8.5 Bay of Biscay case study - DiscardLess · This project has received funding from ... 8.5 Bay of Biscay case study Raúl Prellezo and Eider Andonegi (AZTI) Abstract: The case study

www.discardless.eu 127

This projecthas received funding from

the European Union’s Horizon 2020

research and innovation programme

undergrantagreementNo633680

8.5 BayofBiscaycasestudy

RaúlPrellezoandEiderAndonegi(AZTI)

Abstract: The case study is described in terms of some “a priori findings” that have been obtainedbefore DiscardLess started. Moreover, the situation of the fisheries in terms of the species caught,

discardsdataanddiscardsamplingprogramisalsodescribed.

8.5.1 BriefpresentationoftheCSandfisheriesconcerned

Bay of Biscay (Figure 28) is a highly productive system. It creates the perfect conditions to

multispeciestrawlingfleetstomakeuseofthisproductivity.Inparticularthereisatrawlfleetbasedin

theportsofOndarroa(BasqueCountry,Spain)operatinginthisareatargetingmorethan48different

species(seeAnnex1foracompletelistoflandingsandAnnex2forthecodereferencesinEnglishand

Spanish)andlandingandsellingalwaysbackinOndarroa.

Figure28.Casestudyarea:BayofBiscay

The operation of this fleet can be divided into metiers. These métiers are based on the target

assemblage landed by trip, as stipulated in the Commission Decision 2008/949/EC Appendix IV

footnote(b),However,thisCommissiondecisiononlyconsideredgeneralandnon-specificassemblage

of species (crustaceans, cephalopods, demersal fish…),which arenotdetailed enough todefine the

differentfishingtacticsfollowedbythisfleet.Basedondirectinterviewswithskippers,threedifferent

“groupoftargetspecies”wereidentified;thepercentageofeachgroupwithinthelandingislaterused

toallocatetripsintodefinemétiers.

A firstmetier,pair trawlers(PTBhereafter),useaveryhighverticalopeningbottomtrawl to target

hake.Theactivityisconstantalongtheyear,withaslighteffortreductionduringsummerperiod.Total

landingsreach2293tonsin2013,andhakelandings(themaintargetspecies)1682tones.

A secondmetier, bottom otter trawlers targeting demersal species (OTD hereafter), has a constant

activityalongtheyear,withslighteffortreductionduringsummerperiod.Totallandingsreach2836

tons in2013.Hake(Merlucciusmerluccius),anglerfishes (Lophiuspiscatorius andLophiusbudegassa)






andmegrims(Lepidorhombuswhiffiagonis)are themain landedspecies,but therearemore than65otherlandedspecies(pouts,dogfish,triglids…).

The third metier, bottom otter trawlers targeting mixed species (OTM hereafter) concentrates its

activityduringwinterseasons.Totallandingsreached655tonsin2013.Squids,cuttlefish,andmullets

arethemaintargetspeciesinthismétier.

PTBismainlylandinghake.Totaldiscardsarearound15%ofthetotalcatch.Hakeindividualsunder

minimum landing size (MLS hereafter) and pelagic species (horsemackerel, andmackerel) are the

main component of the discarded catch fraction. There are bothmarket and regulation reasons for

discardingwithinthismétier.Hake(MLS)andmackerel(quotaexhaustion)arediscardedduetolegal

reasons.Marketreasonsliebehindhorsemackereldiscards.

OTD mainly lands hake, anglerfish and megrim, but there are more than 65 other landed species

(pouts, dogfish, triglids…). Total discards are around 60-65 % of the total catch. Hake individuals

underMLSandpelagicspeciessuchashorsemackerel(Trachurustrachurus)andmackerel(Scomberscombrus))arethemaincomponentofthediscardedcatchfraction.

OTMmainly landssquids,cuttlefish,andmulletsarethemaintargetspecies inthismétier.However

this is a verymixedmétier includingmany other species (pout, seabass, hake…),most of themnot

subjecttoanytotalallowablecatch(TAC)orMLS.

