ISSN 1198-6727 Fisheries Centre Research Reports...ISSN 1198-6727 Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2018 Volume #26 Number #1 A global fishing gear dataset for integration into the

ISSN 1198-6727

Fisheries Centre Research Reports

2018 Volume #26 Number #1

A global fishing gear dataset for integration into the Sea Around

Us global fisheries databases

Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, The University of British Columbia, Canada

A global fishing gear dataset for integration into the Sea Around Us global fisheries database

Please cite as: Cashion, T.; Al-Abdulrazzak, D.; Belhabib, D.; Derrick, B.; Divovich, E.; Moutopoulos, D.; Noël, S.L.; Palomares, M.L.D.; Teh, L.; Zeller, D.; Pauly, D. (2018) A global fishing gear dataset for integration into the Sea Around Us global fisheries databases. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 26(1): 71pp.

© Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, The University of British Columbia, 2018 Fisheries Centre Research Reports are Open Access publications

ISSN 1198-6727 Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4. This research report is indexed in Google Scholar, Research Gate, the UBC library archive (cIRcle).

2018 Fisheries Centre Research Reports 26(1)

2

Table of Contents Director’s Foreword ............................................................................................................ 7Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 8Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 8Methods ................................................................................................................................................................ 9

Industrial gears ............................................................................................................................................... 9Artisanal ........................................................................................................................................................ 10

Results ............................................................................................................ 12Industrial .................................................................................................................... 12

Albania ...................................................................................................................................................... 12Algeria ....................................................................................................................................................... 12American Samoa ...................................................................................................................................... 12Angola ....................................................................................................................................................... 12Anguilla (UK)............................................................................................................................................ 12Antigua and Barbuda ............................................................................................................................... 13Argentina .................................................................................................................................................. 13Aruba ......................................................................................................................................................... 13Ascension Island (UK) ............................................................................................................................. 13Australia .................................................................................................................................................... 13Azores Islands (Portugal) ........................................................................................................................ 13Bahamas.................................................................................................................................................... 13Bahrain...................................................................................................................................................... 14Balearic Islands (Spain) ........................................................................................................................... 14Bangladesh................................................................................................................................................ 14Barbados ................................................................................................................................................... 14Belgium ..................................................................................................................................................... 14Belize ......................................................................................................................................................... 14Benin ......................................................................................................................................................... 14Bermuda (UK) .......................................................................................................................................... 14Bonaire (Netherlands) ............................................................................................................................. 14Bosnia and Herzegovina .......................................................................................................................... 14Bouvet Island (Norway) ........................................................................................................................... 14Brazil ......................................................................................................................................................... 15British Indian Ocean Territory ................................................................................................................ 15British Virgin Islands ............................................................................................................................... 15Brunei Darussalam ................................................................................................................................... 15Bulgaria ..................................................................................................................................................... 15Cambodia .................................................................................................................................................. 15Cameroon.................................................................................................................................................. 15Canada ...................................................................................................................................................... 15Canary Islands (Spain) ............................................................................................................................. 16Cape Verde ................................................................................................................................................ 16Cayman Islands (UK) ............................................................................................................................... 16Chile .......................................................................................................................................................... 16China ......................................................................................................................................................... 16Christmas & Cocos Island (Australia) ..................................................................................................... 16Clipperton Island (France) ...................................................................................................................... 17Colombia ................................................................................................................................................... 17Comoros Island ........................................................................................................................................ 17Congo, Democratic Republic of (aka ex-Zaire) ....................................................................................... 17Congo, Republic of ................................................................................................................................... 17Cook Islands ............................................................................................................................................. 17Corsica (France) ....................................................................................................................................... 17Costa Rica ................................................................................................................................................. 17


3

Côte d’Ivoire ............................................................................................................................................. 17Croatia ...................................................................................................................................................... 18Crozet Island (France) ............................................................................................................................ 18Cuba ......................................................................................................................................................... 18Curaçao (Netherlands) ............................................................................................................................ 18Cyprus (North) ........................................................................................................................................ 18Cyprus (South) ........................................................................................................................................ 18Denmark .................................................................................................................................................. 18Djibouti .................................................................................................................................................... 18Dominica .................................................................................................................................................. 18Dominican Republic ................................................................................................................................. 19Easter Island (Chile) ................................................................................................................................ 19Ecuador ..................................................................................................................................................... 19Egypt ......................................................................................................................................................... 19El Salvador ................................................................................................................................................ 19Equatorial Guinea .................................................................................................................................... 19Eritrea ....................................................................................................................................................... 19Estonia ..................................................................................................................................................... 20Faeroe Islands (Denmark) ...................................................................................................................... 20Falkland Islands (UK) ............................................................................................................................. 20Fiji ............................................................................................................................................................ 20Finland ..................................................................................................................................................... 20France ...................................................................................................................................................... 20French Guiana ......................................................................................................................................... 20French Polynesia ..................................................................................................................................... 20Gabon ........................................................................................................................................................ 21Galapagos Islands (Ecuador) ................................................................................................................... 21Gambia ...................................................................................................................................................... 21Gaza Strip ................................................................................................................................................. 21Georgia ...................................................................................................................................................... 21Germany ................................................................................................................................................... 21Ghana ....................................................................................................................................................... 22Glorieuse Islands (France)...................................................................................................................... 22Greece ...................................................................................................................................................... 22Greenland ................................................................................................................................................ 23Grenada.................................................................................................................................................... 23Guadeloupe (France)............................................................................................................................... 23Guam (USA) ............................................................................................................................................ 23Guatemala ................................................................................................................................................ 23Guinea ...................................................................................................................................................... 23Guinea-Bissau.......................................................................................................................................... 23Guyana ..................................................................................................................................................... 24Haiti ......................................................................................................................................................... 24Heard & McDonald Islands (Australia) ................................................................................................. 24Honduras ................................................................................................................................................. 24Hong Kong ............................................................................................................................................... 24Howland and Baker Islands (USA) ........................................................................................................ 24Iceland ..................................................................................................................................................... 24India & the Andaman and Nicobar Islands ........................................................................................... 24Indonesia ................................................................................................................................................. 25Iran ........................................................................................................................................................... 25Iraq ........................................................................................................................................................... 25Ireland ...................................................................................................................................................... 25Israel ........................................................................................................................................................ 25Italy .......................................................................................................................................................... 25


4

Jamaica .................................................................................................................................................... 25Jan Mayen Island (Norway) ................................................................................................................... 25Japan ........................................................................................................................................................ 26Jarvis Island (USA) ................................................................................................................................. 26Johnston Atoll (USA) .............................................................................................................................. 26Jordan ...................................................................................................................................................... 26Juan Fernandez Islands (Chile).............................................................................................................. 26Kenya ....................................................................................................................................................... 26Kerguelen Islands (France) .................................................................................................................... 26Kermadec Islands (New Zealand) .......................................................................................................... 26Kiribati ..................................................................................................................................................... 26Kuwait ...................................................................................................................................................... 26Latvia........................................................................................................................................................ 27Lebanon ................................................................................................................................................... 27Lithuania .................................................................................................................................................. 27Lord Howe Island (Australia) ................................................................................................................. 27Macquarie Island (Australia) .................................................................................................................. 27Madagascar .............................................................................................................................................. 27Madeira Island (Portugal) ...................................................................................................................... 27Malaysia ................................................................................................................................................... 27Maldives ................................................................................................................................................... 27Malta ........................................................................................................................................................ 27Marshall Islands ...................................................................................................................................... 28Martinique ............................................................................................................................................... 28Mauritania ............................................................................................................................................... 28Mauritius ................................................................................................................................................. 28Mayotte (France) ..................................................................................................................................... 28Mexico ...................................................................................................................................................... 28Micronesia ............................................................................................................................................... 28Morocco ................................................................................................................................................... 28Montenegro ............................................................................................................................................. 29Montserrat (UK) ...................................................................................................................................... 29Mozambique ............................................................................................................................................ 29Mozambique Channel Islands (France) ................................................................................................. 29Myanmar .................................................................................................................................................. 29Namibia.................................................................................................................................................... 29Nauru ....................................................................................................................................................... 30Netherlands ............................................................................................................................................. 30New Caledonia ......................................................................................................................................... 30New Zealand ............................................................................................................................................ 30Nicaragua ................................................................................................................................................. 30Nigeria...................................................................................................................................................... 30Norfolk Island (Australia) ....................................................................................................................... 30North Korea ............................................................................................................................................. 30Norway ...................................................................................................................................................... 31Oman ......................................................................................................................................................... 31Pakistan .................................................................................................................................................... 31Palau.......................................................................................................................................................... 31Palmyra Atoll and Kingman Reef ............................................................................................................ 31Panama ..................................................................................................................................................... 31Papua New Guinea ................................................................................................................................... 31Peru ........................................................................................................................................................... 31Poland ...................................................................................................................................................... 32Portugal .................................................................................................................................................... 32Prince Edward Island (South Africa) ..................................................................................................... 32


5

Puerto Rico (USA) ................................................................................................................................... 32Qatar ........................................................................................................................................................ 32Réunion .................................................................................................................................................... 32Romania ................................................................................................................................................... 32Russia ....................................................................................................................................................... 32Saba (Netherlands) ................................................................................................................................. 33Saint Barthelemy (France) ...................................................................................................................... 33Saint Helena ............................................................................................................................................ 34Saint Kitts and Nevis ............................................................................................................................... 34Saint Lucia ............................................................................................................................................... 34Saint Martin (France) ............................................................................................................................. 34Saint Paul and Amsterdam Iles .............................................................................................................. 34Saint Vincent and the Grenadines .......................................................................................................... 34Samoa....................................................................................................................................................... 34Sao Tome and Principe ........................................................................................................................... 34Saudi Arabia ............................................................................................................................................ 34Senegal ..................................................................................................................................................... 34Seychelles ................................................................................................................................................. 35Sierra Leone ............................................................................................................................................. 35Singapore ................................................................................................................................................. 35Sint Eustatius (Netherlands) .................................................................................................................. 35Sint Maarten (Netherlands).................................................................................................................... 35Slovenia .................................................................................................................................................... 35Solomon Islands ...................................................................................................................................... 35Somalia .................................................................................................................................................... 35South Africa ............................................................................................................................................. 35South Georgia, Sandwich Islands, and South Orkney Islands (UK) .................................................... 36South Korea ............................................................................................................................................. 36Spain ........................................................................................................................................................ 36Sri Lanka .................................................................................................................................................. 36Sudan ....................................................................................................................................................... 37Suriname .................................................................................................................................................. 37Svalbard Island (Norway) ....................................................................................................................... 37Sweden ..................................................................................................................................................... 37Syria ......................................................................................................................................................... 37Taiwan ...................................................................................................................................................... 37Tanzania................................................................................................................................................... 37Thailand ................................................................................................................................................... 37Timor Leste .............................................................................................................................................. 37Togo.......................................................................................................................................................... 37Tonga ....................................................................................................................................................... 38Trinidad and Tobago ............................................................................................................................... 38Tristan da Cunha ..................................................................................................................................... 38Tromelin Islands (France) ...................................................................................................................... 38Tunisia ..................................................................................................................................................... 38Turkey ...................................................................................................................................................... 38Turks and Caicos ..................................................................................................................................... 38Tuvalu ...................................................................................................................................................... 38Ukraine .................................................................................................................................................... 38United Arab Emirates ............................................................................................................................. 39United Kingdom ...................................................................................................................................... 39Uruguay ................................................................................................................................................... 39USA .......................................................................................................................................................... 39US Virgin Islands .................................................................................................................................... 40Vanuatu .................................................................................................................................................... 40


6

Venezuela ................................................................................................................................................. 40Viet Nam .................................................................................................................................................. 40Wake Island (USA) .................................................................................................................................. 40Wallis and Futuna Islands (France) ....................................................................................................... 40Yemen ...................................................................................................................................................... 40

Regional and other non-national findings ............................................................................................... 40NAFO ............................................................................................................................................................. 40CCAMLR ........................................................................................................................................................ 41ICES ............................................................................................................................................................... 42

Large Pelagics ................................................................................................................... 42Artisanal Regional Results ................................................................................................. 42

Africa ............................................................................................................................................................. 42Ghana ....................................................................................................................................................... 42Nigeria...................................................................................................................................................... 42Senegal ..................................................................................................................................................... 42

Asia ................................................................................................................................................................ 42Japan ........................................................................................................................................................ 42South Korea ............................................................................................................................................. 43Thailand ................................................................................................................................................... 43

Caribbean ...................................................................................................................................................... 43Cuba ......................................................................................................................................................... 43

Europe ........................................................................................................................................................... 43Denmark .................................................................................................................................................. 43Norway ..................................................................................................................................................... 43United Kingdom ...................................................................................................................................... 43

Oceania .......................................................................................................................................................... 44New Zealand ............................................................................................................................................ 44Papua New Guinea .................................................................................................................................. 44Tonga ....................................................................................................................................................... 44

North America .............................................................................................................................................. 44Canada ..................................................................................................................................................... 44Mexico ...................................................................................................................................................... 45USA .......................................................................................................................................................... 45

South America............................................................................................................................................... 45Brazil ........................................................................................................................................................ 45Chile ......................................................................................................................................................... 45Venezuela ................................................................................................................................................. 45

Global results ................................................................................................ 46Discussion ..................................................................................................................................................... 47Conclusion..................................................................................................................................................... 48Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 48References ..................................................................................................................................................... 49


7

Director’s Foreword

ItisthemissionofUBC’sInstitutefortheOceansandFisheriestoleadthewaytohealthyandsustainablemarinesystemsthrough,amongotherthings,excellentoriginalresearchthatseeksnewknowledgeandsolutions.Weknowthattheworld’soceansareincrisisduetohumanactivitiessuchasanthropogenicemissions,pollution,habitatdestruction,andoverfishing.However,understandinghowweareinteractingwithourmarineecosystemsisanintegralpartofunderstandinghowtoadjustthestatusquoandproperlymanageresources.Fishinggearsrepresenttheactualmechanismbywhichfisheriesinteractwiththemarineenvironmentinthemostdirectway.Whetheritisthroughlarge,industrialfishingtrawlsandmechanicalseines,orartisanallevelgillnets,handlinesortraps,fishinggearhavetremendouseffectsontheecosystemsinwhichtheyoperate.Thisstudydocumentsthegearassignmentforeachindividualfishingcountry,utilizingthereconstructedcatchdatafromtheSeaAroundUs.Ithascreatedaglobalharmonizationoffishinggearusedataforthereconstructedcatchdata,allowingglobalandregionalmeta-analysestobeundertakenofcatchbygeartypeaswellasgearusepatternsoverthelast60+years.Icongratulatetheauthorsonthisimportantandtimelypieceofwork.Prof.EvgenyPakhomovDirector,InstitutefortheOceansandFisheriesTheUniversityofBritishColumbia


8

Abstract Globally, marine fisheries exhibit a great spatial and temporal diversity in the use of fishing gear. However, the development and use of fishing gear for industrial marine fisheries has not been well understood at a global level. Here, we assign all globally reconstructed fisheries catches of the Sea Around Us to a specific gear type. This report documents the results of this gear assignment for each individual fishing country of the Sea Around Us. Globally, we found that bottom trawls and purse seines account for the majority of all gears used, especially when small-scale gears are excluded. We also derive approximate gear type use for small-scale fisheries via an indirect, regionally representative approach. This approach made use of the largest artisanal fishing countries in each region of the world, and assigned the remaining artisanal catches to these countries assuming they are representative of the broader region. The major artisanal gear types worldwide were gillnets and various types of line gear. Changes in gear use over time are presented globally, with all data freely available at www.seaaroundus.org.

Introduction Fishing gears represent the actual mechanism by which fisheries interact with the marine environment in the most direct way. There is a wide diversity of fishing gears being used around the world, from small-scale gears operated by hand such as spears, simple hand lines, traps or beach seines, to large-scale trawls and mechanically powered seines. A major concern surrounding fishing gears are the unintended by-catch of non-target organisms (Alverson et al. 1994), habitat alterations (Turner et al. 1999), and gear-associated high fuel use (Parker and Tyedmers 2015). There has been considerable research conducted on the interactions of various fishing gears with the ecosystems they operate in, but little global harmonization or meta-analyses of the gear-catch inter-relationships have been undertaken, except for the earlier Sea Around Us work of Watson et al. (2006a; 2006b).

Watson et al. (2006b) constructed a database and rule-based gear-to-catch matching system to assign a set of gear types to the catch of a particular taxon based on the general information about gear use. However, these assignments were largely independent of any information on the country or region where the fishery in question was operating; also, these gear assignments were time invariant. Therefore, the results were strongly influenced by taxonomic distinctions at the species level, but also at less refined taxonomic resolution (e.g., genus, family, order, etc.), and also did not reflect country-specific patterns of fishing gear use or changes in gear use over time. Furthermore, this earlier matching system included some small-scale fishing gear types, but assigned them based on their proportion to the global fisheries landings statistics reported by FAO on behalf of member countries, which has now been shown to substantially under-report global catches (Pauly and Zeller 2016a), especially for small-scale fisheries in developing countries (Zeller et al. 2015).

