After acknowledging the failure of current fishery policies within the union, EU officials are now considering banning the practice of discarding fish at sea.

“What’s the point of setting a quota if fishermen aren’t accountable for the fish they actually catch?” says Mogens Schou, a Danish fishery official.

The EU’s quotas limit the size of the annual catch that countries and their fleets can sell on their return to harbour, but instead of protecting remaining fishing populations from depletion, the system is making fishermen dump lower-value fish at sea to maximize profit. According to officials in the European Commission’s fisheries office, most of these fishes do not survive.

“To stay under their quotas, and make more money, fishermen discard half of what they catch,” says Schou, “They ‘high-grade’ – in other words, only keep the most profitable fish.”

Last month, an EU report was released highlighting the failure of current EU fishing regulations by showing that 88% of fish species in EU waters are being fished out faster than they can reproduce. In response to the report, fishery ministers from the 27 EU nations are currently discussing how to protect the remaining fish stocks from complete eradication.

As a part of these talks, Denmark has proposed an amended quota system where fishermen and their countries are held accountable for the amount of fish caught rather than the amount returned to port. To make it harder for fishing fleets to cheat, Denmark is also proposing that fishermen voluntarily equip their boats with on-board cameras. In exchange, the fishermen would get bigger quotas.

Denmark has already designed a surveillance kit consisting of four cameras, a GPS (Global Positioning System) device, and sensors that notice when fish is being hauled or dumped. The Danish kits are currently being used on six fishing boats with Danish officials monitoring the footage.

Danish fisherman Per Nielsen installed the kit on his trawler Kingfisher in September and believes it to be a good investment. The kit cost roughly 10,000 USD, but Nielsen was compensated by being allowed to catch several extra tens of thousands of dollars worth of cod.

As of now, EU fishermen throw overboard an estimated 50% of the fish they catch and did for instance dump 38% of the 24,000 tons of cod they caught last year, according to the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.

Scientists are unaware of the state of nearly two-thirds of Europe’s fish stocks and do not have enough information to assess the exact scale of the crisis the European fishing industry is facing, says the European Commission.

This is naturally alarming, since the commission last month admitted that nothing short of a completely new fisheries management system based on scientific evidence could stop the downward spiral of years of dangerously depleted fish stocks and get the struggling European fishing industry back on its feet.

Europe

The European Commission is now proposing smaller annual EU fish catch quotas and have given governments and industry representatives until the end of July to submit their views.

“The contribution of EU fisheries to the European economy and food supply is far smaller today than it was in the past. Even more worryingly, the status of some 59 per cent of stocks is unknown to scientists, largely due to inaccurate catch reporting,” the European Commission says in an official statement.

The policy has not been reformed since 2002 and the European Commission admits there has been “slow progress” in stock recovery, since quotas consistently have been set at unsustainably high levels.

Alabama fishermen and scuba divers will receive a welcome present from the state of Alabama in a few years: the coordinates to a series of man-made coral reefs teaming with fish and other reef creatures.

In order to promote coral growth, the state has placed 100 federally funded concrete pyramids at depths ranging from 150 to 250 feet (45 to 75 metres). Each pyramid is 9 feet (3 metres) tall and weighs about 7,500 lbs (3,400 kg).

The pyramids have now been resting off the coast of Alabama for three years and will continue to be studied by scientists and regulators for a few years more before their exact location is made public.

In order to find out differences when it comes to fish-attracting power, some pyramids have been placed alone while others stand in groups of up to six pyramids. Some reefs have also been fitted with so called FADs – Fish Attracting Devices. These FADs are essentially chains rising up from the reef to buoys suspended underwater. Scientists hope to determine if the use of FADs has any effect on the number of snapper and grouper; both highly priced food fishes that are becoming increasingly rare along the Atlantic coast of the Americas.

Early settlers and late followers

Some species of fish arrived to check out the pyramids in no time, such as grunt and spadefish. Other species, like sculpins and blennies, didn’t like the habitat until corals and barnacles began to spread over the concrete.

“The red snapper and the red porgies are the two initial species that you see,” says Bob Shipp, head of marine sciences at the University of South Alabama. After that, you see vermilion snapper and triggerfish as the next order of abundance. Groupers are the last fish to set in.”