8.5.2 Causesofdiscarding

The threemétiersshare thesamemarketandregulationreasons fordiscarding.Hakeandmackerel

arediscardedduetolegalreasons;MLSisthemainreasonfordiscardinghakeandquotaexhaustion

for discardingmackerel.Market reasons lie behind horsemackerel discards; it has a relatively low

marketpriceandvolatile(relatedtothefreshness)incomparisonwithmaintargetspecies.


This projecthas received funding fromthe European Union’s Horizon 2020research and innovation programmeundergrantagreementNo633680

8.5.3 Effectsofdiscarding

Therearenotstudiesintermsofthesurvivabilityofdiscardsonthesetypesofvessels.Nevertheless,given thecharacteristicsof thegearsand that theyareoperating in theseabed, survivability canbeconsideredtobeataverylowlevel.

Regarding theecologicaleffects, againnot toomanystudies canbe foundspecifically related to thisfishery.

However in thiscontextwerefer toHeathetal. (2014) inwhereunless it isstatedhowthesubsidyeffect is supposed to be low, the cascading effects in the food-web can be quite high. However, asmentionedabovethisresult isnotspecific tothiscasestudy,sosimulationsarerequiredtoconfirmanyconclusion.



The economic effects are likely to be high and coming from different sources, the table belowsummarizesthemainfindingsobtainedforthisfishery.

Table24.Maineconomiceffects

PTB OTD OTM

Choke -76% -98% -99%

NormalLandings(value) +3% +32% +18%

MLSLandings(value) +2% +2.6% +1.8%

Fishingeffort(cost) 0% 0% 0%

AdditionalHoldCapacity N N N

LandingCosts a a a

Additional crew productivitycosts

-7% -18% -73%

Fromthe tableabove(Table24)someconclusionscanbeobtained.Firstofall, “Chokeeffect” is themost importanteffect.This term(chokespecies) refers to the idea that the lowestquota inamixedfisheryconstraintstheopportunitiesofcatchingotherstockforwhichquotahasnotbeenexhausted,given a certain fishing effort. The level of catches and the small quota that individually each vesselcouldcatchimpliesthatwithanimplementationoftheLandingObligation(LO),andwithnofurtheravoidancecoming fromthevessel fishingbehavior, thenumberof tripswouldbereduced ina76%,98%and99%,forthemétiersPTB,OTMandOTD,respectively.

Onatripbasisandgiventhatallthecatchhastoberetained, isbettertosell it. It impliesthattherewill be an increment on the total turnover. This increment comesmainly from themarketable fish(before itwascaughtbutdiscarded)even if there isa2%,1.8%and2.6%of the incomethatcomesfromsellingrawmaterial toproducesub-products, for themétiersPTB,OTMandOTD, respectivelywhenthepriceoftherawmaterialisof50€/ton.Overalltheincomepertripisincreasedbya32%forOTDand18%forOTM.InthecaseofaPTBtriptheincrementismuchmoremodestofaroundthe3%.



Giventhattheavoidancemeasureshavenotanalyzedyet,effortchangeshavenotbeenmeasured.

Theextraholdingnecessitiesderivedfromretainingallthecatcheshavebeenalsocalculated.Intermsofnumbersofboxestheincreaseestimatedisof10%,50%and105%formétiersPTB,OTDandOTM,respectively. There is also a necessity to store the catches that cannot be directed to humanconsumptioninthiscaseandadditional1storageboxes,4and8,havetobeincludedforPTB,OTDandOTM,respectively.Neverthelessandaccordingtothemeasurestakentheholdcapacityisnotlimitingthetotalcatches,soitdoesnotrepresentaconstraint.