Since this initial gear-catch assignment, the Sea Around Us has undertaken a global catch data reconstruction project (Pauly and Zeller 2016a; Zeller et al. 2016) that combines reported data with comprehensive estimates of unreported fisheries catches, including major discards (Pauly and Zeller 2016a; Pauly and Zeller 2016b). The process of catch reconstruction relies on diverse country- and fisheries-specific data sources to comprehensively account for all fisheries activities in a country, in all cases back to 1950. The total reconstructed catch includes small-scale fisheries (i.e., recreational, subsistence, and artisanal) that are often ignored or poorly monitored or reported by national authorities (Zeller et al. 2015), as well as other unreported catches including discards (Zeller et al. 2017). While information on gear types was included in many country catch reconstructions, it was often not explicit, or was addressed in a way that did not enable standardization across the global scale.

Therefore, the aim of the present study was to identify the fishing gears used globally since 1950 by the reconstructed catch data of the Sea Around Us (Pauly and Zeller 2016a; Zeller et al. 2016). These gear data were then used to provide detailed spatially allocated catch-by-gear data for all fisheries catches. This study treats industrial fisheries and artisanal (i.e., commercial small-scale) separately due to the differences in gear use between these sectors. Other small-scale fisheries (i.e., recreational and subsistence) are not being addressed in this report as together they represent only 3.7% of global marine catches. Therefore, we retain a general ‘small-scale gear’ categorization in the global Sea Around Us fisheries database.


9

Methods The reconstructed catch data for the domestic waters of each country or territory1 used country or territory-specific fishing sector definitions (or regional equivalents) to determine if the catch was large-scale (i.e., industrial) or small-scale (i.e., artisanal, subsistence, or recreational) in nature (Zeller et al. 2016). However, all fishing gears that are actively dragged through the water using engine power were defined as industrial, following Martín (2012). Thus, some trawl or purse seine fleets potentially defined as ‘small-scale’ by a given country, e.g., purely by vessel length, are re-assigned in the Sea Around Us data as industrial.

The reconstructed catch data are composed of millions of catch records, each consisting of a catch tonnage of a particular taxon, by a particular fishing country, caught in a particular area, by a particular fishing sector, and which is either landed or discarded, and either reported or unreported. The information used to assign the fishing gear used attempted to best match the uniqueness of each catch record. Thus, all gear assignments attempt to be sensitive to temporal and geographic changes for the respective fishing country and taxon. This is aided by the structure of the Sea Around Us catch data, which consists of three data layers (Zeller et al. 2016): 1) domestic fisheries within a country’s home EEZ; 2) foreign fisheries within a given EEZ; and, 3) industrial large-pelagic fisheries (mainly for tuna and billfishes) that span both EEZs and the high seas (Le Manach et al. 2016). As the large-pelagic data layer is reconstructed separately (Le Manach et al. 2016), its gear assignment can be addressed independently and is largely based on the gear data reported through the Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (e.g., IATTC, ICCAT, WCPFC, etc.). These separations of data layers aid in the temporal and geographic disaggregation of the gear data.

Industrial gears Here, we define 8 broad industrial gear categories, with 18 specific gear types (Table 1). We determined the appropriate gear types or gear categories (Table 1) that an industrial catch record could be assigned to on the definitions of gear by von Brandt (1984). Our aim was to separate all industrial gears into their larger gear categories, and to refine past this point only when necessary or explicitly already done by the information source. The major gear types were determined to fit into the categories detailed below (Table 1).

First, we assigned all industrial catch data rows that have gear information already included (e.g., from catch data reconstructions) to the appropriate gear categories, while confirming and validating this choice based on additional information in the reconstruction and its source material. Examples where this was done include the layer 1 data (domestic fisheries) for EEZs of the Red Sea (Tesfamichael and Pauly 2016) where gears were assigned that readily allowed standardized gear categories to be associated. As many gear types, such as longlines and gillnets, can be used by both the industrial or the artisanal sectors the gear types defined were assigned within the original sector (i.e., industrial or artisanal) already established in the catch reconstruction.

Second, we assigned all taxa that are caught by a single gear by a fishing country in a geographic region in a given year. Examples of this include taxa that are only caught by one industrial gear type by a country, such as the use of purse seines for anchoveta (Engraulis ringens) in Peru.

Third, we assigned gear types to all taxa that are caught by multiple gears by the same fishing country in the same geographic area. This required assigning proportions of the different gear types to the mixed gear category for each unique fishing country, year, taxon, and geographic region. In this way, catches of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) by the United Kingdom could be separated into Danish seines, bottom trawls, gillnets, and line gear.

There were some challenges that required addressing. The first was the classification of gears that are essentially artisanal in nature, but are classified by the Sea Around Us as industrial because they operate in foreign EEZs (Zeller et al. 2016), such as Iraq’s artisanal gillnet fisheries in Iran’s EEZ, or Sint Maarten’s trap fishery operating in the EEZ of Saba and Sint Eustatius. These were classified as industrial (under the ‘others’ category, Table 1), as they do not fish within their home EEZs as required by the definition for small-scale fisheries by the Sea Around Us (Zeller et al. 2016). The solution for this was to classify all of these as gear type ‘long-distance artisanal’ within the single industrial ‘others’ gear category (Table 1).

1 The Sea Around Us treats many overseas territories as separate ‘country entities’ to separate truly domestic from foreign fisheries. The term ‘country’ used throughout this report does not necessarily reflect political ‘nation’ states, but is rather used to identify a distinct fishing entity.


10

The second major challenge was the level of likely uncertainty around these assignments and lack of available information with regard to the exact proportions of catches reported for each gear type. While this was a substantive challenge, we applied the appropriate gear information to match the unique characteristics of each catch record as closely as possible for all cases. Further research into gear assignment, and feedback from in-country experts are welcome, as it will lead to future improvements of the current data.

Table 1: Industrial gear categories and gear types used by the Sea Around Us, with descriptions (adapted from Gabriel et al. 2005). Gear category Gear type Description Bottom trawl Bottom trawl

Nets dragged by vessels in contact with the ocean floor

Bottom trawl Shrimp trawl Bottom trawl Beam trawl Bottom trawl Otter trawl Pelagic trawl Pelagic trawl Nets dragged by vessels, but not

in contact with the ocean floor and targeting pelagic or semi-pelagic taxa

Longline Lines Includes all gears where lines with hooks of any kind are the primary gear used

Longline Pole and line Longline Longlines Longline Hand lines Purse seine Encircling nets All net-based gears that encircle

the catch rather than entangle it Purse seine Purse seines Purse seine Small encircling nets Gillnets Gillnets All net-based gears that entangle

catch rather than encircle it Gillnets Trammel nets Others Others Pots, traps and other gear1 Long-distance artisanal Artisanal fisheries operating

outside their domestic EEZ Small-scale Small-scale All gears used for small-scale

fisheries (See Table 2). Unknown Unknown 1’Others’ includes industrial pots, traps, other nets, other lines, dredges, dragged gear, and mixed gears.

Artisanal Here, we define 10 broad artisanal gear categories composed of 24 specific gear types (Table 2). The top three countries in terms of tonnage of artisanal catches for each region (Table 3) were identified and were assigned artisanal gears by taxon for each year using a combination of national data, independent research papers, and grey literature (see the section “Individual EEZs” for references and assumptions for each country). Annual breakdowns of artisanal catch of each taxon by gear were pooled for most regions (Africa, Asia, Europe, South America) and the overall breakdown of artisanal taxa by gear were used to disaggregate artisanal catch for all other countries within the region. Taxa that were not present in these overall artisanal gear breakdowns, but were present elsewhere within the region were assigned a taxon present in the overall breakdown on the basis of similar lineage, habitat, or functional group. Overall breakdowns for broader taxonomic categories (families, orders, classes, etc.) were pooled with data for all specific taxa that fell within the category in order to best reflect the various gears used in broad categories of taxa.

For regions with particularly important differences in economic development or climate, and thus gears used, the top three EEZs were not pooled, but instead assigned to a breakdown based on the countries with the top catch and most similar in development and taxa present (Table 3). For North America, for example, artisanal gear breakdowns were assumed for countries in Central America to be most similar to Mexico, Caribbean countries to be most similar to Cuba, and arctic North American countries were assumed to be similar to Alaskan EEZs, Canadian Arctic, and Canadian Atlantic EEZs. For Oceania, Australia was assumed to most closely resemble New Zealand, while all other EEZs within the region were assumed to be represented most closely by a pooled breakdown of Papua New Guinea and Tonga.


11

Table 2. Artisanal gear categories and gear types used by the Sea Around Us, with descriptions (adapted from Gabriel et al. 2005). Gear category Gear type Description Bag nets Bag nets Nets used by individuals to lift or scoop fish

from the water Cast nets Cast net Nets thrown atop the intended catch from

shore or boats Cast nets Lampara nets Hand or tools Hand collection Fishing by hand collection, skin diving,

harpoons, or other methods not involving nets or lines

Hand or tools Diving Hand or tools Harpoons Small-scale encircling nets Encircling nets Nets that surround fish from the sides and

beneath, most often associated with purse seines used by small-scale fishers

Small-scale encircling nets Purse seine

Small-scale gillnets Set net Net-based gear that entangles catch, deployed from a boat and/or suspended in the water column

Small-scale gillnets Driftnet Small-scale gillnets Trammel net Small-scale lines Hand line

Gear composed of fishing lines with baited or unbaited hooks

Small-scale lines Trolling line Small-scale lines Longline Small-scale lines Pole line Small-scale lines Squid jigging Small-scale pots or traps Fyke net Manufactured structures that trap fish,

including net weirs and pots Small-scale pots or traps Traps/pots Small-scale seine nets Beach seine Weighted, surrounding nets that encircle fish

from the sides and is then dragged into a boat or onto the shore

Small-scale seine nets Boat seine

Small-scale other nets Small-scale other nets Nets not belonging to other net categories Artisanal fishing gear Dynamite, chemical Other fishing gear not belonging to any of the

above categories, or that is from a mixed fishery or is unknown

Artisanal fishing gear Mixed gear Artisanal fishing gear Unknown

Table 3. Regionally representative artisanal fishing countries, for small-scale fishing gear assignment. Region Countries Artisanal catch in region (%) Africa Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal 38.5 Asia Japan, South Korea, Thailand 28.4 Caribbean Cuba 29.4 Europe Denmark, Norway, UK 38.2 North America - North Canada, USA* 96.3 North America - Central Mexico 90.4 Oceania - Others Papua New Guinea, Tonga 24.2 Oceania - Australia New Zealand 66.4 South America Brazil, Chile, Venezuela 45.1

*Data for North American arctic and subarctic EEZs and the Atlantic coast of Canada were used to assign artisanal gear breakdowns to Greenland and St. Pierre and Miquelon, respectively.


12

Results

Industrial Albania Albanian marine fisheries is operating in the Adriatic Sea (GFCM-20, FAO 37.2.2) and its fishing gear was reconstructed to better estimate its fleets unreported catch (Moutopoulos et al. 2015). Fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1 and catch data were disaggregated to the gear types presented as follows: (a) trawlers (mid-water and otter trawls); (b) purse seiners (encircling nets); and (c) “other coastal boats” (mostly including trammel and gill netters) operating along the coasts. Categories (a) and (b) represent the industrial sector. Discards have been estimated for all the above mentioned categories (Moutopoulos et al. 2015) during the entire studied period 1950-2010, whereas recreational fisheries catches are considered to be negligible (Moutopoulos et al. 2015).

By gear analyses of fisheries catches showed that trawls, and specifically otter trawls, mostly contributed the highest percentage (73.6%) of the total catches during 1950-2010, whereas mid-water trawls represented a much lesser portion of the total catch (9.2%). For the remaining gears, small-scale fisheries contributed 12.5% of the total catches and purse seines 4.7%.

With respect to the analyses of the species composition by gear, trawl reported catches were mostly represented by other species (74.8%), followed to a much lesser extent by Merluccius merluccius (16.9%) and Boops boops (4.2%). For purse and beach seines Sardina pilchardus (99 and 100%) vastly contributed to their total catches, respectively, whereas for small-scales Spicara spp. (50%), M. merluccius (31.1%) and B. boops (17.5%) mostly represented to the total small-scale catches.

Algeria Many gear types were already assigned for Algeria indicating the discards reconstructed from the bottom trawl and small pelagic purse seine fisheries (Belhabib et al. 2012d). In addition, many taxa are solely caught by bottom trawls according to the sources used to reconstruct the bottom trawl fisheries, and effort data (Belhabib et al. 2012d). These taxa broadly included elasmobranchs, decapods, and other demersal fishes.

American Samoa American Samoa does not have industrial fisheries outside of its large pelagic fisheries generally operating offshore (Zeller et al. 2006; Zeller et al. 2015). The gear type of the artisanal fishers targeting lobster outside of American Samoa’s EEZ were assigned as small-scale gears. All other catches were associated to the hand lines and longlines of the tuna fishery and so were broadly categorized as ‘lines’.

Angola Angola’s domestic gear use can be separated into three distinct types: shrimp trawls, demersal fish trawls, and small pelagic purse seines. These are largely distinct and were incorporated into the reconstruction of discards (Belhabib and Divovich 2015). However, landings were not initially separated and the assumption that all small and medium pelagics were caught by purse seines was taken. The remaining landings could not be separated out between shrimp and demersal fish trawling and were assigned to the class of bottom trawls.

Many foreign countries fish in Angola’s EEZ waters using a variety of gears. China fishes solely with bottom trawls in Angola’s waters (Pauly et al. 2014). The former USSR and Soviet related countries (herein defined as Russia, Poland, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Georgia) were reconstructed according to their bottom trawl and pelagic trawl fleets, and the bottom trawl taxa were identified in the reconstruction (D. Belhabib, unpublished data). These same bottom trawl taxa were largely targeted by European and East Asian fleets (including Japan, Spain, Italy, and under Flag of Convenience countries like Panama; Belhabib and Divovich 2015). Ghana’s catches here were assigned to the same taxa as Ghana uses in its domestic fleet (see Ghana section; Nunoo et al. 2014). The Republic of Congo operates shrimp trawls within the Angola’s EEZ (Belhabib et al. 2015c). Finally, Nigeria’s catches were assigned as bottom trawl catches as its domestic industrial fishery is solely bottom trawls (see Nigeria section; Etim et al. 2015).

Anguilla (UK) Anguilla has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Ramdeen et al. 2014c).


13

Antigua and Barbuda Antigua and Barbuda have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Georges et al. 2015).

Argentina Bottom trawling is the dominant gear in Argentina (Villasante et al. 2015b), and its targeted taxa were assigned to this gear type. All shrimp taxa caught by the industrial sector were assumed to be caught with shrimp trawls. Argentina’s squid jigging fishery was assigned as longlines as the common gear type of this gear (FAO 2014). Finally, Argentine anchovy has part of the fishery MSC certified for pelagic trawls and this was thus assumed to be the dominant gear type employed.2

Aruba Aruba has no domestic industrial fisheries of its own (Pauly et al. 2015). Taiwan fishes in Aruba’s EEZ with longlines for large pelagics (Pauly et al. 2015). Venezuela fishes with longlines and bottom trawls in Aruba’s EEZ (Pauly et al. 2015).

Ascension Island (UK) Ascension Island has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Booth and Azar 2009).

Australia Australia’s industrial fisheries use a diversity of gears including bottom trawls, pelagic trawls, longlines, other line, gillnets, and purse seines (Kleisner et al. 2015). All discards were assigned to either pelagic trawls or bottom trawls depending. Discards were only reconstructed for trawls (Kleisner et al. 2015), and these were assigned to bottom or pelagic trawls based on the pelagic or demersal nature of the species. If the species was considered both, then it was split evenly among bottom trawls and pelagic trawls. The Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Fisheries Research & Development Cooperation website and reports was also used to determine gear types for certain species (Australian Fisheries Management Authority 2017; Fisheries Research & Development Corporation 2017). As these sources did not have a proportion breakdown for the different gear types for a species, it was assumed that the gear types “longline & other line-gears”, “gill-/driftnet”, and “purse seine” were evenly split. If there were trawls mentioned, the pelagic or demersal nature of the species was used to determine bottom or pelagic and was proportioned with 80% trawl and 20% other gear types. This proportion was assumed based on report mentions on the majority of catch from trawls. For any species without a gear type listed in a report or Australian Government websites, similar species from the same genus was assumed to be caught with the same gear. If the genus was unavailable, the family classification was used to determine gear types.

Azores Islands (Portugal) The Azores’ domestic fishery includes a demersal longline fishery for rockfish and other demersal fish, and a baitfish fishery supporting its tuna fisheries (Pham et al. 2013). The baitfish fishery uses encircling nets similar to purse seines and was assigned to this gear type. There has recently been the development of a bottom trawl fishery for orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) mainly operating out of ports on Portugal’s mainland (Pham et al. 2013). In addition, the semi-domestic Portuguese longline fishery operates in the Azores but lands all of their catch on the mainland (Pham et al. 2013)

Foreign fishing is quite common in the Azores. The former USSR (Russia) operated a bottom trawl fishery here, and Ireland now currently operates an orange roughy bottom trawl fishery (Pham et al. 2013).

