Search The Database
| Location | Gear | Catch | Technique | Bycatch species | Type | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scotland |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Trout |
Metal oxide/barium sulfate nets
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters), Phocoena phocoena (Harbor porpoise) | Field study in the wild | Acoustic pingers placed in the rear of a pair trawl net in the United Kingdom bass pair trawl fishery did not reduce bycatch of common dolphins (Delphinus delphis). Multi-monofilament net, placed in the North Sea and West of Scotland gillnet fisheries, had no significant impact on harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) bycatch when compared to traditional monofilament net. Thin twine monofilament nets (.4mm twine diameter, 90 mm mesh size) reduced bycatch of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and seals in the North Sea and West of Scotland gillnet fisheries when compared to thick (.6mm twine diameter, 267 mm mesh size) monofilament nets. Barium sulphate nets had higher bycatch of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and seals in the North Sea and West of Scotland gillnet fisheries when compared to traditional gillnets. |
Florida |
Traps
|
Crab |
Trap guards (T-bars, otter guards)
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters) | Field study in the wild | Trap guards, made of bungee cords, reduced interactions between bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and the Indian River Lagoon blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) pot fishery. |
southern Skagerrak Sea, Sweden |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Cod (Gadus morhua) and pollock (Pollachius pollachius) |
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters), Phocoena phocoena (Harbor porpoise) | Field study in the wild | Pingers were tested to reduce harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) bycatch in bottom-set gillnets in the Swedish Skagerrak Sea. During the experiment, no harbor porpoise were caught in control or experimental gillnets, possibly as a result of a combination of factors including displacement of porpoise, high prey availability in other areas, or pingers acting as passive reflectors. Pingers did not affect the catch of target species, including cod (Gadus morhua) and pollock (Pollachius pollachius). No bycatch of harbor porpoise in nets with or without pingers |
California Current, United States |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Swordfish and sharks |
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters), Berardius bairdii (Baird's beaked whale), Mesoplodon carlhubbsi (Hubb's beaked whale), Mesoplodon stejnegeri (Stejneger’s beaked whale), Ziphius cavirostris (Cuvier’s beaked whale) | Field study in the wild | This study is based on seventeen years of fishery observer data collected aboard drift gillnet vessels fishing for swordfish and sharks in the California Current (United States). Since use of acoustic pingers began in 1996 (source level ∼135 dB RMS, re: 1 Pa @ 1 m, frequency 10–12 kHz, pulse duration = 300 ms, pulse interval = 4 s), there have been no beaked whale entanglements through 2006, in comparison to 33 entanglements from 1990-1998. 260 cetaceans representing 12 other species were observed entangled in the fishery from 1996-2006. No observed bycatch of beaked whales |
Brazil |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters) | Field study in the wild | Underwater acoustic pingers were tested in Brazil to evaluate the behavioral responses of tucuxi (Sotalia fluviatilis). Five pingers were evenly placed on a floating 100 m line set along the dolphins' swimming parth in and out of sheltered waters. Dolphin sighting frequencies were recorded for functional and dummy pingers and control trials. Dolphin sightings were significantly lower in areas where the pinger line was set. Sighting frequency was significantly lower with active pingers than in dummy or control trials, but there wre no significant differences between the dummy and control trials. Preliminary results suggest that acoustic pingers attached to gillnets may be used to successfully prevent tucuxi bycatch. |
|
Shannon Estuary, Ireland |
not applicable | Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters) | Field study in the wild | Trials to assess the behavioural response of free-ranging bottlenose dolphins to continuous and responsive pingers were conducted. In boat based trials both types of pinger affected dolphin behaviour, while in static trials the detection of dolphin vocalisations was significantly lower in the presence of active continuous pingers. Change in behaviour of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in boat based trials. |
||
Balearic Islands, Spain |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Mixed species |
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters), Tursiops truncatus (Bottlenose dolphin) | Field study in the wild | A large scale pinger trial was conducted and results showed a 49% decrease dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) depredation rates when pingers were active. However the different pinger brands tried were not equally effective in reducing depredation. The AQUAmark 210 pingers had significant results, while Dukane Netmark 1000 and SaveWave Dolphinsaver High-impact did not have significant results. Profit per unit increased 9%. 49% reduction in depredation rate by bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) |
Mediterranean, Balearic Islands |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Red mullet |
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters) | Field study in the wild | The experiment tested the effects of Aquamark 100 pingers on the depredation rate of bottlenose dolphins on trammel nets. Results showed nets equipped with pingers had 87% fewer holes (attributed to damage by dolphins) than nets without pingers. Reduced bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) depredation |
North Carolina, USA |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
Mixed |
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters) | Field study in the wild | The authors tested the behavioural response of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) to gill nets equipped with active and control Dukane NetMark 1000 pingers. Although dolphins were observed significantly fewer times within a 100m circular buffer zone from the alarms, overall results showed no significant differences in the number of groups observed, or closest approaches by animals to the net, between active and control periods. No difference on group size or closest approach to the net between active and control pingers |
Turkey |
Gillnets and Entangling Nets
|
turbot fish |
Acoustic deterrent devices
|
Small Cetaceans (maximum length < 7.5 meters), Phocoena phocoena (Harbor porpoise) | Field study in the wild | Gill nets fitted with Dukane NetMark 1000 pingers had significantly less bycatch of harbor porpoises than control nets and the fish size and catch rates of the target species were not affected. Reduced harbor porpoise interactions with gillnet |