Hmmm, a different tack to get Trawling Limitations???

Roccus7

Moderator
Staff member
It took Tax Evasion to lock up Al Capone, maybe air pollution may shut down trawling??? Then again, those could backfire with the Econuts insisting on Electric Outboards...

Trawling for Fish May Unleash as Much Carbon as Air Travel, Study Says​

The report also found that strategically conserving some marine areas would not only safeguard imperiled species but sequester vast amounts planet-warming carbon dioxide, too.

A trawler on Georges Bank, between Massachusetts and Nova Scotia. A new study found that bottom trawling accounts for as much carbon emissions as global aviation.

A trawler on Georges Bank, between Massachusetts and Nova Scotia. A new study found that bottom trawling accounts for as much carbon emissions as global aviation. Credit...Jeffrey Rotman/Alamy

For the first time, scientists have calculated how much planet-warming carbon dioxide is released into the ocean by bottom trawling, the practice of dragging enormous nets along the ocean floor to catch shrimp, whiting, cod and other fish. The answer: As much as global aviation releases into the air.

While preliminary, that was one of the most surprising findings of a groundbreaking new study published on Wednesday in the journal Nature. The study offers what is essentially a peer-reviewed, interactive road map for how nations can confront the interconnected crises of climate change and wildlife collapse at sea.

It follows similar recent research focused on protecting land, all with a goal of informing a global agreement on biodiversity to be negotiated this autumn in Kunming, China.

Protecting strategic zones of the world’s oceans from fishing, drilling and mining would not only safeguard imperiled species and sequester vast amounts of carbon, the researchers found, it would also increase overall fish catch, providing more healthy protein to people.

“It’s a triple win,” said Enric Sala, a marine biologist who directs National Geographic’s Pristine Seas project. Dr. Sala led the study’s team of 26 biologists, climate scientists and economists.

How much and what parts of the ocean to protect depends on how much value is assigned to each of the three possible benefits: biodiversity, fishing and carbon storage.

In order to maximize fish catch alone, the study found, nations would need to set aside 28 percent of the ocean for conservation. That’s because no-fishing zones serve as nurseries, replenishing fish and crustacean populations which then disperse beyond the protected areas.

For example, this year a study concluded that a 35 percent reduction in the fishing grounds for the California spiny lobster resulted in a 225 percent overall increase in catch after six years.

“The worst enemy of fishing and food security is overfishing,” Dr. Sala said.


merlin_185157333_fe6b0944-06b5-4476-a14e-be78c4c12ed7-articleLarge.jpg

A trawler’s bycatch. The study found that conservation zones would result in increased catches over all. Credit...Jeffrey Rotman/Alamy

Right now, 7 percent of the ocean is protected, and less than 3 percent is highly protected.

Shark and ray populations have crashed so drastically that scientists warn there is little time to save them. Fishing stocks are declining as the ocean warms.

The finding on emissions from trawling adds new urgency. Each year, the study found, bottom trawlers scrape an estimated 1.9 million square miles of the sea floor. If undisturbed, the carbon stored there can remain for tens of thousands of years.
The team had not planned to calculate the amount of emissions released by trawling until an outside reviewer for Nature required it, Dr. Sala said. So his team hired an additional researcher and got to work.

“I could not believe it,” he recalled, describing the video call when his colleagues revealed the number of emissions. “Immediately I went to Google and checked the global emissions by sector and by country, and said, ‘Wow, this is larger than Germany’s.’”

The carbon released from the sea floor leads to more acidified water, threatening marine life, and reduces the oceans’ capacity to absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide. China, Russia, Italy, the United Kingdom and Denmark lead the world in such trawling emissions.

Trisha Atwood, an aquatic ecologist at Utah State University who was one of the study’s authors, compared trawling to cutting down forests for agriculture.

“It’s wiping out biodiversity, it’s wiping out things like deep sea corals that take hundreds of years to grow,” Dr. Atwood said. “And now what this study shows is that it also has this other kind of unknown impact, which is that it creates a lot of CO2.”

In ongoing research, Dr. Atwood and others are studying whether that carbon dioxide from the sea bottom ultimately escapes into the air itself. Early data indicates that “a large proportion” does.

“I can tell you that the results are troubling,” she said.

Scientists underscore that any conservation measures need to happen in conjunction with an urgent transition away from fossil fuels.

A fishing boat on the North Sea. “It’s wiping out biodiversity, it’s wiping out things like deep sea corals that take hundreds of years to grow,” one of the study’s authors said of trawling.

A fishing boat on the North Sea. “It’s wiping out biodiversity, it’s wiping out things like deep sea corals that take hundreds of years to grow,” one of the study’s authors said of trawling. Credit...Pascal Rossignol/Reuters

To build the database for the study’s algorithms, researchers looked at the ocean in blocks of 50 kilometers by 50 kilometers. To calculate biodiversity, they filled in which species lived in the blocks, their risks of extinction, their roles in the ecosystem and how unique they were in the world. They added fishing-catch data for each square along with the species’ reproductive rates and growth rates, home ranges and movement. They calculated the maximum biomass each square would hold if no fishing occurred. On top of that, they added data on sea floor carbon and maps from Global Fishing Watch on where trawling took place.