Bahamas The Bahamas’ only industrial fishery is for Caribbean spiny lobster (Panulirus argus) and this operates with a multitude of gears (Smith and Zeller 2013). There is also some minor catch outside of their EEZ, but this is considered as small-scale gears and not addressed further here.

2 https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/argentine-anchovy-engraulis-anchoita-bonaerense-stock-semi-pelagic-mid-water-trawl-fishery/about/


14

Bahrain Bahrain operates two forms of industrial fisheries: large pelagic gillnet fisheries generally targeting Scombridae, and bottom trawl fisheries (Al-Abdulrazzak and Pauly 2013a). As large pelagics are addressed separately in Sea Around Us data (Le Manach et al. 2016), only the bottom trawl gear is assigned here.

Balearic Islands (Spain) The industrial fishing gear use in the Balearic Islands was justified by the same gear being used in Spain’s waters off its Mediterranean coast (Carreras et al. 2015; Coll et al. 2015a). Therefore, taxa assigned as bottom trawl on the mainland were assumed to be bottom trawl here, and the same for purse seining for small pelagics. Some taxa are not caught on both Spain’s mainland Mediterranean coast and in the Balearic Islands and these could not be assigned to a particular gear type at this time.

Bangladesh Bangladesh’s sole domestic industrial fishery is a bottom trawling fleet targeting demersal fish and shrimps (Ullah et al. 2014). These could not be separated into bottom trawls and shrimp trawls at this time, and so the entire industrial catch was assigned as bottom trawls.

Barbados The industrial fisheries of Barbados were separated for the reconstruction of their marine fisheries catches (Mohammed et al. 2015). Therefore, flying fishes (Exocoetidae) are indicated as having been caught by gillnets, barracudas (Sphyraenidae) by seine, and the remainder of catches were by various longline gears employed in the Barbados.

Belgium Bottom trawls have dominated Belgium’s fisheries since the introduction of steam trawlers in 1884 (Vroome 1957; FAO 2005d; Lescrauwaet et al. 2015). This gear profile has remained and only a few components could be separated out completely. Belgium continues a fishery for Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) and common shrimp (Crangon crangon) and these were separately assigned as shrimp trawls. Furthermore, European sprat (Sprattus sprattus) and Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) are targeted solely by pelagic trawls (Lescrauwaet et al. 2015). The remainder of catches could not be separated into their specific bottom trawl type (e.g., shrimp trawl) and were assigned to general bottom trawls.

Belize Belize’s sole industrial fishery was a shrimp trawl fishery (FAO 2005b; Harper et al. 2011; Zeller et al. 2011); this gear has been banned from Belize waters since 2011.3

Benin Benin’s small EEZ leaves little ground for industrial fisheries, although it is targeted by domestic and foreign vessels using shrimp trawls (Belhabib and Pauly 2015a).

Bermuda (UK) Bermuda reports purse seine tuna vessels to the IATTC (2016), and all industrial landings of this territory are related to these activities (Divovich et al. 2015d).

Bonaire (Netherlands) Bonaire has no domestic industrial fisheries of its own (Lindop et al. 2015a)

Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnia and Herzegovina have no industrial gear operating in their waters (Iritani et al. 2015).

Bouvet Island (Norway) Bouvet Island is a territory of Norway, contained within CCAMLR area 48.6 (CCAMLR 2016). The only fisheries that operate here are longline fisheries targeting Patagonian and Antarctic toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides and D. mawsoni, respectively), including an illegal component of these fisheries (Padilla et al. 2015)4.

3 http://amandala.com.bz/news/belize-totally-bans-bottom-trawling/ 4 https://www.ccamlr.org/en/compliance/illegal-unreported-and-unregulated-iuu-fishing


15

Brazil Brazil’s mainland industrial fisheries are dominated by bottom trawls for demersal fish and shrimp and purse seines for small pelagics, with a more recent industrial gillnet fishery (Freire et al. 2015). Brazil’s available gear information is only presented for landings for the fleet rather than at the species level, and often only for a subsection of their fisheries. Therefore, we assigned industrial gear types to major species, and allocated the remaining taxa to the average gear type in that year. Shrimps caught by industrial fisheries were assumed to be caught by shrimp trawls (Paula Rosso and Pezzuto 2016). Various line gear was assumed to be used for large pelagics and associated species (Bugoni et al. 2007). Purse seines have been used since at least 1950 to target and catch small pelagics industrially (Vasconcellos and Gasalla 2001). The average gear type in a given year was reconstructed for three different time periods using a variety of sources (Freire et al. 2015). This reconstructed gear breakdown was adapted excluding seine fisheries as small pelagics were already assigned, and live bait tuna fisheries addressed elsewhere (see Large Pelagics section). The remaining gear breakdown was applied for all other remaining taxa.

No industrial fisheries operate in Brazil’s offshore archipelago of Fernando de Noronha.

British Indian Ocean Territory There are no domestic industrial fisheries in the British Indian Ocean Territory, otherwise known as the Chagos Archipelago (Zeller and Pauly 2014). However, fishers from Mauritius use hand lines within the Chagos Archipelago (Boistol et al. 2011).

British Virgin Islands The British Virgin Islands have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Ramdeen et al. 2014b).

Brunei Darussalam Industrial fisheries in Brunei can be placed in two categories: purse seines and bottom trawls (Cinco et al. 2015). The purse seines are of varying sizes and target sardines, small jacks (Carangidae), tunas and other pelagic fishes. The bottom trawls target snapper, groupers, small mackerel, and supply Brunei’s ‘trash fish’. This categorization can apply to both the domestic operations, and Bruneian vessels operating in Malaysia and Vietnam.

Bulgaria Bulgaria’s fisheries were reconstructed including original gear types to assign more accurate discard rates to the fisheries of Bulgaria (Keskin et al. 2015; Keskin et al. 2017). These were thus updated to the new categories (Table 1). The only addition is a corrective adjustment of the Alosa immaculata catches, which are predominantly caught by purse seines.

Cambodia Cambodia’s fisheries are dominated by bottom trawl fisheries targeting shrimp and purse seines for small pelagics (Teh et al. 2014b). The purse seine fisheries target Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kangurta), torpedo scad (Megalaspis cordyla), and catch other mackerels and anchovies. In the early 1990s, the shrimp fisheries by-catch began to be used as inputs for a fertilizer plant and this fishery became less selective for shrimp and became focused on supplying general fish biomass for fertilizer production. This trend in decreased selectivity is common in Asian trawl fisheries and is called “biomass fishing”.

Cameroon Cameroon operates a demersal fish trawl fishery and a shrimp trawl fishery (Belhabib and Pauly 2015d). These were previously assigned and characterized in the original reconstruction and were updated to the gear types described in Table 1. Foreign fleets operating in Cameroon’s waters include China’s bottom trawls (Pauly et al. 2014), and the former USSR’s pelagic trawl fisheries (Belhabib and Pauly 2015d).

Canada Canada’s marine fisheries occur in all three of their adjacent oceans, but each area is distinct (Booth and Watts 2007; Ainsworth 2015; Divovich et al. 2015a). Canada’s Pacific marine fisheries have gear information available for major species from 1996 to present.5 These data were compiled and organized to match our catch data for

5 http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/comm/summ-somm/index-eng.html


16

Canada’s Pacific marine fisheries (Ainsworth 2015). The gear breakdown by species for 1996 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data: set nets, bottom otter trawl, midwater trawl, longline, salmon troll, purse seine, drift net, gill net, and traps. As Canada’s East Coast EEZ is fully contained within the NAFO convention area, the marine fisheries operating here are addressed in the NAFO section. No industrial gears operate in Canada’s arctic waters (FAO Area 18; Booth and Watts 2007; Teh et al. 2015b).

Canary Islands (Spain) The Canary Islands have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Castro et al. 2015).

Cape Verde Cape Verde’s industrial fisheries employ lines, purse seines for small pelagics, and traps (Santos et al. 2012). There are two components of its hand line fishery: the first using encircling nets (e.g., small purse seines) for baitfish and the hand line fishery targeting a diverse array of species. In addition, Cape Verde also has a trap fishery targeting spiny lobsters (Panulirus spp.).

Cayman Islands (UK) The Cayman Islands have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Harper et al. 2009a).

Chile Chile’s industrial fisheries are dominated by small pelagics, but also have a large portion from bottom trawls (van der Meer et al. 2015). Chile’s mainland EEZ only uses purse seines for Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi), chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus), anchoveta (Engraulis ringens), sardine (Sardinops sagax), and Araucanian herring (Clupea bentincki). Chile’s fisheries in the Austral zone are freezer vessels for semi-pelagic fish, and thus are likely pelagic trawls. Chile’s fisheries for squat lobsters (Pleuroncodes monodon, Cervimunida johni), Patagonian toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides), and other demersal taxa (Anguilliformes and Pleuronectiformes) are solely undertaken with bottom trawls (van der Meer et al. 2015).

The only industrial fishery to operate in the Juan Fernandez islands is a pelagic trawl fishery for Chilean jack mackerel (Zylich and van der Meer 2015). No industrial fisheries operate in the waters of the Desventuradas Islands (unpublished data from van der Meer et al. (forthcoming), Zylich and van der Meer 2015).

China China’s fisheries statistics suffer from chronic misreporting leading to over-reporting of domestic catches (Watson et al. 2001; Pauly and Le Manach 2015), and under-reporting of catches by its distant water fleets (Pauly et al. 2014). China’s fisheries statistics that include gear are available from 1978 to present, but are not disaggregated by species (China Fishery Statistical Yearbook, as kindly compiled by Dr. Ciu Liang, Xiamen University, pers. comm.).

Therefore, to make a reasonable estimate of China’s fishing gear by taxa, we took the Chinese fisheries landings data by gear, and removed the non-industrial gears (‘static fishing’ and ‘others’). We then applied the remaining gear types to the taxa by functional group. Functional groups only caught by that single industrial gear type were assigned solely to that gear type. Therefore, small and medium bathydemersals, small and medium benthodemersals, cephalopods, shrimps, lobsters, jellyfish, and other demersal invertebrates were assumed to be caught solely with trawls. In addition, large sharks were assumed to be only caught by line gear. The amount of China’s catch that originated from these functional groups that were mono-specific in their gear, were removed from the total. Then the gear proportions for the remainder were re-calculated for functional groups that could be caught by multiple gear types.

Christmas & Cocos Island (Australia) The only industrial fishery off of Christmas Island is a line fishery (Greer et al. 2012). Cocos Island has similar species caught as off Christmas Island, but information is not publicly accessible due to privacy concerns (Greer et al. 2012). Therefore, the industrial fishery operating in the waters of Cocos Island was assigned as line gear as well.


17

Clipperton Island (France) Clipperton Island, being uninhabited, has no domestic fishery, and the catch made in its EEZ is entirely made by foreign fleets and industrial gear, mainly targeting tuna and associated species, notably shark (Pauly 2009).

Colombia Colombia’s shrimp trawl fisheries are a major part of their catch and include all reconstructed unreported catch for Colombia in both their Pacific and Caribbean waters (Lindop et al. 2015b). In addition, they have a purse seine fishery in their Pacific waters for several small pelagics and this was assumed to include Pacific anchoveta (Cetengraulis mysticetus), Pacific thread herring (Opisthonema libertate), and other herring (Clupeidae).

China fishes inside Colombia’s Pacific waters with longline gear, likely as part of their tuna fisheries operations in this region (Pauly et al. 2014; IATTC 2016).

Comoros Island Comoros Island has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Doherty et al. 2015c).

Congo, Democratic Republic of (aka ex-Zaire) The Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) industrial fisheries are solely shrimp trawls. Thus, all of their industrial catches were assigned to the shrimp trawl gear.

China operates a tuna fishery and a bottom trawl fishery within the DRC EEZ (Pauly et al. 2014). As tuna fisheries and their associated catches (including by-catch and discards) are addressed separately in the Sea Around Us database, the bottom trawl fisheries were the industrial fisheries that were assigned at this layer. The Republic of Congo operates shrimp trawls within the DRC’s EEZ.

Congo, Republic of The Republic of Congo has a diversity of gears used by its industrial sector that were used to reconstruct its marine fisheries catches (Belhabib et al. 2015c). In line with the reconstruction, shrimp trawls, demersal fish trawls, and purse seines were assigned to their respective gear types in Table 1. In addition, pirogues of the DRC were assigned as small-scale due to their artisanal nature. In addition to domestic industrial fisheries, China and Côte d’Ivoire operate in Congo’s EEZ with bottom trawls and purse seines, respectively (Pauly et al. 2014; Belhabib and Pauly 2015b).

Cook Islands The only industrial fishery operating within the Cook Islands’ EEZ is a tuna longline fishery (Haas et al. 2012). The Cook Islands formerly employed trolling vessels (Gillett 2009), but these were grouped under the gear type of longlines.

Corsica (France) France’s only industrial fishery that operates in Corsica relies on bottom trawls (Le Manach et al. 2011; Le Manach and Pauly 2015b).

Costa Rica Costa Rica has industrial fisheries operating in both its Pacific and Caribbean waters (Trujillo et al. 2015). A large part of this the shrimp trawl fishery, which only operates within its Pacific waters, whereas its purse seine fishery for clupeids operates on both coasts. In addition, Costa Rica has a longline fishery for tunas and sharks (Trujillo et al. 2015; IATTC 2016). The Cayman Islands has a small-scale fishery operating with Costa Rican waters and this was assigned as ‘small-scale gears’.

Côte d’Ivoire Côte d’Ivoire’s marine fisheries are centered around small pelagic purse seines and bottom trawls for fish (Belhabib and Pauly 2015b). These were employed in the reconstruction and updated to reflect the categories in Table 1. In addition, these waters are fished by many countries. China operates both a longline fishery for tuna and sharks here, as well as a bottom trawl fishery (Pauly et al. 2014). In addition, Israel, Montenegro, Canada, the European Union, Denmark, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Portugal, Taiwan, USA, and Senegal operate tuna purse seines within their waters (Belhabib and Pauly 2015b).


18

Croatia Croatia’s bottom trawl fisheries target European hake (Merluccius merluccius), Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), soles (Soleidae), horn and musky octopuses (Eledone spp.), and mullets (Mullus barbatus and M. surmuletus) and grey mullet (Family Mugilidae). In addition, Croatia’s reconstructed marine fisheries catches include discards from their bottom trawl fisheries (Matić-Skoko et al. 2014). Conversely, Croatia’s purse seine fisheries target garfish (Belone belone), saddled seabream (Oblada melanura), and silversides (Atherinidae). The catches for Montenegro and Croatia were reconstructed using similar methods based on their shared history (Keskin et al. 2014; Matić-Skoko et al. 2014), although there are some differences between them.

Crozet Island (France) The industrial fisheries in Crozet Island’s waters are contained within CCAMLR Area 58.6. Japan had a bottom trawl fishery from 1976-1979 as part of experimental fishing in the area (Pruvost et al. 2015a). France operated a bottom trawl fishery before 1997 and then again for a season in the year 2000. This was then replaced by seven longlining vessels currently targeting toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides; Pruvost et al. 2015a). In 2000, both longliners and bottom trawlers fished in the Crozet Island waters; their catches could not be split by gear at this time and were assigned as ‘mixed gear’.

Cuba The only industrial fishery operating within Cuba’s waters is their own shrimp trawl fishery, and its associated by-catch and discards (Baisre 2000a; Au et al. 2014).

Curaçao (Netherlands) Curaçao operates longline gear targeting large pelagics in this area and outside of its EEZ (Lindop et al. 2015a).

Cyprus (North) North Cyprus had only briefly an industrial vessel operating within its waters (Ulman et al. 2013b). Bottom trawling was banned in the 2000s, although there was a brief period in the 1990s when it was the only industrial gear. After this time, only purse seines operated industrially.

Cyprus (South) Cyprus has an industrial longline fishery targeting Atlantic bonito (Sarda sarda) and frigate and bullet tunas (Auxis spp.) with by-catch of sunfish (Mola mola), thresher sharks (Alopias spp.), and whiptail stingrays (Dasyatidae; Ulman et al. 2013b). Bottom trawls make the remainder and great majority of the catch, except for a small section of the fleet, which operates with a diversity of gears. As these target the same species, the assumption made was to split all catches along the proportion of each gear with 94.65% assigned to bottom trawl, and 5.35% assigned to mixed gears of the inshore industrial polyvalent fleet (FAO 2005e; European Union 2007).

Denmark Denmark publishes fishing gear data in its Yearbook of Fishery Statistics. Landings data were thus available by species and gear from 1999 to 2014. These data were compiled and organized to match our catch data for Denmark (Bale et al. 2010; Gibson et al. 2014). Gear data of an average of the period of 1999-2001 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data: trawls (of varying sizes), purse seines, mixed gear, and unknown. Denmark’s statistics do not separate trawls by bottom or pelagic types, but they do by size. Based on other sources, ‘trawls’ were assumed to be pelagic trawls for Atlantic mackerel, blue whiting, Atlantic herring, European sprat, capelin, and greater argentine whereas the remainder of trawl catches were assumed to be from bottom trawls (Bale et al. 2010; Lassen 2011; FAO 2013; Semrau and Ortega Gras 2013; Gibson et al. 2014).