Both the University of South Alabama and the Alabama state Marine Resources division are using tiny unmanned submarines fitted with underwater video cameras to keep an eye on the reefs and their videos show dense congregations of spadefish, porgies, snapper, soap fish, queen angelfish and grouper.

“My gut feeling is that fish populations on the reefs are a reflection of relative local abundance in the adjacent habitat,” says Shipp. “Red snapper and red porgy are the most abundant fish in that depth. They forage away from their home reefs and find new areas. That’s why they are first and the most abundant.”

What if anyone finds out?

So, how can you keep one hundred 7,500 pound concrete structures a secret for years and years in the extremely busy Mexican Gulf? Shipp says he believes at least one of the reefs has been discovered, since they got only a few fish when they sampled that reef using rod and reel. Compared to other nearby pyramid reefs, that yield was miniscule which may indicate that fishermen are on to the secret. As Shipp and his crew approached the reef, a commercial fishing boat could be seen motoring away from the spot.

Reef building corals rely on herbivore animals to continuously remove unwanted algae growth from them, since algae compete with the corals for both sunlight and nutrients. Without regular cleaning, corals eventually die and the reef becomes overgrown by various types of algae. A report scheduled to be published this week in the early edition of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences now suggests that having herbivore animals present on the reef isn’t enough; there must also be a proper balance between the various species. This conclusion results from a long-term study on coral reef recovery and seaweed[1] carried out by Dr. Mark Hay, the Harry and Linda Teasley Professor of Biology at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and his co-author Dr. Deron Burkepile who is now Assistant Professor at the Florida International University’s Marine Science Program.

Different fish feed on different algae and maintaining a proper balance may therefore be critical. “Of the many different fish that are part of coral ecosystems, there may be a small number of species that are really critical for keeping big seaweeds from over-growing and killing corals,” says Hay. “Our study shows that in addition to having enough herbivores, coral ecosystems also need the right mix of species to overcome the different defensive tactics of the seaweeds. This could offer one more approach to resource managers. If ecosystems were managed for critical mixes of herbivorous species, we might see more rapid recovery of the reefs.”

Coral reef

The 10 month long study was carried out 18 metres (60 feet) below the surface off the coast of Florida, where Hay and Burkepile placed 32 cages on a coral reef in November 2003. At this point, the coral reef area chosen by the researchers had only four to five percent live coral coverage. Each cage was roughly two metres square and one metre tall (1 metre = 3.3 feet) and the mesh was fine enough to prevent large fish from entering or leaving the cage. The scientists then carefully selected the number and type of fish to place in each cage, using the four following combinations:

· Two fish capable of eating hard, calcified plants

· Two fish capable of eating eat soft plants that defends themselves chemically

· Both types of fish.

· No fish at all

The two species used for the experiement where the Redband parrotfish (Sparisoma aurofrenatum) and the Ocean surgeonfish (Acanthurus bahianus).

As suspected, the type of fish turned out to play a key role in the growth of algae and seaweed on the reef.

“For the cages in which we mixed the two species of herbivores, the fish were able to remove much more of the upright seaweeds, and the corals in those areas increased in cover by more than 20 percent during ten months,” says Hay. “That is a dramatic rate of increase for a Caribbean reef.”

Areas with only one type of fish or no fish at all lost as much as 30 percent of their live coral coverage during the research, while areas with two species of fish increased their live coral coverage from four to five percent to six to seven percent.

“Species diversity is critically important, but we are losing critical components of the Earth’s ecosystem at an alarming rate,” says Hay. “There has been little work on the role of diversity among consumers and the effect that has on communities. This study will help add to our knowledge in this critical area.”

After the initial 10-month experiment, Hay and Burkepile launched a second study where the Ocean surgeonfish (Acanthurus bahianus) was substituted with Princess parrotfish (Scarus taeniopterus). Unfortunately, the cages only stayed on the reef for seven months before being wiped away by Hurricane Dennis in July 2005.

The research was conducted at the National Undersea Research Center in Key Largo, Florida and supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation and the Teasley Endowment at Georgia Tech.

You can read more about Hay’s and Burkepile’s work at

http://www.biology.gatech.edu/faculty/mark-hay/ http://www.biology.gatech.edu/faculty/mark-hay/lab.php
http://www.fiu.edu/~dburkepi/front.htm
http://www.fiu.edu/~dburkepi/research.htm