 2006 , The impact of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices on diverse tropical marine communities in Australia's northern prawn trawl fishery

Pagination

  • First page « First
  • Previous page ‹ Previous
  • …
  • Page 13
  • Page 14
  • Page 15
  • Page 16
  • Current page 17
  • Page 18
  • Page 19
  • Page 20
  • Page 21
  • …
  • Next page Next ›
  • Last page Last »

©2022 Consortium for Wildlife Bycatch Reduction  |  All rights reserved

  • Home
  • About Us
  • What's Bycatch?
    • Species List
  • Database of Publications
    • Bycatch Reduction Techniques Fact Sheets
  • Research Programs
    • Consortium Publications
  • Our Donors and Partners
  • Funding Opportunities
  • Join the Exchange
  • News
  • Events
  • Log in