Djibouti Djibouti does not have their own domestic industrial fishery operating in their waters (Colléter et al. 2015). Somali and Yemeni small-scale fishers enter Djibouti’s waters to fish, and this was assigned to ‘small-scale gears’ (Colléter et al. 2015).

Dominica No industrial fisheries operate within the EEZ of Dominica (Ramdeen et al. 2014a).


19

Dominican Republic The Dominican Republic’s industrial fishery employs hand lines and longlines mainly targeting snapper (Lutjanidae; van der Meer et al. 2014). These catches were thus assigned to the group ‘lines’.

Easter Island (Chile) Chile’s fisheries in Easter Island are small-scale fisheries with hand lines and nets. The fishers that operate offshore are mainly hand lines and so the industrial catch here was assigned to hand lines (Zylich et al. 2014a).

China, Japan, Latvia, and Spain are reported to fish in Chile’s waters with pelagic trawls for Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) and longlines for tuna-like fishes (Scombridae; Zylich et al. 2014a).

Ecuador Ecuador operates a diversity of gears within their EEZ waters. The reconstruction took into account the shrimp trawl fishery and its associated by-catch and discards (FAO 2011; Alava et al. 2015). In addition, Ecuador purchased fishing vessels from Peru during the crash of the anchoveta fishery in the 1970s, and these purse seiners continued to target small pelagics including Pacific anchoveta (Cetengraulis mysticetus; Alava et al. 2015; FAO 2017a). Also, Ecuador’s shark fisheries were assumed to be longlines in line with its reported gear usage for shark taxa to the IATTC (2016).

Egypt Egypt’s has coastlines both along the Red Sea and the Mediterranean and its catches were thus reconstructed separately (Tesfamichael and Mehanna 2012; Mahmoud et al. 2015). Egypt’s Red sea fisheries include shrimp trawls targeting Penaeid shrimps (Penaeidae), but also catching taxa such as threadfin breams (Nemipteridae), snappers (Lutjanidae), and cuttlefish (Sepiidae). The other major fishery is the small pelagic purse seine fishery for red-eye round herring (Etrumeus sadina) and Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta), and catching other mackerels (Scomber japonicus) and ‘sardines’ (Sardinella spp.).

Egypt’s Mediterranean fisheries include bottom trawl and purse seiners. The bottom trawls targeted shrimp and demersal fish, but these could not be separated into distinct gear types at this time. The purse seines targeted European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), sardines (Sardinella spp.), and Mediterranean horse mackerel (Trachurus mediterraneus; Mahmoud et al. 2015). The purse seine fishery has unreported landings of their target species, but discards were only estimated for the bottom trawl sector (Mahmoud et al. 2015).

El Salvador El Salvador’s industrial fisheries are mainly based around trawl fisheries. They have a longstanding shrimp trawl fishery, with by-catch used for fishmeal and landed by artisanal fishers as ‘morallas’ (Donadi et al. 2015). In addition, a deeper bottom trawl fishery operates for pelagic red crab (Pleuroncodes planipes). Also, a shark fishery started in the 2000s that employs longlines (Donadi et al. 2015).

Equatorial Guinea The domestic fisheries of Equatorial Guinea were reconstructed based on anchor points of the number of vessels operating in the industrial sector (Belhabib et al. 2015a; Belhabib et al. 2016). The taxonomic breakdown applied to the estimated catches is based on catches related to bottom trawl fisheries, and thus Equatorial Guinea’s domestic industrial catches are assigned to bottom trawls.

The foreign fisheries operating in Equatorial Guinea’s EEZ are from China, Nigeria, and the former-USSR. China’s vessels operating here are tuna longlines, addressed separately (see Large Pelagics), and bottom trawls (Pauly et al. 2014). Therefore, the catches assigned here for China were assigned to bottom trawls. Nigeria’s fisheries here are a mix of bottom trawls and purse seines. The former-USSR fisheries were reconstructed based on their fishing practices in Cameroon and these were all pelagic trawls. Thus, all catches of countries previously part of the USSR operating here was assigned as pelagic trawls. All other foreign fisheries operating in Equatorial Guinea were reconstructed as bottom trawl fisheries, and this was used to assign their gear type.

Eritrea Eritrea’s domestic fisheries were reconstructed around two central gears (Tesfamichael and Mohamud 2012). Eritrea operates a shrimp trawl fishery and a longline fishery targeting sharks as part of a joint venture with


20

Australia (Tesfamichael and Mohamud 2012). In addition, Israel and Egypt operate bottom trawls in Eritrean waters (Tesfamichael and Mohamud 2012).

Estonia Estonia’s marine fisheries are dominated by trawls targeting both pelagic and bottom trawl species (FAO 2005f; Veitch et al. 2010). The pelagic trawl fishery targets herring (Clupea harengus) and sprat (Sprattus sprattus; Raid et al. 2010), while the bottom trawl fishery targets Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) and flatfishes.

Faeroe Islands (Denmark) The Faeroe Islands fishing gear was assumed to be the same as Denmark based on their shared history, and because the ‘domestic’ fisheries of the Faeroe Islands were for a long time truly Danish vessels fishing there. For details on Denmark’s gear assignment, see the Denmark section.

Falkland Islands (UK) The Falkland Islands publishes fishing gear data in their annual fisheries yearbooks for all countries fishing in the Falkland Islands (Falkland Islands Government Fisheries Department 2005, 2015). Landings data were thus available by species and gear from 1995 to 2014. These data were compiled and organized to match our catch data for all countries fishing in Falkland waters (Palomares and Pauly 2015). To complete the time series, the annual data from 1995 were carried backward to 1970, when industrial fishing began in the Falkland Islands. The catch data were then disaggregated into the gear types in the yearbooks, i.e., bottom trawls, squid jigs mixed gears, and pots.

Fiji Fiji has no domestic industrial fisheries of its own except tuna fisheries based on the islands. Tuvalu’s foreign fishers operating here are subsistence fishers and were thus designated as small-scale gears (Crawford et al. 2011).

Finland Finland publishes fishing gear data online (Official Statistics of Finland 2017). Landings data were thus available by species and gear from 1980-2014. These data were organized to match our catch data for Finland fishing in the Baltic Sea (Rossing et al. 2010a). The average of 1980-1982 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided, i.e., trap nets, gillnets, longlines, trawls, and other, unknown or hidden gear. The gear type ‘trawls’ was interpreted to mean pelagic trawls as Finland’s main catches by trawls are European sprat and Atlantic herring and there is very little catch of demersal taxa; this inference is supported by other sources (FAO 2005g; Rossing et al. 2010a; Lassen 2011).

France France’s fisheries within its marine waters were reconstructed according to gear type (Bultel et al. 2015b; Bultel et al. 2015c). Gears that were originally assigned were updated to the gear types in Table 1. This required assigning fyke nets to ‘pots or traps’, nets to ‘gillnets’, seines to ‘purse seines’, and to separate the ‘trawl’ sector into pelagic and bottom trawl components. Shads (Alosa spp.), round sardinella (Sardinella aurita), European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), European pilchard (Sardina pilchardus), European sprat (Sprattus sprattus) caught by trawls were assigned to pelagic trawls, while the remainder of the taxa caught by ‘trawls’ was assigned to bottom trawls.

French Guiana French Guiana’s domestic fisheries are all small-scale in nature. However, the foreign fleets of the USA, Japan, and France have operated shrimp trawl fisheries (Harper et al. 2015). In addition, Venezuela operates a fishery here with various types of line gear for snapper (Lutjanidae), and these were assigned to the larger group ‘lines’ (Harper et al. 2015).

French Polynesia French Polynesia’s industrial fishery is a tuna longline fishery operating in its EEZ (Misselis 2002; Bale et al. 2009).


21

Gabon Gabon’s domestic fleet is entirely made up of bottom trawls, although many of these are associated with a flag of convenience operation (Belhabib 2015b). Apart from tuna fisheries operating in Gabon’s waters, the majority of countries are operating bottom trawls. In addition, there is a great number of countries operating in Gabon’s water due to the presence of many flag of convenience fishing vessels (Belhabib 2015b). For example, the Republic of Congo operates shrimp trawls and demersal fish trawls in Gabon, and some of these vessels are Chinese vessels operating under Congo’s flag (Belhabib 2015b). Therefore, non-tuna fisheries were all assigned as bottom trawl as the landings that were reconstructed for them are based on bottom trawl fisheries catch profiles (Belhabib 2015b).

Galapagos Islands (Ecuador) Tuna fisheries operate near the Galapagos Islands using both purse seine and longline gear, and longlines are used to target sharks as well (Schiller et al. 2013; Schiller et al. 2015). As the large pelagics fishery is addressed separately by the Sea Around Us, the remaining catches were assigned to the longline fishery targeting sharks.

Gambia Gambia’s domestic industrial fleet is composed of bottom trawlers and purse seiners. Due to a lack of other information, the main small pelagic species were assumed to originate from the purse seine fleet, with the remainder being assigned to bottom trawls. The main small pelagic species identified are sardinellas (Sardinella aurita, S. maderensis, and other Sardinella spp.) and bonga shad (Ethmalosa fimbriata).

The foreign fleet segments were reconstructed in three sections. The first being Japan targeting tuna species and this was addressed elsewhere (see Large Pelagics). The second is Norway, Bermuda (i.e., a FoC), and South Africa who use purse seines for small pelagics in Gambia’s waters. Finally, the remainder of foreign countries use bottom trawlers and their catches were reconstructed to reflect this (Belhabib et al. 2014b).

Gaza Strip The Gaza Strip has domestic industrial fisheries of bottom trawls and purse seines operating in its waters. Bottom trawls only began to be used in 1970, and targeted a new group of taxa formerly not targeted by the purse seines operating theretofore. The bottom trawls caught diverse taxa including: barracudas (Sphyraena spp.), Bogue (Boops boops), grey mullets (Mugil spp.), common squid (Loligo vulgaris), devil fish (Mobula mobular), sargo breams (Dentex spp.), groupers (Epinephelus spp.), surmullets (Mullus surmuletus), and smooth-hounds (Mustelus mustelus). The purse seine fisheries caught various taxa including many jack mackerels (Trachinotus ovatus, Trachurus mediterraneus, and T. trachurus), sardinellas (Sardinella aurita), and various mackerels (Scomberomorus commerson, Scomber scombrus, and other Scombroidea).

Georgia Georgia’s main industrial fisheries are for sprat (Sprattus sprattus), anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), and demersal taxa. Georgia operates a dredge fishery for Rapana whelk (Rapana venosa) and its discards were assigned to dredging gear. Georgia’s sprat fishery, which also caught Atlantic herring, was a pelagic trawl fishery for most of the period except from 1976 to 1992 when bottom trawl gear was used. This change in gear use was likely to be consistent across former-USSR countries on the Black Sea and thus was applied here for Georgia (see Ukraine section; Ulman et al. 2015b).

Foreign fleets operate bottom trawl fisheries in Georgia’s waters including Russia, Ukraine, and Turkey (Ulman and Divovich 2015). Russia also operates a sprat fishery in Georgia’s water using both bottom and pelagic trawls, and this was split evenly based on Russia’s gear use in their own Black Sea waters (Divovich et al. 2015c). Turkey also fishes in Georgian waters for small pelagics using purse seines.

Germany Germany’s industrial fisheries cover the Baltic and the North Sea and are dominated by bottom trawling, although they do catch common pelagic species in this area (Rossing et al. 2010b; Gibson et al. 2015b). Germany’s industrial fisheries for small pelagics use pelagic trawls and this was applied for European sprat, Atlantic mackerel, Atlantic horse mackerel, blue whiting, and Atlantic herring (Wolff et al. 2014). All catches of common shrimp are caught by beam trawls by Germany (FAO 2007b). Sole, saithe, plaice, and other flatfishes are caught by various bottom trawls (FAO 2007b). Germany’s reported catch of redfishes (Sebastes spp. and Sebastes mentella) in Iceland’s waters are with bottom trawls (Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture


22

2012), and this was assumed to be the same in its own EEZ waters. Sandeels (Ammodytes spp.) are caught by bottom trawls by Germany (Wolff et al. 2014). The remainder of Germany’s landings are likely non-targeted catch from its bottom trawl fisheries and was assigned as such. Germany’s discards of beam trawls, bottom trawls, and otter trawls were reconstructed based on their gear use (Rossing et al. 2010b; Gibson et al. 2015b), and fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1.

Ghana Ghana’s fishing gears were reconstructed for a more accurate estimate of their total fisheries catches (Nunoo et al. 2014). Therefore, pair trawlers, pole and line, and purse seine catches were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1. The remainder of the catch came from Ghana’s bottom trawl fisheries.

Côte d’Ivoire’s fisheries operating in Ghana’s waters include their purse seines and bottom trawls (Belhabib and Pauly 2015b). China also fishes here and was assigned as bottom trawls as the only other Chinese fisheries operating here were tuna longliners (Pauly et al. 2014). Togo fishing in Ghana is believed to be a Flag of Convenience for Spain operating bottom trawls (Nunoo et al. 2014).

Glorieuse Islands (France) Mayotte has a semi-industrial hand line fishery operating in the Glorieuse islands, but also has small-scale fishers in the barque fishery (Doherty et al. 2015d). Madagascar has a sea cucumber (Holothuroidea) fishery operating in the Glorieuse islands as well, and sometimes these small vessels target sharks and small tunas. These catches were all assigned as small-scale due to their artisanal nature (Le Manach and Pauly 2015a).

Greece Greek marine fisheries use a high diversity of gears within its EEZ that span from the Aegean Sea to the Ionian Sea and most of their vessels are polyvalent. Greece’s fishing gear was reconstructed to better estimate its fleets unreported catch (Moutopoulos et al. 2015), and fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1. Thus, catch data were disaggregated to the gear types provided as follows: (a) trawlers (Otter trawls); (b) purse seiners (encircling nets); (c) beach seiners operating along the coasts; and (d) “other coastal boats” (including trammel and gill netters, drifters, long-liners, traps, etc.) operating along the coasts. Categories (a) and (b) represent the industrial sector, whereas (c) and (d) have been taken as a single pooled group of ‘small-scale gears’ of the Greek fisheries. Discards have been estimated for all the above mentioned categories (Moutopoulos et al. 2015). In addition, it is worthy to point out that in the category of “other coastal boats” both the reported reconstructed landings from the professional small-scale fishery as well as the unreported reconstructed landings from the vessel-based and shore-based recreational and subsistence fisheries were included (Moutopoulos et al. 2015).

By gear analyses of fisheries catches were made separately depending on the area (i.e. Aegean-GFCM 22, Ionian-GFCM 20 and Cretan-GFCM 23 Seas). In all the above areas, small-scale gears (both for reported and unreported catches) contributed more than the half of the total Greek fishery catches during 1950-2010; Aegean: 53.0, Ionian: 62.9%, and Cretan 63.1%. For the remaining gears, during 1950-2010, purse-seines represented most of the reported catches in Aegean Sea (23.5%) followed to a lesser extent by trawls (17.4%), whereas in Cretan and Ionian Seas trawls highly contributed to the total reported catches (22.6% and 18.1%, respectively), followed to a lesser extent by purse seines (10.0% and 11.7%, respectively).

With respect to the analyses of the species composition by gear and area, in Aegean Sea trawl reported catches were mostly represented by Trachurus mediterraneus (12.0%), Merluccius merluccius (7.5%), and Mullus barbatus (6.0%), and Spicara smaris (5.7%) during 1950-2010. In contrast, in the Ionian Sea trawls mostly caught Spicara smaris (12.1%), Spicara flexuosa (10.6%), and M. merluccius (8.3%), whereas in Cretan Sea trawls mostly caught S. smaris (22.0%) and T. mediterraneus (12.3%), Boops boops (9.9%), and Natantia (9.4%).

For purse seines in Aegean Sea and Ionian Sea Engarulis encrasicolus (29.7% and 24.7%, respectively) and Sardina pilchardus (29.3% and 37.0%, respectively) mostly contributed to the total catches, whereas in Cretan Sea B. boops (27.1%) and T. mediterraneus (21.3%) mostly represented to the total purse seine catches.


23

For beach seines in Aegean Sea and Ionian Sea S. smaris (46.7% and 51.0%, respectively) and S. pilchardus (10.9% and 13.9%, respectively) mostly contributed to the total catches, whereas in Cretan Sea S. smaris (49.0%) and B. boops (15.2%) mostly represented to the total beach seine catches.

For small-scale reported and unreported catches in Aegean Sea Mugilidae and S. pilchardus (6.7% and 6.6%, respectively) mostly contributed to the total catches, whereas in Ionian Sea Diplodus sargus and Xiphias gladius (7.2% and 6.8%, respectively) highly contributed to the total catches. In Cretan Sea, Dentex macrophthalmus (13.0%), and Polyprion americanus (7.7%) mostly contributed to the total small-scale catches.