Theadditionallandingcostscomeintermsofthehirecostofthestoringboxes.Ithasbeenassumedthat no ice is used for the conservation (onboard) of the fish of catches that cannot be directed tohumanconsumption.Ithasalsohasassumedthatrevenuesareintermsofsellingofsub-productstofishmeal. Commercial fishmeal plant supplied an average price between 50€ tones to 120 € tonesdependingonthequality(freshnessandoilpercentageoftherawmaterial).Therevenuethatcanbeobtainedfromfishcoversthe10%oftheadditionallandingcostsforPTBandaroundthe8%forOTDand11%OTMintheworstcase(priceofrawmaterialof50€/ton)and25%forPTBand20%forOTDand27%forOTDinthecasewhere120€/tonarepaid.



ForthecaseofacrewmemberworkingonaPTBtrip,theextralaborproductivityrequiredisof10%.IfitwereanOTDtripthisextraproductivityrequiredwillbeof50%andfinallyforanOTMtrip this percentage rises to 105%of the original one. In otherwords, for this last case, a crewmemberwill have tohandle ineachworkinghourtwotimestheamountoffishthanwithouttheLO,orworktwotimesmorehoursthanbefore.Infact,itimpliesthat this cost will become an expense due to the necessity ofrecruitingmorecrewmembersinthetrips.

As seenbefore, ina tripunder landingobligation the income isalso higher (everything is retained and sold), and given thesalary system (based on a percentage of the value of thelandings),itimpliesthattheremunerationwillalsobehigher.Ithasbeenobtainedhowthisremuneration isa3%higherundertheLOthanwithoutLOinaPTBmétiertrip,a17%higherinanOTDmétieranda32%higherinanOTMmétier.

Considering the extra productivity requirements and the extraincomepertripthenetresultisthat7%oftheproductivityforaPTBtripwillnotbepaidunlessthereisanincreaseintheshare

ofthelandingsvaluereceivedbythecrew.Thisvaluesraisesto18%and73%foranOTDandOTMtripsrespectively.



8.5.4 Discarddata

8.5.4.1 Sampling

Discarddataiscollected,byobserversonboard,undertheSpanishDiscardSamplingProgram,whichisfundedundertheDataCollectionFramework(EC,2008).

Thesamplingdesignisstratifiedbyfleet,areaandquarter.Tripsaretheprimarysamplingunit,andsampleselectionisnonprobabilitybased;tripshavebeenselectedbasedonavailabilityandsuitabilityofthevessel.

Theiruseintheassessmentgroupsisquitestockspecific.Forthecaseofthehakestocktheyareusedandfrom2015onwards,theTACadviceisgoingtobeprovidedincludingallthecatches.Forthecaseofmegrimcurrentlydiscardsdataarenotusedbutstepsaregivenonincludingthem.

Thecoverageofthesamplingstrategyisexplainedinthethreetablesbelow:



Table25Spanishmixedotterbottomtrawl(OTB_MCF_>=70)intheBayofBiscay:numberofvessels,trips,andsampling

coverage.

Novessels Notrips

2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Total 11 9 8 129 162 62

Sampled 4 6 1 7 11 1

Samplingcoverage(%) 36% 67% 13% 5,4% 6,8% 1,6%

Table26.SpanishpairbottomtrawlintheBayofBiscay:fishingunits*,landings,trips,andsamplingcoverage.

Novessels* Notrips

2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Total 5 5 3 295 166 174

Sampled 2 3 3 8 8 10

Samplingcoverage(%) 40.0 60.0 100 2.7 4.8 5.7

*refers to fishing unit (two vessels). If one of the vessels has been replaced, a new unit has beenconsidered.

Table27SpanishdemersalotterbottomtrawlintheBayofBiscay:numberofvessels,trips,andsamplingcoverage.