“The results of this high-level analysis convey a very hopeful message,” said Josephine Iacarella, an aquatic ecologist at Fisheries and Oceans Canada who was not involved in the study.

The study’s findings bolster an international push to safeguard at least 30 percent of Earth’s lands and waters by 2030, known as 30x30. But as on land, the most strategic places to protect are not evenly distributed among nations. Negotiations will be difficult. Money will be a problem.

“Currently each nation does it based on their own priorities,” Dr. Iacarella said. “To raise that to a global level is more challenging, but that discussion can be started by papers like this.”
 
As I have always maintained, I personally and I believe most concerned fisherman do care deeply about the environment and try really hard to protect it as much as possible.

However, every time I see another "study" that uses as many of the modern day "fear mongering" buzz words like climate change, dangerous carbon emissions, evil fossil fuels, global agreements on biodiversity, etc. my antenna go straight up screaming biased farce!

I am also very suspicious of the armchair professors who use computer generated models to predict the next catastrophe. Many have not even visited the local areas they are speculating about in person. I might be wrong, but I wonder if Trisha Attwood from Utah State U. has ever been on the Atlantic A quick look at her credentials shows that virtually all of her research has taken place in Australia on the Great Barrier Reef and Hawaii. Enric Sala is of Spanish heritage and did most of his research also on the west coast at La Jolla.

I remember the same long rang projections being done by the "scientists" from Deep Water Wind, citing data from West Coast studies on fish kept in pens and extrapolating that information to what was going to happen to free swimming fish around the windmill platforms in the Atlantic. Sounds very "fishy" to me!!
 
@captmike28 Don't disagree with anything said above and have often railed against "Computer Screen" Fishery Managers. That being said, there's no doubt that trawling is by nature the most "wasteful" commercial fishing technique, and when they're dragging along the bottom, they can cause longer-term damage.

Sometimes the strangest bedfellows who are often foes, e.g. Econuts, might be manipulated to be useful allies in specific situations to get things changed when "normal" channels haven't worked. In this instance, if they can be successful in banning trawling from large swaths of prime real estate like Georges, this could help bolster excellent rod and reel fishing, both recreational and commercial.

I recognize that making deals with the Devil can be dangerous, but if you look at the situation as a "Judo" move, why not take someone's energy and use it to your own advantage? Just saying...
 
Slippery slope with carbon emissions. Next thing you know they start looking at charter, party, and rec boats. I’m no fan of trawling.
 
Oh wow, i don't have time right now but will reply later. I just love Dr. Sala's pic. all arranged nicely of a couple of Skates, Fluke and or Flounder, the single scollop, Sea Robins and of course the Maine lobster. Looks like they had an artist out there arranging the bottom dwellers. :rolleyes:
 
Thanks for your feedback, Roccus. I do realize that trawling is a pretty destructive process for the commercial harvesting of fish. In our local area, I used to spend the month of December, when my vessel is already hauled out, fishing with an long term friend and excellent fisherman, our own Lep, for Tog in the NY Bight/17 fathoms area. Over the last 5-10 years roller trawler operations have literally destroyed much of the prime habitat we used to fish. Not that Lep has not discovered new area to fish but the spots we used to slam them on 15-20 years ago are literally gone, pummeled to sand.

Gill netting can be pretty non discriminant as well, pretty much killing everything ensnared in it's claws. Yet, I do see your point and would like to remain optimistic that some type of reasonable compromise could be made between recreational and commercial interests while at the same time protecting the environment. The biggest challenge always seems to be the ones with the most money and best political connections get all the regulations written in their favor.

I would be really interested in hearing Old Mud's comments on this scenario, especially with his back=ground.
 
So we all know, what is Old Mud's background?
His Fishing Curriculum Vitae reads like a University's Professor Emeritus' CV.

It's way to long to list, but suffice it to say he has made money fishing in just about every fishery and technique. He cut his teeth by working on trawlers fishing the Grand Banks in his teens!! When I fish with him I'm tempted to bring along a tape recorder because he's a walking fishing encyclopedia and forgets more fishing in 5 microseconds than I can ever hope to learn...
 
His Fishing Curriculum Vitae reads like a University's Professor Emeritus' CV.

It's way to long to list, but suffice it to say he has made money fishing in just about every fishery and technique. He cut his teeth by working on trawlers fishing the Grand Banks in his teens!! When I fish with him I'm tempted to bring along a tape recorder because he's a walking fishing encyclopedia and forgets more fishing in 5 microseconds than I can ever hope to learn...
Whats a tape recorder?
 