Greenland Greenland was a prominent cod fishing ground of the North Atlantic with the eastern portion monitored by ICES, and the western portion monitored by NAFO. As the truly domestic fisheries were mainly small-scale, the large-scale fisheries are very similar to the Danish fleet due to their being part of the Danish Kingdom. Therefore, the gear breakdown of Denmark was applied to Greenland’s catches (see Denmark section).

Grenada Grenada’s fishing gear was reconstructed to better estimate its fleets unreported catch (Mohammed and Lindop 2015a), and fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1. Grenada catches flyingfish (Exocoetidae) and southern sennet (Sphyraena picudilla) with gillnets, large pelagics including common dolphinfish and sharks with longlines, and mackerels and tunas with purse seines (Scomberomorus cavalla, S. maculatus, Acanthocybium solandri, and other Scombridae).

Guadeloupe (France) Guadeloupe has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Frotté et al. 2009a).

Guam (USA) Guam has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Zeller et al. 2007a).

Guatemala Guatemala’s industrial fisheries are centered on three components: shrimp trawling, longlining for sharks (Alopias pelagicus, Carcharinus falciformis, Sphyrna lewini), dolphinfish (Coryphaena hippurus), snappers (Lutjanus guttatus, and other Lutjanus spp., and Lutjanidae) and groupers (Epinephelus analogus and Epinephelus itajara), and purse seines for tunas and associated species (see Tuna Section; Lindop et al. 2015c). The shrimp trawl fishery and its associated by-catch and discards were assigned as shrimp trawls. The other industrial portion of the catch that was not tunas, was assigned as longlines (Lindop et al. 2015c).

Guinea Guinea’s domestic industrial fisheries are solely bottom trawls (Belhabib et al. 2012a). However, they operate purse seine tuna fisheries that lands “faux poissons”, which are treated in the ‘Large Pelagics’ section.

Malta operates a bottom trawl fishery in Guinea’s waters. Côte d’Ivoire’s fisheries operating here include their purse seines and bottom trawls (Belhabib and Pauly 2015b). China, Liberia, and Ghana have demersal fish trawls operating here, and China has cephalopod trawlers fishing as well. Senegal has long-distance pirogues operating here that are considered small-scale. However, they are also used as a FoC appearing to operate bottom trawls (Belhabib et al. 2012a). Former USSR countries operated bottom trawls squids, flatfishes, and hakes, but also pelagic trawls for small pelagics. The other major gears used by foreign fisheries are small pelagic purse seines, tuna longline, and purse seine fisheries (addressed in Large Pelagics), and bottom trawls for shrimp, cephalopods, and demersal fish (Belhabib et al. 2012a). Thus, based on their catches, Germany, Spain, and Panama’s small pelagics (chub mackerel and horse mackerels) were assigned as purse seine. Spain and Panama’s other catches were mainly cephalopods and shrimp and assigned as bottom trawls. Greece, Portugal, South Korea, Japan, and Italy’s landings are all dominated by demersal fish, cephalopods and shrimp and so were assigned as bottom trawls.

Guinea-Bissau Guinea-Bissau has no domestic industrial fisheries in their EEZ (Belhabib and Pauly 2015c).


24

Mauritania’s other foreign fishing is solely with bottom trawls (Belhabib et al. 2012b), and this was assumed to apply here. Senegal has long-distance pirogues operating here that are considered small-scale (Belhabib et al. 2013).

European and South Korean fisheries are noted as almost entirely demersal (Belhabib and Pauly 2015c), and thus a simple assumption of assigning these to bottom trawls was applied. Japan, other African countries, and most FoC fishing vessels were split taxonomically based on the average fleet operating in that year (Belhabib and Pauly 2015c). Therefore, these catches could not be split by gear and this was assigned to mixed gear until further improvements can be done.

China operates bottom trawls, small pelagic purse seines, and tuna longlines in Guinea-Bissau’s waters (Pauly et al. 2014). The catches were thus disaggregated along taxonomic lines with European anchovy, European pilchard, sardinellas, jack and horse mackerels, and chub mackerel assigned as purse seine, and the remainder assigned as bottom trawl. Longlines are addressed in the Large Pelagics. Some other FoC Countries were reconstructed solely for bottom trawls and these were assigned as bottom trawl.

Guyana Guyana’s domestic industrial fisheries are composed of shrimp trawling and tuna fisheries. The tuna fisheries use gillnet gear but this is addressed in the Large Pelagics. The remainder of catches are the target, by-catch, and discards of the shrimp trawling fishery (MacDonald et al. 2015). In addition, Japan and the USA both operate shrimp trawl fisheries in Guyana’s waters (MacDonald et al. 2015).

Haiti Haiti has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Ramdeen et al. 2012a).

Heard & McDonald Islands (Australia) The fisheries of the Heard and McDonald Islands were reconstructed with Australia’s marine fisheries (Kleisner et al. 2015), and the gear was reconstructed following Australia’s methods (see Australia section).

Honduras Honduras main industrial fishery in its Caribbean waters is a shrimp trawl, although substantial catches come from other gears used catching lobsters, conches, decapods, and molluscs (Funes et al. 2015). While the majority of these are likely small-scale methods or traps, these could not be separated out at this time. The Cayman Islands operates a small-scale fishery for sharks in Honduras waters (Harper et al. 2009a).

No industrial fishing occurs in Honduras Pacific waters (Funes et al. 2015).

Hong Kong Hong Kong’s industrial marine fisheries follow a similar pattern of development as mainland China. Based on the similar taxa being caught and targeted as the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong’s gear breakdown was assigned based on China’s gear information (see China Section).

Howland and Baker Islands (USA) Howland and Baker Islands have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Zeller et al. 2007b; Zeller et al. 2015).

Iceland Iceland publishes fishing gear data online and can be accessed through Statistics Iceland. Landings data were thus available by species and gear from 1982-2014. These data were compiled and organized to match our catch data for Iceland (Valtýsson 2014). The average gear use by species of 1982-1984 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data: pelagic trawl, purse seine, Danish seine, Nephrops trawl, shrimp trawl, bottom trawl, bottom longline, handline, scallop dredge, shellfish dredge, bottom gillnet, and others.

India & the Andaman and Nicobar Islands India’s industrial fisheries include tuna longlines (see Large Pelagics), shrimp trawling, gillnets, and purse seines (Hornby et al. 2015b). Many taxa included in the reconstructed component of the catch are only caught by shrimp trawls, and these were assigned to this gear. Gillnets are used for a wide diversity of taxa caught in India,


25

and are likely the only gear used to catch taxa not caught by shrimp trawls (shrimps) or small pelagics. Small pelagics make up a large part of India’s catches and are caught by purse seines and gillnets. However, there is currently a lack of information to be able to split these catches into these two categories, and they were thus assigned as mixed gear. China and Taiwan both operate tuna longlines and shrimp trawls in India’s waters. As tuna are address separately (see Large Pelagics), all catches here were assigned to shrimp trawls (Hornby et al. 2015b).

There are no domestic industrial fisheries that operate off the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Hornby et al. 2015a).

Indonesia Indonesia’s marine fishing gear was used to improve estimation of their total catch (Budimartono et al. 2015a; Budimartono et al. 2015b). Some gear information was missing and these were updated based on the previously reconstructed gear. Therefore, many demersal species are only caught by bottom trawls by the industrial sector including shrimps, marine crustaceans, granular ark, and cuttlefishes. Purse seines became the dominant gear type used after the series of ineffective bottom trawl bans beginning in 1980 (Budimartono et al. 2015a). Longlines are frequently used for tuna and other large pelagics including sharks inside and outside the Indonesian EEZ.

Iran Shrimp trawls dominate Iran’s domestic industrial fisheries (Moniri et al. 2013). However, Iran experimented with pelagic trawling for lanternfishes (Myctophidae) as a potential source of fishmeal (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture 1996; FAO 2005c). In addition to Iran’s domestic fisheries, many countries target shrimp with bottom trawls in Iran’s EEZ. These include South Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Pakistan.

Iraq Iraq has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Al-Abdulrazzak and Pauly 2013b).

Ireland Ireland’s marine fisheries share many characteristics with that of the UK due to their shared history and their close proximity (Miller and Zeller 2013; Gibson et al. 2015a). As no detailed national data were available for Ireland, Scotland’s detailed landings of species by gear type were applied to Ireland’s marine catches within its domestic waters (see United Kingdom section).

Israel Israel’s sole domestic industrial fishery is bottom trawling in the Mediterranean (Edelist et al. 2013). Israel has no domestic industrial fishing occurring in its Red Sea waters, but used bottom trawls in Eritrea’s EEZ (Tesfamichael et al. 2012a) (Tesfamichael and Mohamud 2012).

Italy Italy’s marine fisheries use a high diversity of gears and most of their vessels are polyvalent. However, the landings data were available for the original reconstruction (Piroddi et al. 2014). In addition, gear use for Italy is very region specific and the differences in gear use was used to estimate discards at the regional level (Piroddi et al. 2014). The landings by gear by species for all of Italy was used as a baseline of gear use, and then modified to gears used in that region, and during that time period. Midwater trawls were only used in the Adriatic and Sicilian waters, and dredges were only used in Adriatic, and the Central and South Tyrrhenian Seas (Piroddi et al. 2014). Dredges were only introduced in 1970 (Piroddi et al. 2014), and thus dredges were not used in the gear breakdowns for 1950-1969. Using these combinations, gear use in Italy’s waters was reflective of the region of fishing at a sub-national level, and varied through time based on gear presence.

Jamaica Jamaica has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Lingard et al. 2012a).

Jan Mayen Island (Norway) Norway’s fisheries here are reported with their national fisheries information and are thus assigned gear based on Norway’s mainland EEZ (see Norway section).


26

Japan Japan publishes fishing gear data online (Fisheries; 2016). Landings data were thus available by species group and main gears for 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2007-2013. These data were organized to match our catch data for Japan fishing in the their main island EEZ (Swartz and Ishimura 2014). The gear use of 1990 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided, i.e., large trawls, offshore trawl, small trawl, boat seine, encircling nets, gillnets, pole and line, longline, and squid anglings. The gear type ‘trawls’ was interpreted to mean bottom trawls as Japan’s main catches by trawls are cods and groundfishes. Japan has no industrial fishing occurring in its Daito or Ogasawara Islands (Swartz 2015).

Jarvis Island (USA) Jarvis Island has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Zeller et al. 2007b; Zeller et al. 2015).

Johnston Atoll (USA) Johnston Atoll has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Zeller et al. 2007b; Zeller et al. 2015).

Jordan Jordan has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Tesfamichael et al. 2012a)

Juan Fernandez Islands (Chile) The Juan Fernandez Islands are home to mainly small-scale fisheries. However, a midwater trawling fishery for Chilean jack mackerel operates from the mainland and fishes here (unpublished data from van der Meer et al. (forthcoming), Zylich and van der Meer 2015). This is the only industrial fishery here, and thus all industrial fishing was assigned as pelagic trawls.

Kenya Kenya operates industrial shrimp trawl fisheries and tuna longline fisheries (Kenya Maritime Authority 2015; Le Manach et al. 2015a). As tuna longline fisheries are addressed separately (see Large Pelagics), all domestic industrial catch was assigned as shrimp trawls (Le Manach et al. 2015a).

Kerguelen Islands (France) The marine resources around the Kerguelen Islands have long been targeted by various fisheries. France from 2012-2015 only conducts longlining in this area. France used only bottom trawls before 1998. Over the period of 1998-2010, there were several years where the waters were only fished with longlines (2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, and 2010). The remaining years had both bottom trawls and longlines targeting the same taxa, and these catches could not be separated at this time (Palomares and Pauly 2011).

The foreign fisheries in Kerguelen Islands include Japan, Ukraine and Poland. Japan has only operated longlines in these islands. Poland is reported to only fish with bottom trawls here (Palomares and Pauly 2011). Ukraine formerly fished with only bottom trawls until 1990 when it introduced longlines based on the Japanese and French success (Palomares and Pauly 2011). Currently, Ukraine only operates longlines. Similar to France, for the years where the gear was transitioning, the catches could not be separated out at this time and were assigned as mixed gear.

Kermadec Islands (New Zealand) The resources around the Kermadec Islands have been recently targeted by New Zealand’s fisheries for large pelagics and for orange roughy. The orange roughy fishery is undertaken with pelagic trawls as bottom trawls are banned in this area (Clark et al. 2010). There have also been foreign and domestic longline fisheries for large pelagics including swordfish (Zylich et al. 2012).

Kiribati Kiribati’s only industrial fishery outside of its tuna fisheries (see Large Pelagics), is a baitfish fishery for its tuna fishery (Zylich et al. 2014b). These baitfish are often taken with small encircling nets or lift nets and these were assigned as ‘other nets’ (Gillett 2012).

Kuwait Kuwait’s sole domestic industrial fishery is shrimp trawling (FAO 2003c; Al-Abdulrazzak 2013b).


27

Latvia Latvia’s fisheries are similar to other Baltic Sea countries in that they are centered on small pelagics, i.e., herring and sprat. These are caught by pelagic trawls by Latvia (Raid et al. 2010; Lassen 2011) . The remainder of its catches are caught by gillnets targeting cod and salmon mainly (FAO 2005h).

Lebanon Lebanon has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Nader et al. 2014).

Lithuania Lithuania’s fisheries are similar to other Baltic Sea countries in that they are centered on the small pelagics of herring and sprat. These are caught by pelagic trawls by Lithuania (FAO 2005a; Lassen 2011). The remainder of Lithuania’s catches are multi-gear vessels, and these could thus not be separated at this time and were assigned as mixed gear.

Lord Howe Island (Australia) Lord Howe Island has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Kleisner et al. 2015).

Macquarie Island (Australia) Australia has a bottom trawl and longline fishery in Macquarie Island’s waters. The longline fishery targets Antarctic toothfish (Dissostichus mawsoni) and the bottom trawl fishery targets blue antimora (Antimora rostrata). The ridge scaled rattail (Macrourus carinatus) is caught by both gears and was split between them based on the gears relative catch in that year.

Madagascar Madagascar’s only domestic industrial fleet is shrimp trawling operating in its EEZ (Le Manach et al. 2012). Réunion’s fisheries in Madagascar include similar line gear as used domestically (see Réunion section). However, they additionally include shrimp trawl catches (Le Manach et al. 2012).

Madeira Island (Portugal) The domestic fleet of Madeira Island has several portions. The tuna fishery here uses pole and line gear, but catches their baitfish with some variation of encircling nets. The catch of baitfish was thus assigned as ‘encircling nets’ (Shon et al. 2015). In addition, they have a demersal longline fishery for black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo; Reis et al. 2001).

Spain, Ireland, and the former-USSR fleet have operated in Madeira’s waters as well. Ireland’s fishery for orange roughy was disaggregated across ICES areas and these bottom trawls are thus assumed to operate here. Spain’s catches are associated to its offshore longline fleet. The Soviet fishery here was attributed to Russia and was assigned as pelagic trawl based on the taxa.

Malaysia Malaysia’s catches by gear were reconstructed to provide better estimates of fishery discards (Teh and Teh 2014). These were done based on national fisheries statistics reports with landings by gear (Jabatan Perikanan Malaysia 2011). Therefore, fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1.

Maldives The Maldives industrial fleet is dominated by longlines and gillnets. As these gears were already included in the reconstruction (Hemmings et al. 2014), the fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1.

Malta Malta’s industrial fisheries include bottom otter trawls and longlines (Khalfallah et al. 2015a). These were distinguished initially along taxonomic lines between being caught by bottom trawls and longlines (Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture 2013; Khalfallah et al. 2015a). Malta’s bottom trawls target various shrimp (Aristeus antennatus, Aristaeomorpha foliacea, and Parapenaeus longirostris), Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), and demersal fish (Merluccius merluccius, Mullus surmuletus, and M. barbatus).


28

Marshall Islands The Marshall Islands are home to a tuna fishery using longline and purse seine gear (Haas et al. 2014), but this is addressed in the Large Pelagics.

Martinique Martinique has no domestic industrial fishery, and no foreign industrial fisheries operate in its waters (Frotté et al. 2009b).

Mauritania The major industrial fisheries of Mauritania are pelagic trawls and bottom trawls targeting demersal fish and shrimps (Belhabib et al. 2012b). Therefore, large catches of small pelagics were assigned to pelagic trawl including sardinellas (Sardinella aurita, S. maderensis, and Sardinella spp.), Chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus), Cunene horse mackerel (Trachurus trecae), and European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus). Bottom trawls were used for the major demersal taxa including shrimps (Penaeus spp. and specifically Parapenaeus longirostris), squids (Loligo spp.), octopus (Octopus spp.), and cuttlefish (Sepiidae) and their associated discards were assigned to this gear as well (Belhabib et al. 2012b).