Novessels Notrips

2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Total 9 9 8 124 102 254

Sampled 4 2 4 7 3 12

Samplingcoverage(%) 44% 22% 50% 5,6% 2,9% 4,7%



8.5.4.2 Discardratesandlevels

Table28.SpanishOTDintheBayofBiscay:discardsandcatches

Discards(T) Catch(T)

Species 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Horsemackarel 1096 633 782 1160 758 903

Mackerel 1218 102 898 1235 127 907

Hake 100 60 194 153 224 499

Bluewhiting 61 77 191 62 81 192

Black-belliedangler 5 2 10, 96 110 353

Megrim 5 1 8, 112 138 249

Anglerfish 3 0 5 114 70 205

Hake, anglerfishandmegrimare themain landed species, but therearemore than65other landedspecies (pouts, dogfish, triglids…). Total discards are around 60-65 % of the total catch. HakeindividualsunderMLSandpelagicspecies(horsemackerelandmackerel)aremaincomponentofthediscarded catch fraction. Awide range of other species complete the rest of the discarded fraction,some of themunder TAC regulation (bluewhiting, anglerfish, etc), butmost of themnot subject toquotas.

Table29.SpanishOTMintheBayofBiscay:discardsandcatches


Species 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Horsemackarel 1834 1243 568 1843 1297 578

Mackerel 1737 1477 85 1796 1486 85

Hake 80 157 64 124 213 83

Bluewhiting 45 39 0 45 40 0

Black-belliedangler 6 1 0 20 59 27

Megrim 0.2 0 0 8 0 9

Anglerfish 0.1 0.4 0.2 60 78 19






Squids,cuttlefishandredmulletarethemainlandedspecies,buttherearemorethan60otherlanded

species(pouts,hake,monkfish…).Totaldiscardsarearound65-70%ofthetotalcatch.Pelagicspecies

(horsemackerelandmackerel)aremaincomponentofthediscardedcatchfraction.Hakeindividuals

under MLS are also discarded. A wide range of other species complete the rest of the discarded

fraction, some of them under TAC regulation (blue whiting, anglerfish, etc.), but most of them not

subjecttoquotas.

Table30.SpanishpairbottomtrawlintheBayofBiscay:discardsandcatches


Species 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Horsemackarel 118,70 215,05 116,98 223,7 262,0 136,9

Bluewhiting 10,81 322,87 34,66 143,2 367,2 90,0

Whiting 0,00 0,00 0,00 55,6 71,9 48,2

Hake 37,41 91,77 106,53 2638,9 1963,8 1787,5

Anglerfish 0,00 0,00 0,00 23,0 30,0 30,1

Black-belliedangler 0,36 0,00 0,00 30,9 46,2 35,2

Mackerel 384,09 41,25 6,68 696,7 80,2 43,1

Hake is the main landed species, but other demersal species are also landed to a lower degree

(anglerfish,whiting,squids,etc.).Totaldiscardsarearound15%ofthetotalcatch.Hakeindividuals

underMLSandpelagicspecies(horsemackerel,bluewhitingandmackerel)aremaincomponentof

the discarded catch fraction. Other species not regulated by TAC complete the rest of the bycatch

(landedanddiscarded).

Figures2and3representtheideaofanaveragetripinwherethecatchesandthediscardslevelare

estimatedbytrip(Figure29)andthe“type”ofthesediscards(MLSorother)(Figure30).



Figure29.Catchesanddiscardsbyaveragetripbythethreemainspeciesdiscarded.

Figure30.Typesofdiscardsaccordingtotheminimumlandingsize(MLS):27cmforhake,20cmforhorsemackereland15cmformackerel.