Thanks for your feedback, Roccus. I do realize that trawling is a pretty destructive process for the commercial harvesting of fish. In our local area, I used to spend the month of December, when my vessel is already hauled out, fishing with an long term friend and excellent fisherman, our own Lep, for Tog in the NY Bight/17 fathoms area. Over the last 5-10 years roller trawler operations have literally destroyed much of the prime habitat we used to fish. Not that Lep has not discovered new area to fish but the spots we used to slam them on 15-20 years ago are literally gone, pummeled to sand.

Gill netting can be pretty non discriminant as well, pretty much killing everything ensnared in it's claws. Yet, I do see your point and would like to remain optimistic that some type of reasonable compromise could be made between recreational and commercial interests while at the same time protecting the environment. The biggest challenge always seems to be the ones with the most money and best political connections get all the regulations written in their favor.

I would be really interested in hearing Old Mud's comments on this scenario, especially with his back=ground.

cant agree with you more..not only 17 but other area's ...I hit 17 last year for the first time in about 4 years cant get over how much bottom is gone. also hit some solid numbers around 17 not what it once was...its a shame

I have lived 2/3 of my life but fear what we leave for our kids & grand kids land & sea...I been hearing for year about the decline of blackfish in the west end & all that say "its just crying wolf " well the wolf is here ...last season was the worst on record west end..not just me but many who didn't cry wolf are now crying wolf....I have a friend who's family own's a long line boat..and he's a guy who loves to fish Tuna , shark bottom fish from the GOM to the GOM ..and he said it made him sick to see what goes on ,on that boat..

as a old salt commercial black fisherman once said.." no body left me any buffalo "
 
cant agree with you more..not only 17 but other area's ...I hit 17 last year for the first time in about 4 years cant get over how much bottom is gone. also hit some solid numbers around 17 not what it once was...its a shame

I have lived 2/3 of my life but fear what we leave for our kids & grand kids land & sea...I been hearing for year about the decline of blackfish in the west end & all that say "its just crying wolf " well the wolf is here ...last season was the worst on record west end..not just me but many who didn't cry wolf are now crying wolf....I have a friend who's family own's a long line boat..and he's a guy who loves to fish Tuna , shark bottom fish from the GOM to the GOM ..and he said it made him sick to see what goes on ,on that boat..

as a old salt commercial black fisherman once said.." no body left me any buffalo "
It is very sad, Capt. Richie. I know a couple of guys who pinhook for Tog in the NY Bight area and they are seeing the same pattern.

What seems a little odd is, by contrast, we have enjoyed some outstanding Blackfishing on the North Fork for several years now. There is still some Tog potting going on but I have not seen trawlers working the eastern Sound since they wiped out the winter flounder population in the mid 80's. I guess that accounts for some of it because the recreational pressure has certainly grown a lot over time.
 
How can I get invited to that lunch??:)
You are very fortunate, Roccus, to have such a wealth of information at your disposal.

C'mon up, you've got an open invite. I'm buying this week!!

When Mud & I meet up for lunch, fishing or clamming I do feel guilty for having his wisdom all to myself.

It's not just his Maine experiences that are informative, the dude worked on the Trans Alaska Pipeline, among other life experiences that are all quite remarkable, each with a significant mass of knowledge worth hearing...
 
While I was half kidding right now since it is a 250+ mile drive for me, one way, there is always the chance I might plan a few vacation days in one of my favorite places to visit this summer.
Who knows, anything is possible!
 
Shut Down commercial fishing for 10 years and let the ocean heal. 60 years they've been pounding the fish stocks down to nothing again and again. They lose 6 percent of their nets every year that keep catching fish, Longliners set 25 miles of hooks . Too many of them fishing and not enough fish. The ocean can't feed the world anymore. They destroy our fish stocks and we have terrible fishing for the next 30 years. I don't think that's right. They went wild in the 1980's and early 1990's and wiped out the fluke- they penalized recreational fishermen with strict catch limits, after the commercials wiped out fluke they targeted whiting, ling, cod, winter flounder and ruined those stocks. The recreationals had nothing to catch in the winter and they wiped out the blackfish. Cod, whiting, ling, winter flounder, fluke ,blackfish, seabass, porgies all started disappearing around the same time and it wasn't because of global warming/seals /commerants. I wish people would realize that and stop making excuses for the commercials. They ruined the fishing. I lived and fished from the 70's to the present and seen the whole cycle, first it was the Foreign fleet , they went away in 1976 , fish stocks recovered and then the American fleet clobbered them again. The Early 1980's was such a nice time to fish in the NY Bight. The Only depleted fish were the striped bass wiped out by commericial fishing.
Shut down commercial fishing for 10 years and then open it up with only pin hooking. The pinhookers will catch all the fish they need to make a living, but it's not them calling the shots, it's the big fish markets that ship our fish all over the world calling the shots.
 
So you think pinhooking will feed the world?

Pinhookers are barely making ends meet.........unless of course they have a pension to fall back on and are just doing it to pay expenses.

You think 25 blackfish is paying anyones mortgage?
 

Fishing Reports

Latest articles

Back
Top