Ghana’s trawlers operate in Mauritania’s waters and they target demersal and semi-pelagic taxa and were thus assigned as bottom trawls (Nunoo et al. 2014). Senegal has long-distance pirogues operating here that are considered small-scale (Belhabib et al. 2013). China’s vessels operating here are pelagic trawls and tuna vessels (see Large Pelagics). Therefore, all of China’s catch here and its associated FoC vessels (of Bahamas, Belize, and Cyprus) were assigned as pelagic trawl.

Mauritius Mauritius had a brief domestic bottom trawl fishery from 2000-2008, and this was reconstructed to better estimate discards of this fleet (Boistol et al. 2011). The remainder of Mauritius’ industrial fishing was undertaking with hand lines in their own waters and in the Chagos Archipelago. Réunion fishes in Mauritius waters with hand lines and longlines and these were indicated in the reconstructed data (Boistol et al. 2011).

Mayotte (France) Mayotte has no domestic industrial fishery (Doherty et al. 2015d). The only industrial vessels that operate here are tuna purse seiners and longliners (see Tuna Section; Doherty et al. 2015d).

Mexico Mexico’s gear use was reconstructed to better estimate discards of its fleets (Cisneros-Montemayor et al. 2013; Cisneros-Montemayor et al. 2015). Therefore, the fishing gear types provided were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1.

Micronesia Micronesia has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Vali et al. 2014).

Morocco Morocco’s domestic industrial fisheries are composed of several components including offshore demersal and pelagic, coastal demersal and pelagic, driftnets for swordfish, and purse seines for small pelagics (Belhabib et al. 2012c). Belhabib and colleagues indicated much of this gear is in the reconstructed data, and the gear types were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1. The demersal fisheries are dominated by bottom trawls, while the offshore and coastal pelagics are caught by purse seines. All unassigned small pelagics including European anchovy, chub mackerel, shads (Alosa spp.), argentines (Argentina sphyraena), and jack and horse mackerels (Trachurus spp., and Caranx spp.) were assigned as purse seine catches. Other taxa that are caught solely by bottom trawls in these waters for assigned catches were also updated to be caught by this gear.

Morocco’s waters are home to a large amount of foreign fishing, although little is known on the gear use by various fleets. As some of the catch occurring here was reconstructed (Baddyr and Guénette 2001; Belhabib et al. 2012c), and some directly reported to the FAO, we identified the gear of these two sections of foreign fishing separately. The reconstructed portion that was indicated to be operating offshore but within Morocco’s EEZ was assigned the same gear breakdown as Morocco’s offshore fleet as it changed by taxa and year. For the reported


29

FAO catch, the taxa gear use was assumed to be the same as Morocco’s non-offshore fleet operating and the gear evolution by taxa and year was applied to the foreign fleet as well.

Montenegro Montenegro’s bottom trawl fisheries target European hake (Merluccius merluccius), Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), soles (Soleidae), horned and musky octopuses (Eledone spp.), and red mullets (Mullus barbatus M. surmuletus) and grey mullets (Mugilidae). In addition, Montenegro’s reconstructed marine fisheries catches include discards from their bottom trawl fisheries (Keskin et al. 2014). Conversely, Montenegro’s purse seine fisheries target garfish (Belone belone), bullet tunas (Auxis rochei and other Auxis spp.), flathead grey mullet (Mugil cephalus), sardinellas (Sardinella aurita and Sardinella spp.), European sprat (Sprattus sprattus), and jack mackerels (Trachurus mediterraneus, T. trachurus, and other Trachurus spp.). Montenegro uses pelagic trawls for small pelagics including anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), pilchards (Sardina pilchardus), chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus), Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus), and other mackerels (Scomber spp. and Scombridae). Montenegro and Croatia were reconstructed using similar methods based on their shared history (Keskin et al. 2014; Matić-Skoko et al. 2014), but there are minor differences between them.

Montserrat (UK) Montserrat has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Ramdeen et al. 2012b).

Mozambique Mozambique’s industrial fisheries are centered on bottom trawls, shrimp trawls, and tuna fisheries (see Large Pelagics). The shrimp trawl discards were reconstructed separately from the bottom trawl discards. The bottom trawl fishery was shorter lived and associated with the operations of MOSOPESCA, a joint venture between Mozambique and the USSR (Doherty et al. 2015e). As MOSOPESCA’s landing and discards were reconstructed separately, the remaining catches are attributed to the shrimp trawl fleet (Doherty et al. 2015e).

Mozambique Channel Islands (France) The Mozambique Channel Islands have no domestic industrial fisheries of their own. South Africa operates sport recreational fisheries within their EEZ, but these are considered as small-scale gears.

Myanmar Myanmar has limited information on its fishing gear use, both over time and taxonomically. The major industrial gears used by Myanmar are bottom trawls, gillnets, and purse seines (FAO 2006a; Khin 2008; Booth and Pauly 2011). Gillnets are known to be used for tunas (Scombridae and Auxis spp.), sharks (Elasmobranchii), and silver pomfret (Pampus argentus; FAO 2006a). Purse seines are known to be used for small pelagics here (FAO 2006a), and thus catches of Indian mackerel, and the broader families of Clupeidae, Engraulidae, and Carangidae were assigned as purse seine catches. The remainder of catches were assigned as bottom trawl.

Thailand fishes in Myanmar and the taxa were split based on the domestic fisheries of Thailand using purse seines and bottom trawls (Teh et al. 2015a).

Namibia Namibia’s marine fisheries include the very productive pilchard (Sardinops sagax) fishery, and large bottom trawl fisheries for cape hakes (Merluccius spp.; Belhabib et al. 2015d). Based on a lack of other information, the gear descriptions by the FAO for Namibia were applied here where cape horse mackerels are caught by pelagic trawls, anchovies and pilchard are caught by purse seines, and bottom trawls are used for various cape hakes and orange roughy (FAO 2007c). There is also an industrial trap fishery for crabs (Chaceon maritae) and lobsters (Jasus lalandii). Additionally, there is a line fishery for snoek (Thyrsites atun) and steenbrasses (Lithognathus spp.; FAO 2007c), in addition to their longline fishery for sharks.

Namibia was under the control of South Africa until 1990, and South African fishers took advantage of Namibia’s productive fishing grounds. As these fishers operated essentially as domestic fishers, the South African gear use was assumed to be the same as South Africa operating in their own waters. China fishes in Namibia’s waters with purse seines and bottom trawls (Pauly et al. 2014), but these catches were not disaggregated taxonomically and thus cannot be disaggregated by gear here.


30

Nauru Nauru’s only industrial fleet in the uses various line gear to catch tuna, and this is assigned as ‘lines’.

Netherlands The Netherlands domestic industrial fishery is dominated by bottom trawls for fish and shrimp (Gibson et al. 2015d). The main other portion is the pelagic sector, which are caught using pelagic trawls.6 Therefore, the catches of Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus), Atlantic horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus), European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), European pilchard (Sardina pilchardus), blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou), and chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus) were assigned as pelagic trawl (OECD n.d.). The discards were estimated for the shrimp trawl and the beam trawl sectors separately (Gibson et al. 2015d), and these were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1. The remaining shrimp (Crangon crangon, Pandalus montagui, and Penaeus spp.) landings were assumed to come from the shrimp trawl, while the remaining landings other than shrimp were assigned as bottom trawl.

Belgium, Norway and Ireland’s fisheries operating in the Netherland’s EEZ were assigned to gears based on their domestic fleets (see their respective sections).

New Caledonia New Caledonia’s sole industrial fishery is its longline fishery (Dalzell et al. 1996; Harper et al. 2009b)

New Zealand New Zealand’s domestic industrial fisheries use a variety of gear, but information on landings by gear is not regularly published by their Ministry of Primary Fisheries. Therefore, a static landings by gear type was applied from the only year where it was available (King 1986a) to our reconstructed catch data for New Zealand (Simmons et al. 2015). While this does not reflect changes in fishing gear over time, it does provide taxonomic resolution by gear type otherwise not available in other sources.

New Zealand’s waters are fished by foreign entities and these are mainly bottom trawlers for hoki (Macruronus novaezelandiae). Russia, Dominica, and Ukraine solely operate bottom trawlers in these waters (Swain et al. 2012). Japan and South Korea have both operated line vessels using longliners or squid jigging (Swain et al. 2012). Korea’s vessel (Shin Ji) only operated in New Zealand’s waters from 2009-2012, and Japan longliners and squid jiggers only started fishing in 2011 and these trends can be used to reconstruct the catches in New Zealand’s waters and assign the catches to the correct gear (Swain et al. 2012).

Nicaragua Nicaragua’s industrial fisheries catches are dominated by their shrimp trawl fishery (Haas et al. 2015). Thus, all reconstructed shrimp trawl catches (mainly by-catch and discards), and all reported shrimp catch was assigned to shrimp trawls. However, they also have fisheries using trammel nets and longlines (FAO 2006b), but these could not be separated out at this time and the remainder of catches were assigned to mixed gear. The Cayman islands small-scale fishery fishes for sharks in Nicaragua’s waters (Harper et al. 2009a).

Nigeria Nigeria’s domestic fishery is solely bottom trawling for both shrimp and demersal fish (Etim et al. 2015). All foreign fleets fishing in Nigeria use bottom trawls (Etim et al. 2015). Thus, the catches of China, Cote d’Ivoire, Estonia, Egypt, and Cuba were assigned as bottom trawl gear.

Norfolk Island (Australia) Norfolk Island does not have its own domestic industrial fishery. Japan operated an industrial longline fishery off this island (Kleisner et al. 2015), but catches could not be reconstructed with taxonomic resolution at this time.

North Korea There is very little information available on North Korea’s fisheries sector, due to the secretive nature of their government (Shon et al. 2014a). North Korea’s largest vessels are all trawlers (Savada 1993; Pramod and Pitcher 2006), but it is difficult to determine if the smaller non-trawler vessels were included in the industrial sector (Shon et al. 2014a). As the majority of industrial catches were likely attributed to bottom trawls, and there is 6 https://www.noordzeeloket.nl/en/functions-and-use/visserij/


31

little evidence of other gears used in the industrial sector, all catches were assigned to bottom trawls. North Korea’s gear assignment is particularly uncertain and may be revised in the future given additional information.

Norway Norway publishes fishing gear data in their Norges Fiskerier series pre-dating 1950. Landings data by gear data were compiled and organized to match our catch data for Norway (Nedreaas et al. 2015), and was extracted for the years 1954-1972, 1977-1985, and 1987-present. Linear interpolation was done from 1973-1976 and for 1986, and the average of 1954-1956 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data that varied over the time period but included: trawls, purse seines, gillnets, beach seines, lines, hand lines, trolling, traps, dredging, and others.

Oman Oman’s marine fisheries employ two different industrial gears: bottom trawls and longlines (Khalfallah et al. 2015c). Bottom trawls were banned in 2011, and thus the only industrial gear remaining is longlining, which targets large pelagics such as sailfish (Istiophoridae, and Istiophorus platypterus), sharks and rays (Elasmobranchii), and tunas (Thunnus albacares). Bottom trawling began in 1980 and catches seabreams (Sparidae), jacks (Carangidae), and shrimps (Penaeidae; Khalfallah et al. 2015c).

Pakistan Pakistan’s industrial fisheries are concentrated in shrimp trawling and gillnetting. Discards were only estimated for Pakistan’s shrimp trawls and thus all discards were assigned as shrimp trawls. Pakistan’s gillnets target sharks, tunas, and other large pelagic fishes (Hornby et al. 2014). The remainder of catch is by-catch of the shrimp trawl fishery, which targets various Penaeus shrimps but also lands by-catch of small pelagics and other fishes (Hornby et al. 2014). In addition, Taiwan, China, South Korea, and North Korea all operate bottom trawl fisheries in Pakistan’s EEZ (Hornby et al. 2014).

Palau Palau’s industrial fisheries are centered on its tuna fisheries (FAO 2009b; Lingard et al. 2011). Part of this catch is Palau’s pole and line catch of tuna and related species. The other part is bait provision for these tuna fisheries, which is caught with nets. These nets were assigned as ‘other nets’ as no other information was available on them. The bait species are mainly silversides (Atherinidae), anchovies (Encrasicholina heteroloba), and other clupeids (Lingard et al. 2011).

Palmyra Atoll and Kingman Reef Palmyra Atoll and Kingman Reef have no industrial gear operating in their waters (Zeller et al. 2007a; Zeller et al. 2015).

Panama Panama’s fishing gears were reconstructed to better estimate discards of the various fleets (Harper et al. 2014). Therefore, the gear types were updated to correspond to the gear types in Table 1. Under these updates, Panama’s Caribbean waters are only fished with longlines. Panama fishes their small pelagics with purse seines (FAO 2017a), catches sharks with longlines in the Pacific, and catches shrimp and its by-catch with shrimp trawls (FAO 2007g; Harper et al. 2014).

Papua New Guinea Papua New Guinea’s industrial catch is dominated by shrimp trawls (Teh et al. 2014a). The only other industrial fishery is for sharks (Carcharhinus falciformis, Prionace glauca, and other Elasmobranchii), which were formerly caught with gillnets in the 1980s, but were caught with longlines since 1990 onwards (Teh et al. 2014a). In addition, Taiwan has industrial scale fisheries for species generally hand collected such as Giant clam from 1967 to 1981 (Tridacna spp.; Teh et al. 2014a)

Peru Peru is home to large fisheries for small pelagic species that make up the bulk of their fisheries catches. Most species have mono-specific gear use by the industrial sector and these were applied over the study period (Mendo and Wosnitza-Mendo 2014). The small pelagic fleet is caught exclusively with purse seines and this includes anchoveta (Engraulis ringens), chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus), sardine (Sardinops sagax), longnose anchovy (Anchoa nasus), and Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi). Finally, Peru has had


32

diverse landings from its bottom trawl fishery since 1967 (FAO ; Mendo and Wosnitza-Mendo 2014) targeting hake (Merluccius gayi). Peru also has a large squid jigging fishery for Humboldt squid (Dosidicus gigas). In addition to the domestic squid fishery, China fishes in Peru’s EEZ for squid likely using squid jiggers (Pauly et al. 2014).

Poland Poland’s fisheries are similar to other Baltic Sea countries in that they are centered on the small pelagics of herring and sprat. These are caught by pelagic trawls by Poland (FAO 2007d; Lassen 2011). The remainder of its catches are caught by their Baltic cutters that use a variety of gears (FAO 2007d). These could thus not be separated at this time and were assigned as mixed gear.

Portugal Portugal’s gear was reconstructed in its reconstruction to estimate discards for its purse seine, bottom trawl, and longline fisheries (Leitão et al. 2014). Therefore, the gear types used in the reconstruction were updated to reflect the new gear categories in Table 1.

Prince Edward Island (South Africa) South Africa’s domestic fishery operating in Prince Edward Island’s waters was carried out with longlines and pots. Some of these were separable in the data as the longline fishery operated before the pot fishery, but not all catch data were reported separately by gear (Boonzaier et al. 2012).

Prince Edward Island was also one of the areas targeted by illegal longline fisheries targeting Antarctic toothfish (Dissostichus mawsoni) flying under the flags of Argentina, Panama, Vanuatu, and the USA (Boonzaier et al. 2012).7

Puerto Rico (USA) Puerto Rico has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Appledoorn and Sanders 2015).

Qatar Qatar’s domestic industrial fisheries consist solely of bottom trawls (Al-Abdulrazzak 2013c). Additionally, some fishers from Bahrain operate an illegal drift gillnet fishery in Qatar (Al-Abdulrazzak and Pauly 2013a).

Réunion Réunion’s domestic fisheries solely employ line gear. These were separated into handlines and longlines in the catch reconstruction, and applied here to all catches (Le Manach et al. 2015b).

Romania Romania’s domestic industrial sector is composed of pelagic trawlers targeting sprat (Radu et al. 2010), and their industrial fishery started with the development of trawlers (Bӑnaru et al. 2015). Thus Romania’s industrial catch is assumed to be solely from pelagic trawlers, which operate fairly deep in the water column and thus catch many demersal taxa (Radu et al. 2010).

In addition, Turkey fishes for turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) with bottom trawls, and for European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) with purse seines within Romania’s waters.

Russia Russia’s marine waters span a massive distance and are generally separated into six parts: Black Sea, Baltic Sea, Barents Sea, Kara Sea, Laptev to Chukchi Sea, and the Far East including the Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk. These are all highly distinct in their fisheries and are dealt with separately below. The exceptions are the Kara Sea and the area from the Laptev Sea to Chukchi Sea, which only operate small-scale gears at present (Pauly and Swartz 2007).

Russia’s Black Sea fisheries are similar to other former-USSR fishing practices in the Black Sea. Their largest fishery is for European sprat (Sprattus sprattus), which is marked by three separate periods with the use of pelagic trawls from 1950-1974, bottom trawls from 1975-1985, and pelagic trawls again from 1986-2014 (Divovich et al. 2015c). Russia has a dredge fishery for sea snails (Rapana venosa), and its discards were

7 https://www.ccamlr.org/en/fisheries/toothfish-fisheries


33

assigned to this gear type (Divovich et al. 2015c). European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) catches are reconstructed as half purse seines and half pelagic trawls and this assumption was held for the gear assignment (Divovich et al. 2015c). Russia also has catch from gillnets, although these boats generally operate coastally and may be part of the artisanal sector. The remaining catches of Russia in the Black Sea could not be assigned to specific gear types at this time.