8.5.5 EcosystemmodellingoftheBayofBiscay

TheEcopathmodelcoverstheFrenchpartof theBayofBiscay, i.e. theContinentalShelfcoveredbyICESDivisionsVIIIaandb.ItisamodificationoftheonepublishedbyLassalleetal.(2011),wherethefunctionalgroupsandfisheriesused(Table31andTable32respectively)havebeenslightlymodifiedtobettermatchtherequirementsofthiscasestudywithintheproject.Figure28showsthestudyarea.Themainspanish fisheryoperating in thisarea is the trawling fleetbased in theportsofOndarroa,whichisthefocusfisheryofthisstudy.Theoperationofthisfisheryisdividedinmetiers(EC,2008),andthreemetiershavebeenidentifieddependingonthegroupoftargetspecies:pairtrawlers(PTB),bottomotter trawlers targettingdemersal species (OTD)andbottomotter trawlers targetingmixedspecies(OTM).Anadditionalfisheryhasbeenincluded,called'others(OTH)'representinganon-realfisherytosomehowsimulatetheactivityofotherexistingfisheriesandaimingtoaccountforthetotallandings anddiscardsproduced in the study area. The species each of these fisheries are targeting(only for the focus fishery)are shown inTable32,alongwith theonesdiscardedand the identifiedchoke species (Schrope, 2010). In this choke species list only the species that will become chokespecieswithahigherprobabilityhavebeenincludedforeachfishery.

Table31:FuntionalgroupsincludedintheEwEmodel-based

Groupname

1 Pursuitdiversseabirds 18 Sprat

2 Surfacefeedersseabirds 19 Benthiccephalopods

3 Stripeddolphins 20 Pelagiccephalopods

4 Bottlenosedolphins 21 Carnivorousbenthicinvertebrates

5 Commondolphins 22 Necrophagousbenthicinvertebrates

6 Long-finnedpilotwhales 23 Sub-surfacedepositfeedersinvertebrates

7 Harbourporpoises 24 Surfacesuspensionanddepositfeedersinv

8 Hake 25 Benthicmeiofauna

9 Monkfish 26 Suprabenthicinvertebrates

10 Megrim 27 Macrozooplankton

11 Bluewhiting 28 Mesozooplankton

12 Smallhake 29 Microzooplankton

13 Benthivorousdemersalfish 30 Bacteria



14 Mackerel 31 Largephytoplankton

15 Horsemackerel 32 Smallphytoplankton

16 Anchovy 33 Discards

17 Sardine 34 Detritus

Table32:MaintargetedandchockespeciesofthePTB,OTDandOTM.

Targetspecies Discarded1species ChokespeciesPTB Adulthake HorseMackerel

BluewhitingMackerel

Smallhake(<MLS)Anglerfish

HakeMackerel

HorseMackerelBluewhiting

OTD AdulthakeAnglerfishMegrimOthers

Mackerel

HorseMackerelSmallhake(<MLS)

BluewhitingAnglerfishMegrim

HakeMackerel


OTM SquidsCuttlefishMulletsOthers

Mackerel

HorseMackerelSmallhake(<MLS)

BluewhitingAnglerfishMegrim

HakeMackerel


1Discardedandsubjecttoatotalallowablecatch(TAC)orminimumlandingsize(MLS).

Discardingisincludedinthemodelsindeitmayaffecttrophicandpopulationdynamics.DiscardsarepartofthetotalcatchedintheEcopathmodel;totalcatchesarecalculatedassumoftotallandingsanddiscardsofeachfisheryinthemodel.Themodelneedstobetoldwhattodowiththediscardsenteredas part of the catches, so the Discard fate needs to be introduced. This parameter represents thefractionofdiscards(between0and1)whichflowstoagivendetritusgrouporisexported.Anotherparticularityofthemodelisthatitincludesafunctionalgroupcalleddiscards(seeTable31),whichisintroducedtobetteraccountfortheecologicalimpactsofdiscardingintheecosystem.

8.5.6 References



EC2008.CouncilRegulation(EC)No199/2008of25February2008concerningtheestablishmentofa

Communityframeworkforthecollection,managementanduseofdatainthefisheriessector

andsupportforscientificadviceregardingtheCommonFisheriesPolicy.