Russia’s Baltic Sea fishing fleet was inferred from other fishing fleets operating in the Baltic, especially with former-USSR countries such as Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. The dominant fisheries of the Baltic Sea are pelagic trawls for herring (Clupea harengus) and sprat, and bottom trawls for cod (Gadus morhua) and flatfishes. Russia’s industrial catches here were apportioned along these lines with herring and sprat and their unreported fisheries catches assigned to pelagic trawl, and the remainder assigned to bottom trawls.

Russia fishing in the Barents Sea is undertaken with several gears including pelagic trawls, bottom trawls, longlines, crab pots and traps, and these were used to determine discards and unreported industrial catches in the reconstruction (unpublished data of Popov et al. (forthcoming), Jovanović et al. 2015). Therefore, the industrial gear types used in the reconstruction were updated to reflect the new gear categories in Table 1.

Russia fishing in the Far East had some of their gear originally reconstructed (Sobolevskaya and Divovich 2015), although much was in categories not able to be applied here. Various shrimps (mainly Pandalus spp., but also Pandalopsis japonica) caught by Russia were assumed to come from their shrimp trawl fleet operating here. Russia’s industrial crab fleet operating here was assumed to be the same gear used by Russia in Alaskan waters (Otto 1981). Salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) fisheries are dominated by gill and driftnets by Japan and Russia (Sobolevskaya and Divovich 2015). Pacific herring (Clupea pallasi) caught by Russia was originally ascribed as trawls, and these were assumed to be pelagic trawls based on the taxa.

There was a large scale change over from bottom trawling for Alaska pollock, to almost solely pelagic trawling. By 2003, over 97% of the USA’s landings of Alaska pollock came from pelagic trawls, whereas 100% was reported to be caught by bottom trawls from 1950-1975 when data quality was good enough to detect these differences (Based on National and Regional NMFS data). Russia and the USA are both noted now in reports as almost solely pelagic trawling for this species (FAO 2007e).8 In addition, Japan’s fisheries reported catch had a sharp decrease in demersal catch along with their Alaska pollock fishery in 1990.

Russia’s waters in the Far East are frequently fished by foreign nations. China operates industrial bottom trawlers for groundfish here, but also has fishers that cross the Russian border from China for small-scale salmon poaching (Doherty et al. 2015a). Japan’s crab fleet operates here with traps. Japan operates a demersal longline fleet for Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus) and Alaska pollock (Theragra chalcogramma). Japan’s mothership trawler fleet operating here was reconstructed as bottom trawls from before 1990, but after 1990 appear to have switched to targeting pelagic taxa (Doherty et al. 2015a). Therefore, this was used as a cut-off point for the switching of this fleet from bottom trawling to pelagic trawling. Japan’s remaining fisheries were illegally operating bottom trawlers and longlines that could not be separated at this time and were assigned as mixed gear. Taiwan, Ukraine, and North Korea fishing here is with bottom trawls (Doherty et al. 2015a).9 South Korea has extensive fisheries in Russia’s Far East. They operated a bottom trawl fishery for a single year in 1995 for Pacific halibut and Pacific cod. South Korea operated an illegal crab fishery in Russian waters. Finally, the remainder of their catch was targeting Pacific herring and Alaska pollock after 1990 and was thus assumed to be pelagic trawls. The USA has been caught illegally fishing for crab in Russia’s waters with traps (Doherty et al. 2015a). Their legal halibut catch in this area, however, is assumed to be caught with lines similar to catch in domestic waters.

Saba (Netherlands) Saba has no domestic industrial fisheries of its own (Lindop et al. 2015a). Sint Maarten has an industrial trap fishery in Saba and Sint Eustatius’ EEZs (Lindop et al. 2015a).

Saint Barthelemy (France) Saint Barthelemy has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Bultel et al. 2015d)

8 https://www.fishsource.org/search?query=Alaska+pollock 9 http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2004/09/24/2003204114


34

Saint Helena The hand line fishery of Saint Helena is classified as industrial (Booth and Azar 2009), and is the only industrial fishery to operate here.

Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Kitts and Nevis have no industrial gear operating in their waters (Ramdeen et al. 2013).

Saint Lucia Saint Lucia has two main industrial gears: various line gear for large pelagics and gillnets for flying fishes (Exocoetidae; Mohammed and Lindop 2015b). The variety of line gears including trolls, longlines, and handlines were aggregated to longlines, and these catch common dolphinfish (Coryphaena hippurus), sharks (Carcharhinidae), and tuna like fishes (Scombridae; FAO 2007a).

Martinique fishes with longlines in Saint Lucia’s waters (Mohammed and Lindop 2015b).

Saint Martin (France) Saint Martin has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Bultel et al. 2015d)

Saint Paul and Amsterdam Iles Saint Paul and the Amsterdam Iles are Antarctic islands controlled by France since 1843. They are uninhabited presently, but their waters have been fished over time. First, there are diver fisheries targeting St. Paul’s fingerfin (Nemadactylus monodactylus), hapuku wreckfish (Polyprion oxygeneios), bluenose warehou (Hyperoglyphe antarctica), and striped trumpeter (Latridae). The lobster (Jasus paulensis) fishery uses pots or traps frequently (Pruvost et al. 2015b). Finally, there is a bottom trawl fishery targeting the above taxa as well that is separate from the diving and trap components.

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Saint Vincent and the Grenadines have a longline fishery for large pelagics that operates within their own waters (Mohammed and Lindop 2015c). This is their only industrial fishery. Grenada fishes in this EEZ as well, with small-scale fishers and larger scale operations targeting fish offshore. Grenada’s offshore fishery is a longline fishery operating here for large pelagics. The remainder of Grenada’s fishers that operate in this EEZ are considered to be ‘small-scale’ gears (Mohammed and Lindop 2015c).

Samoa Samoa’s domestic industrial fishery is solely a longline fishery for tuna and has by-catch of related species and sharks (Lingard et al. 2012b).

Sao Tome and Principe Sao Tome and Principe has no domestic industrial fisheries in its waters (Belhabib 2015a). However, foreign tuna fisheries commonly operate in these waters (see Large Pelagics).

Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia has marine coasts in both the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf (aka the Arabian Gulf). Saudi Arabia’s only industrial fleet in the Persian Gulf is a bottom trawling fleet, targeting shrimp and demersal fish (Tesfamichael and Pauly 2013). In the Red Sea, all Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta) catches were assigned as purse seine catches (FAO 2003b), while the remainder was assigned to bottom trawls (Tesfamichael and Rossing 2012).

Senegal Senegal’s domestic industrial fisheries operating here are bottom trawls and purse seines (Belhabib et al. 2013). The purse seines mainly target sardines (Sardinella spp.), but also catch West African Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus tritor) and jacks (Caranx spp.). The remainder of their catch was assigned as bottom trawl.

Portugal, Italy, Spain, France, Gambia, Gabon, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, and Mauritania only operate bottom trawls here (Belhabib et al. 2013; Belhabib et al. 2014a; Belhabib 2015b). Former USSR countries, as well as Bulgaria, Estonia, and Georgia, solely operate pelagic trawls here. In addition, it is likely that Ukraine is operating a FoC pelagic trawling operation through St. Vincent and the Grenadines and the Bahamas in Senegal’s


35

waters. Côte d’Ivoire’s fisheries were reconstructed according to their gear use of purse seines and bottom trawls (Belhabib and Pauly 2015b).

Seychelles The Seychelles does not have their own domestic industrial fishery, but foreign fishers operate here exclusively with longlines (Le Manach et al. 2015c).

Sierra Leone Sierra Leone’s domestic industrial fishery is solely a bottom trawl fishery. Côte d’Ivoire’s fisheries were reconstructed according to their gear use of purse seines and bottom trawls (Belhabib and Pauly 2015b). All other foreign fisheries were reconstructed as bottom trawl fisheries and this gear was assigned for their catches (Seto et al. 2015).

Singapore Singapore has no industrial gear operating in its tiny EEZ (Corpus 2014).

Sint Eustatius (Netherlands) Sint Eustatius has no domestic industrial fisheries of its own (Lindop et al. 2015a). Sint Maarten has an industrial trap fishery in Saba and Sint Eustatius’ EEZs (Lindop et al. 2015a).

Sint Maarten (Netherlands) Sint Maarten has no domestic industrial fisheries of its own (Lindop et al. 2015a)

Slovenia Slovenia’s gear was reconstructed in its reconstruction to estimate discards for its purse seine, bottom otter trawl, and pelagic trawl fisheries (Bolje et al. 2015). These catches were updated to conform to the gear types described in Table 1.

Solomon Islands The Solomon Islands does not have their own domestic industrial fishery, but their waters are fished by small-scale fishers from Tuvalu (Crawford et al. 2011). The large-scale tuna fishing that occurs in these waters will be addressed in the Large Pelagics.

Somalia Somalia’s only domestic industrial fishery to operate is a bottom trawl fishery (Persson et al. 2014). However, many countries take advantage of the lack of enforcement of fisheries laws in Somalian waters and fish illegally (Glaser et al. 2015). These fisheries were reconstructed based on known South Korean bottom trawl effort and catches in this EEZ, and are now included in Sea Around Us data. The catches of South Korea, Italy, Greece, and Egypt were thus assigned as bottom trawls. In addition, Djibouti’s fishers often fish in Somalian waters although these are small-scale fishers.

South Africa South Africa used to control the area that is modern-day Namibia. Therefore, their fishers gear use are interlinked for this period, and South Africa fishing in Namibian waters was separated out in the original reconstructions (Baust et al. 2015; Belhabib et al. 2015d). South Africa fishing in Namibian waters is assumed to be the same gear use as South Africa fishing in their modern-day waters.

South Africa’s largest catches are attributed to Cape horse mackerel (Trachurus capensis), which are caught by pelagic trawls, bottom trawls, and purse seines. Other small pelagics including pilchard (Sardinops sagax), sardinellas, Southern African anchovy (Engraulis capensis), and Whitehead’s round herring (Etrumeus whiteheadi) are caught almost exclusively with purse seines in South Africa. South Africa operates shrimp trawls for knife shrimp (Haliporoides triarthrus), Mozambique lobster (Metanephrops mozambicus), and other penaeus shrimps (Penaeus spp.). The remainder of the catch is dominated by bottom trawl fisheries. The major gear information herein was kindly provided by Ms. Lisa Boonzanier (pers. comm.).

Japan, Estonia, Honduras, Georgia, and Portugal operate both a fishery for small pelagics with purse seines, and a shrimp trawl fishery. Spain, Chile, and Uruguay’s catch in South Africa’s waters are longline fisheries for Antarctic toothfish (Dissostichus mawsoni).


36

South Georgia, Sandwich Islands, and South Orkney Islands (UK) The United Kingdom’s (UK) domestic industrial fisheries in these EEZs are limited (Palomares and Pauly 2015). The UK operated a short-term pelagic trawl fishery for krill (Euphausia superba) and other taxa in South Georgia and Sandwich Islands. However, the UK also operated a longline fishery inside and outside these EEZs for Antarctic toothfish (Dissostichus mawsoni) and catching several other taxa.

The South Georgia and Sandwich Islands are home to many foreign fisheries, targeting the main species of the CCAMLR area. Argentina fished with pelagic trawls for Antarctic krill in 1999 (South Orkney and outside of EEZ only), used bottom trawls in 1994 and 1995, and has used longlines since 2004. Panama operates an Antarctic krill fishery in South Georgia. Bulgaria operates a longline fishery in the South Georgia and Sandwich Islands EEZ, and outside of this EEZ in CCAMLR areas. China’s pelagic trawl fishery operates here for pelagic trawl and catches small amounts of other species as by-catch. Spain operated a bottom trawl fishery in 1986, 1987, and 1991. In 1987, Spain had an Antarctic krill fishery in these EEZs. Spain’s contemporary fisheries (post-1996) are solely longlines in these EEZs. The former East Germany’s Antarctic fishery was solely bottom trawls, except its pelagic trawl fishery for Antarctic krill. In the South Orkney Islands, South Korea solely uses pelagic trawls. Korea commonly uses pelagic trawls for krill in these other EEZs, but also has squid jigs for black squid (Martialia hyadesi).

Vanuatu operates a pelagic trawl fishery for Antarctic krill, although this is likely a FoC for Norway. South Africa operates a pelagic trawl for krill that it reports to CCAMLR as otter trawl midwater, but the remainder of their catches here are from longlines. Uruguay’s fisheries are mainly longlines, however, they operate a pelagic trawl for Antarctic krill here, and their use of pots and longlines in 2001, 2006, 2007, and 2009 in South Georgia could not be split into their respective gears at this time. Chile operated a one year longline fishery in South Orkney in 1998, but the remainder of their fisheries here were pelagic trawls. In South Georgia and Sandwich Islands, Chile operated bottom trawls prior to 2001 but now only operates pelagic trawls.

The former-USSR countries (here: Russia, Ukraine, Poland, and Latvia) operated pelagic trawls for Antarctic krill in these EEZs. In addition, Russia, Poland, and Ukraine operate a longline fishery for Antarctic toothfish. Russia operates a pot fishery for crabs and a pelagic trawl fishery for lanternfishes in South Georgia. Previously, Poland used bottom trawls in South Georgia extensively, but changed in 1988 to operating pelagic trawls.

The USA operated a bottom trawl fishery in South Orkney in 1999. After this, the USA operated a pelagic trawl fishery in South Orkney and South Georgia. Finally, the US operates a pot fishery for Antarctic toothfish in South Georgia. USA fishes in area 48.1 with bottom trawls, except for its pelagic trawl for Antarctic krill.

South Korea South Korea publishes fishing gear data online.10 Landings data were thus available by species group and main gears for 1990-2007. These data were organized to match our catch data for South Korea fishing in the their EEZ (Shon et al. 2014b). The gear use of 1990 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided, i.e., bottom trawl, pair trawl, offshore, shrimp trawl, dredge, fixed net, and other.

Spain Spain’s Mediterranean catches were reconstructed with gear to better estimate their total catches in this area (Coll et al. 2015b). The gear types were applied to the major gear categories present in the original reconstruction (Coll et al. 2015b). Due to a lack of data for Spain’s Northwest coast, we temporarily used the species gear data for Spain’s Mediterranean for the Northwest Coast EEZ. However, there are ongoing efforts to improve the underlying data (Villasante et al. 2015a), and this will be included in future catch and gear reconstructions for this EEZ.

Sri Lanka Sri Lanka’s industrial marine catch is dominated by its shrimp trawling sector. There are two sections that are not attributed to this gear type: tuna fisheries (see Large Pelagics) and sea cucumber (Holothuroidea) fisheries. Sea cucumber fisheries are conducted at an industrial scale in Sri Lanka, often using tuna boats to transport

10 www.kosis.kr


37

between fishing sites, but it remains an activity done by hand and thus is classified as small-scale gears here (O’Meara et al. 2011). The remaining industrial catch was assigned to the shrimp trawling sector.

Sudan Sudan does not have a domestic industrial fishery operating in their own waters (Tesfamichael and Ekawad 2012). Egypt’s Red Sea fisheries extend into Sudan’s waters and were reconstructed using their gears’ of bottom trawls and purse seines (see Egypt section; Tesfamichael and Ekawad 2012; Tesfamichael and Mehanna 2012).

Suriname The only domestic industrial fishery operated in Suriname’s waters is their shrimp trawl fishery (Hornby et al. 2015c). Historically, the USA, Japan, and South Korea have operated shrimp trawling vessels in Suriname’s waters (Hornby et al. 2015c). Venezuela fishes for snapper in Suriname’s EEZ with hand lines (Hornby et al. 2015c).

Svalbard Island (Norway) Svalbard’s waters are targeted by domestic (Norwegian), and foreign fleets (Ireland and Iceland). As these countries fleets were disaggregated, their operations in Svalbard fall within the ICES area and were assumed to conform to their domestic industrial operations.

Sweden Sweden publishes fishing gear data online and also in their annual fisheries reports (Statistiska Centralbyrån [Central Bureau of Statistics] 1975). Landings data were thus available by species and gear from 1999 to present, and one year in 1975 (Statistiska Centralbyrån [Central Bureau of Statistics] 1975). These data were compiled and organized to match our catch data for Sweden (Persson 2010; Persson 2015). Linear interpolation was done from 1975 to 1999, and the breakdown for 1975 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data: trawl, bottom trawl, pelagic trawl, seine, large longlines, driftnets, beach seine, fyke nets, traps, herring nets, purse seine, multigear, and others.

Syria The only industrial fishery operated in Syria’s waters is their domestic bottom trawl fishery (Ulman et al. 2015a).

Taiwan Taiwan’s fishing gear used was reconstructed originally and employed to better estimate unreported catches associated with these gears (Divovich et al. 2015b). These were updated to correspond to the new gear types in Table 1.