Heath,M.R.,Cook,R.M.,Cameron,A.,Morris,D.J.,andSpeirs,D.C.2014.Cascadingecologicaleffects

ofeliminatingfisherydiscards.NatureCommunications,5:3893doi:10.1038/ncomms4893.

Lassalle, G., Lobry, J., Le Loc’h, F., Bustamante, P., Certain, G., Delmas, D., Dupuy, C., Hily, C.,Labry,C., LePape,O.,Marquis,E.,Petitgas,P.,Pusineri,C.,Ridoux,V., Spitz, J., andNiquil,N.,2011. Lower trophic levels and detrital biomass control the Bay of Biscay continental shelffoodweb:implicationsforecosystemmanagement.ProgressInOceanography91,61-75.

Schrope,M.2010.What’sthecatch?Nature,465:540-542.

www.discard

less.eu

141

Thisprojecthasreceivedfundingfrom

theEuropean

Union’sHorizon

2020research

andinnovation

programme

undergrantagreementN

o633680

ANNEX1:Landingsbyspeciesandm

étiersin2013.

OTB

OTM

PTB

ene

febmar

abrmay

junsep

octnov

dicfeb

novene

febmar

abrmay

junjul

sepoct

novdic

ANK

1972978

23886402

90627128

77955254

1435505

986893

1961524

9389

523373

1088470

4572545

435

ARY5100

35661520

29922569

14135642

5028134

62393618

62914

10535

18723

17

5980

26

BIB361

349412

177

355794

737

189223

330

12583

11117

65244

34225

3497

BLL

59

5

471

2

21

BRF

1082

132

BSS1411

559374

64

940422

10727974

7202498

17376

323

351661

COE802

10341422

439250

2701577

619868

582508

1179519

116268

81205

4143

49160

9568

CRE

571219

1270

CTB

7886

4

189

62

CTL2146

33193820

493

415700

2513933

81902617

364990

23

3

473173

EOI4536

20963125

42782362

1357511

67046

3171066

75

85

11

GAD3308

19551298

16551364

26354504

2417967

31932676

32421702

17155

1301226

393930

2311668

672880

GFB

113205

256

177

GUX755

10943391

12641675

32134986

322838

1647372

1432410

203612

2971064

5511558

8314022

32722963

HAD

11

36

HKE

46632138

39323926

52803914

44972723

2513

27472136

4481497623

230308229575

158581161322

18235561720

11947681877

14392

HOM

584

224

1006420

2346628

852132

136

31441171

1055436

1347631

1729758

92510

285

JOD242

2751248

1319915

835540

41417

101811

102786

1238506

8252451

1268809

9121601

646392

LDB1353

8411054

782450

185510000

5549221

108119

8537

0

0

1304

LIN

10

4663

948

3441

13

1281

2134

142

9

97

18

MAC

17208

MAS

12

MEG

54533454

428415363

1015510989

1189770

20275

224375

27119

6

1128

MGR

33

74364

213

MON

1404

8241136

1585924

6181137

85843

1159537

4481881

345217

129707

256124

116394

4629530

www.discard

less.eu

142

Thisprojecthasreceivedfundingfrom

theEuropean

Union’sHorizon

2020research

andinnovation

programme

undergrantagreementN

o633680

MUL

481

255

165

MUR

491248

6091665

2304626

333

159607

1112165

354

130

16032

26

299

OCC

33

OMZ

462600

1816671

1872711

11982933

838284

57

765

PAC

10

POL

101159

16949

9

6354

6

4613

7710

3747

5414

2315

4

RJC223

213696

284281

381499

17

16813

32183

1157

159424

7237

1749

RJN

2147783

30646029

14132231

3742506

1654

902191

1509

SBA

27

5

SBG

42

17

10

SBR

107

SKA

1168

843

445

365178

4415

6315

25

2361

34

SOL182

89252

9282

288

43

52

30

SOX

3801858

168143

878

SQZ275

1428

271

194486

55844

85293453

6912

23

33

5564197

SRG

10

10

5

14

SYC2162

28314764

34035977

61196422

4029241

37161479

15384821

1407

59

189

26991

TRK332

409990

1789772

518

241387

351

119210

2231401

59538

12

14141

TUR

7

7756

14

64

7

7

3

6

UCA

110

1610

9513

15

WEG

638

79

36

241

17

32233

1288365

689

WHB

70

3331679

9783981

3203357

92

WHG

94

634

266135

35498

7

740865

240






ANNEX2:Codes

Code Spanishname Scientificname EnglishnameANK Rapenegro Lophiusbudegassa Black-belliedangler

ARY Peon,pezplata ArgentinasphyraenaBIB Fanecacomun Trisopterusluscus Pout,Bib

BLL Remol,Corujo Scophthalmusrhombus Brill

BRF Cabra(Helicolenusdactylopterus) HelicolenusdactylopterusBSS Lubina Dicentrarchuslabrax Bass

COE Congrio(Congerconger) Congerconger Conger

CRE Buey Cancerpagurus Ediblecrab

CTB Mojarra Diplodusvulgaris CommonTwoBandedSeaBream

CTL Sepiasychocos SepiidaeEOI Pulpoblanco Eledonecirrhosa Curledoctopus

GAD Fanecasspp Trisopterusspp Pout,Bib

GFB Brotoladefango(Phycisblennoides) Phycisblennoides GreaterForkbeard

GUX Triglidos TriglidaeHAD Eglefino Melanogrammusaeglefinus Haddock

HKE Merluzaeuropea Merlucciusmerluccius Hake

HOM ChicharroNegro Trachurustrachurus Atlantic(Scad)Horsemackerel

JOD PezdeSanPedro Zeusfaber AtlanticJohnDory

LDB Galloboscii Lepidorhombusboscii Four-spotmegrim

LIN Maruca,Juliana(Molvamolva) Molvamolva Ling

MAC Verdel,Caballa Scomberscombrus Mackerel

MAS Estornino Scombercolias Chubmackerel,Spanishmackerel

MEG Gallowhiffiagonis Lepidorhombuswhiffiagonis MegrimMGR Corvina Argyrosomusregius Meagre

MON Rapeblanco Lophiuspiscatorius Anglerfish,Monkfish

MUL Lisas MugilidaeMUR Salmonetederoca Mullussurmuletus RedMullet

OCC Pulpocomun Octopusvulgaris Octopus

OMZ Potasyvoladores OmmastrephidaePAC Breca Pagelluserythrinus Pandora

POL Abadejo Pollachiuspollachius Pollack

RJC Rayadeclavos RajaclavataRJN Rayasantiaguesa Leucorajanaevus Cuckooray

SBA Aligote Pagellusacarne Axilarysea-bream

SBG Dorada Sparusaurata GiltheadSeaBream

SBR Besugo Pagellusbogaraveo Redsea-bream

SKA Rayasspp Rajaspp Skates

SOL Lenguado Soleavulgaris Sole

SOX Soleidos SoleidaeSQZ CalamaresLoliginidae Loliginidae InshoreSquids



SRG Esparidos SparidaeSRG Esparidos SparidaeSYC Pintarroja Scyliorhinuscanicula Dogfish

TRK Tolla,Musolaspp Triakidae Topeshark,flakeTUR Rodaballo Psettamaxima TurbotUCA Verrugatodefango Umbrinacanariensis Canarydrum

WEGSalvario, Escorpion, Escarapote,Araña Trachinusdraco Greaterweever

WHB Lirio,Bacaladilla Micromesistiuspoutassou BluewhitingWHG Merlan Merlangiusmerlangus Whiting

Documents

8.5 Bay of Biscay case study - DiscardLess · This project has received funding from ... 8.5 Bay of Biscay case study Raúl Prellezo and Eider Andonegi (AZTI) Abstract: The case study