Tanzania The only industrial fishery operating in Tanzania’s waters is their domestic shrimp trawl fishery (Jacquet and Zeller 2007; Bultel et al. 2015a).

Thailand The Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC) publishes fishing gear data online for two periods 1976-2007, and after 2007, gear data are collected in a different format for these same countries. However, the data available for the Gulf of Thailand and Indian Ocean (including Andaman Sea) was determined to be representative of Thailand’s industrial fishing gear use over this time period. Data from 1976 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data: pair trawl, otter trawl, otter board trawl, anchovy purse seine, Spanish mackerel drift gill net, other gillnets, mackerel encircling gillnet, and Thai purse seine.

Timor Leste Timor Leste has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Barbosa and Booth 2009).

Togo Togo’s domestic industrial fisheries include purse seining and bottom trawling. As the reconstruction explicitly used gear to determine discards, and unreported catches, these were assigned to the gear types in Table 1.


38

Foreign fisheries in Togo are centered around using bottom trawls, and this was the gear used by most countries fishing here (Belhabib et al. 2015b). The exception to this is pirogues used by Ghana here that are classified as small-scale (Belhabib et al. 2015b).

Tonga Tonga’s only domestic industrial fishery is a longline fishery for tunas (see Tuna Section; Sun et al. 2011)

Trinidad and Tobago Trinidad and Tobago operate trawls that are described as industrial, semi-industrial, and artisanal but they are all using bottom trawl gear and thus assigned as industrial in the Sea Around Us database. Trinidad and Tobago’s multi-gear fisheries use hand lines and traps and were assigned to ‘mixed gear’ as these catches could not be separated (Mohammed and Lindop 2015d). Finally, they operate longline gear targeting large pelagics including tunas.

Venezuela fishes in Trinidad and Tobago’s waters. They operate vessels that use multiple types of line gear and these were assigned to the gear group ‘lines’. The second portion is the shrimp trawl fishery that was identified with discards estimated for this sector (Mohammed and Lindop 2015d).

Tristan da Cunha The industrial fishery operating in the Tristan de Cunha islands uses lobster pots to trap lobsters, and takes some fish as by-catch of these operations (Booth and Azar 2009). This is the only industrial fishery operating in these waters.

Tromelin Islands (France) Tromelin Islands has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Le Manach and Pauly 2015a).

Tunisia Tunisia’s domestic fisheries are reported by gear type and were updated to conform to correct for previous irregularities (Halouani et al. 2015). This corrected gear information was updated to correspond to the new gear types in Table 1.

Egypt’s fisheries in Tunisian waters mirror their domestic fisheries catches in the use of purse seine and bottom trawl gear. See Egypt section for the breakdown by taxa.

Turkey Turkey operates a diversity of gears within their waters that span from the Black Sea to the Aegean Sea. Turkey fishes with pelagic trawls for European sprat (Sprattus sprattus), with purse seines for small pelagic centered around European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), with dredges for Rapa whelk (Rapana venosa), and with bottom trawls for turbot and other flatfishes (FAO 2008; Ulman et al. 2013a; Ceylan et al. 2014). Turkey also has a shrimp trawl fishery targeting various species of shrimps mainly in the Mediterranean and Marmara Seas, and generating large by-catch and discards (Ulman et al. 2013a; GFCM and FAO 2016).

Turks and Caicos The Turks and Caicos do not have their own industrial fishery although foreign fishers operate in their waters. They are small-scale trap fishers from the Dominican Republic and Haiti who cross into the Turks and Caicos EEZ. These are thus assigned as ‘pots or traps’ to reflect their gear use.

Tuvalu Tuvalu has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Crawford et al. 2011).

Ukraine Ukraine’s fisheries’ gear use in the Black Sea is difficult to determine, due to a lack of accessible information. Their largest fishery is for European sprat (Sprattus sprattus), which is marked by three separate periods with the use of pelagic trawls from 1950-1974, bottom trawls from 1975-1985, and pelagic trawls again from 1986-2010 (Ulman et al. 2015b). Anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) is caught as by-catch in sprat pelagic trawl fisheries, but also by purse seines and its catches were split evenly between these two gear types. The So-iuy mullet (Mugil soiuy) is caught by purse seines of Ukraine (FAO 2004). In addition, Ukraine’s bottom trawls catch gobies (Gobiidae), decapods (Decapoda), common shrimp (Crangon crangon), congers (Congridae),


39

silversides (Atherinidae), and starfishes (Asterozoa; Ulman et al. 2015b). The remainder of Ukraine’s taxa could not be assigned to a particular gear type at this time. In addition, Turkey fishes for turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) with bottom trawls in Ukraine’s waters.

United Arab Emirates The United Arab Emirates have no industrial gear operating in their waters (Al-Abdulrazzak 2013a; Khalfallah et al. 2015b).

United Kingdom England and Scotland publish fishing gear data in their annual fisheries yearbooks, although Scotland has a much longer time record of this. Landings data for Scotland was thus available by species and gear from 1950 to 2014, and was extracted for 1954, 1955, 1959, 1960, 1969, 1970, 1978, 1980-1990, and 2000-2014. Data were only extracted for these years as it was deemed this would give a representative sample of changes in gear use for species in the UK fleet. These data were compiled for Scotland and assumed to be representative for the United Kingdom, Channel Islands, and the Republic of Ireland. Linear interpolation was done for the missing years, and the average gear use by species of 1954 and 1955 was carried backward to 1950 to complete the time series. The catch data were then disaggregated to the gear types provided in the data: beam trawl, demersal trawl, pelagic trawl, purse seine, seine net, demersal and pelagic gillnets, demersal pair trawl, great and small lines, Nephrops trawl, mechanical dredge, suction dredge, queen scallop trawl, shrimp trawl, drift nets, and other gears.

Uruguay The majority of Uruguay’s catches are attributed to bottom trawls and are composed mainly of Argentine hake (Merluccius hubbsi), whitemouth croaker (Micropogonias furnieri), and stripped weakfish (Cynoscion guatucupa; Lorenzo et al. 2015). Longline fisheries are the main gear used for squid (Illex argentinus), elasmobranchs (Elasmobranchii, Callorhinchidae, Squalidae, Squatinidae, and Squatina argentina), and tunas (Scombridae; FAO 2017b). Fisheries for clams (Donax spp.) and scallops (Zygochlamys patagonica) are assumed to be dredge fisheries as is common at the industrial scale for these taxa. Purse seine fisheries are identified for anchovies (Engraulis anchoita) and some other small pelagics (FAO 2017b). Traps were used for the crab (Chaceon notialis) fishery (FAO 2009a, 2017b).

USA The reconstructions for the United States mainland EEZ sections (East Coast, Gulf of Mexico, and West Coast) originally included gear as it is provided by the National Marine Fisheries Service for most marine fisheries landings (Doherty et al. 2015b; McCrea-Strub 2015). These were updated to correspond to the new gear types in Table 1. Foreign fisheries operating in the USA but within NAFO areas were assigned in the NAFO section. In addition, Russia had a hake fishery with bottom trawls operating off the USA’s west coast that was reconstructed (Nelson Jr. 1985; Doherty et al. 2015b).

Hawaii’s domestic industrial fisheries (apart from tuna fisheries) are based around a diversity of line gear (Zeller et al. 2007b; Gibson et al. 2015c). Handlines are used for bottom fishes, and a mix of other line gear is used for other reef associated and pelagic fishes and this was assigned as ‘lines’.

Alaska is home to one of the largest fisheries in the world, the Alaskan pollock fishery. In line with other US jurisdictions, commercial marine fisheries are reported by gear type by the NMFS, but the nationally available data for Alaska has been of decreasing quality of resolution over the past 30+ years. However, data at a better resolution are available for select species from the Juneau office of the National Marine Fisheries Service for 2003 to present. The main distinction made is the difference between pelagic trawls and ‘non-pelagic trawls’ indicated in these data in this time period. Those gear types included in the reconstructed data (Doherty et al. 2015a) that had a high enough quality of resolution (e.g., ‘beam trawls, shrimp’ instead of ‘trawls, unspecified’) were updated to correspond to the new gear types in Table 1. The remaining domestic fisheries were updated with this time series and linearly interpolated from 1977 values to 2003 when an appropriate resolution was available.

Alaska is home to many foreign fisheries, and many countries had short-lived bottom trawl fisheries for Alaska pollock (Berger et al. 1986; Fredin 1987). Canada fishes in Alaska’s waters with longlines for Halibut (Forrester et al. 1978). Japan’s crab fisheries are split into two time periods: pre-1970 where tangle nets were the dominant gear, and post-1970 where almost all catch was derived from traps. From 1968 to 1972 was the only period where


40

both of these gears were used by Japan and 1970 was thus used as the transition point (Otto 1981). Japan also fishes for Pacific herring with gillnets in Alaskan waters, and uses bottom trawls for groundfish and pollock (Miles et al. 1982). Japan’s fishery for sablefish is dominated by longlines and was assigned based on their quota allocation that was 5 times larger for longlines than for bottom trawls (Miles et al. 1982; Fredin 1987). Finally, Russia almost solely fished with bottom trawls in Alaskan waters, except for their tangle nets used for crabs (Otto 1981).

US Virgin Islands The US Virgin Islands have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Ramdeen et al. 2015).

Vanuatu Vanuatu’s domestic industrial fisheries are longline fisheries for sharks (Zylich et al. 2014c). Vanuatu’s flag is used internationally as a Flag of Convenience, and this gear description only applies to its truly domestic catches in its EEZ.

Venezuela Venezuela has two kinds of industrial fisheries: bottom trawls and tuna purse seines (Mendoza 2015). As tuna fisheries are addressed separately (see Large Pelagics), all other industrial catch was assigned as bottom trawls. However, Venezuela banned bottom trawling in early 2009 and their only remaining industrial fisheries were tuna fisheries. Trinidad and Tobago fish in Venezuela’s waters with bottom trawls (Mohammed and Lindop 2015d), and all their catches in this EEZ were assigned to this gear.

Viet Nam Viet Nam’s industrial fisheries are centered around bottom trawls as is common in Southeast Asia. Discards were reconstructed for this portion of the industrial sector and these were assigned as bottom trawl gear (Teh et al. 2014c). Purse seine gear is used for small pelagics in Viet Nam including anchovies, and thus the catch of engraulids and clupeids was assigned as purse seine (FAO 2005i). Viet Nam’s catch reconstruction of their bottom trawls was informed by the more detailed information available for Cambodia and thus taxa such as Chondrichthyes and lobsters that were only caught by this gear in Cambodia were assigned the same in Vietnam (Teh et al. 2014b; Teh et al. 2014c). Other demersal taxa such as Indian halibut (Psettodes erumei) and daggertooth pike conger (Muraenesox cinereus) were assigned to bottom trawls as this is the most likely gear to catch these demersal taxa. Swimming crab (Portunus pelagicus) is targeted in the gillnet fishery by Viet Nam and it was thus assigned as gillnets.11

Wake Island (USA) Wake Island has no industrial gear operating in its waters (Zeller et al. 2005).

Wallis and Futuna Islands (France) Wallis and Futuna Islands have no industrial gear operating in its waters (Harper et al. 2009c).

Yemen Yemen’s domestic industrial fishery consists of a demersal trawl that mainly targets shrimp. However, this fishery has a large retained catch of sea catfishes (Ariidae), and thus was assigned to the general bottom trawl gear type (Tesfamichael et al. 2012b). In addition to domestic fisheries, Egypt fishes in Yemen’s EEZ only with bottom trawls (Tesfamichael et al. 2012b).

Regional and other non-national findings NAFO Honduras, Italy, Ireland, Mexico, South Korea, and Venezuela solely report bottom trawl fisheries within the NAFO convention area, and thus all their catches were assigned as bottom trawls. Much of the remaining catches were already assigned a gear type including groundfish trawls, traps for lobster, and dredges targeting scallops.

11 https://fisheryimprovementprojects.org/fip/vietnam-blue-swimming-crab-fishery-improvement-project/


41

In the USA’s NAFO waters, domestic catches were already assigned gear as part of the East coast reconstruction (see USA section; McCrea-Strub 2015). In addition, Iceland reports trawls operating in these waters that are targeting Atlantic herring, and these were assigned as pelagic trawls.

In Greenland’s NAFO waters, many countries have fished for cod, salmon, other groundfish, and shrimp. Iceland and Greenland both operated shrimp trawl fisheries here that were reconstructed for their discards (Booth and Knip 2014).

St Pierre et Miquelon’s sole industrial fishery is bottom trawling (Bultel and Zylich 2015), and thus all of their catches within the NAFO area were assigned as bottom trawls.

A large portion of NAFO’s convention area is outside of any EEZ. However, the gear types were mainly assigned already including dredges for scallops and other molluscs, traps for lobster, and bottom trawl fisheries for various groundfishes. These were updated to conform to the gear types in this report (Table 1).

CCAMLR The CAMLR convention area circumnavigates the globe in the Antarctic and overlaps with many countries territorial waters of Antarctic islands. The CCAMLR naming convention uses the FAO area as the first two digits, and then subdivides these areas according to their convention.

The CCAMLR areas within FAO area 58 are home to four EEZs (Kerguelen Islands, Heard and McDonald Islands, Prince Edward Island, and Crozet Islands) and a relatively large amount of high seas fishing. The Kerguelen Islands and Heard and McDonald Islands are fully contained within FAO area 58 and the CCAMLR area, while Prince Edward Island and Crozet Islands have waters outside and inside the CCAMLR area. As these territorial waters are addressed above, this section will only focus on the high seas fisheries in CCAMLR area 58. Most of the fisheries of area 58 are marked by a change from pelagic and bottom trawl fisheries first in the 1960 and going to the early 1990s, to almost solely longlines today.

There are several pelagic trawl fisheries for Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) in area 58, although those were mainly operated in the 1980s. Thus, catches of Antarctic krill caught by South Korea, Japan, and Russia were assigned as pelagic trawl in areas 58.4.1 and 58.4.2. All catches after 1995 in 58.4.1 are made by longlines. Ukraine and Russia operated pelagic trawls for Antarctic krill and Antarctic silverfish in 58.4.2 until 1990. However, they also operated a bottom trawl fishery from 1985-1990, targeting spiny icefish, but catching various other demersal fish. Longlines were the only reported gear in areas 58.4.3a, 58.4.3b after 2000, and 58.4.4a, and 58.4.4b after 1999. Before this, Japan operated a pelagic trawl fishery for Antarctic krill, and a bottom trawl fishery for cod icefishes (Nototheniidae) in 58.4.4b. Finally, the USSR operated a bottom trawl fishery until 1991 in 58.4.4a and 58.4.4b. Namibia’s catches in area 58 are caught solely with longlines, outside of EEZs.

The CCAMLR areas within FAO area 88 are home to some industrial fisheries, but much smaller than in the remainder of the CCAMLR areas. This entire area is in the high seas. The major fishery before 1995 was the pelagic trawl fishery for Antarctic krill undertaken by the former USSR (Russia and Poland), and Japan12. The remainder of fisheries here are longlines mainly targeting Antarctic toothfish and are undertaken by Namibia, South Africa, Australia, Chile, New Zealand, South Korea, Vanuatu, Poland, Argentina, USA, Russia, Japan, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Spain, Norway, and Ukraine (CCAMLR 2014).

CCAMLR area 48 has the majority of the catches in the CCAMLR area, due in large part to the massive catches of Antarctic krill that have occurred here. Although the former USSR (here: Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Latvia) contributed the most to previous catches, Japan, Spain, the UK, Chile, South Korea, Argentina, Panama, China, India, Norway, Vanuatu, South Africa, USA, and Germany have all used pelagic trawls for Antarctic krill. Japan operated an experimental purse seine fishery for Antarctic krill in 1973 in area 48. Much of the industrial fishing occurring in area 48 occurs in the EEZs of South Orkney, South Georgia, and Sandwich Islands (see these EEZ sections above). However, Japan has a pot fishery for crabs, and a longline fishery for Antarctic toothfish.

12 https://www.ccamlr.org/en/fisheries/krill-%E2%80%93-biology-ecology-and-fishing


42

ICES Gear use within the ICES area but outside of national EEZs was reconstructed according to the countries’ domestic fleets.

Large Pelagics Most nominal catch data supplied to the tuna RFMOs (e.g., IATTC, ICCAT, etc.) are supplied with gear-use data. These were updated to conform to the gear types/categories in this report (Table 1). Discards estimated for the tuna catches were also assigned to the corresponding gear types.

Artisanal Regional Results Africa Ghana The FAO collects data on fishing gears used in the Ghanaian artisanal fisheries, and it was primarily this information that was used to assign gears to various taxa. All mentions of a gear used to catch a particular species were recorded from 7 different sources (Doyi 1984; Schneider 1990; Starnes 2002; Denham et al. 2007; FAO 2007f; Aggrey-Fynn 2008; Nunoo et al. 2009). No information was found regarding the catch by gear of various taxa: therefore, catch was split equally among all gears mentioned for particular taxa in the literature search. Where a taxon could not be found in the literature, its closest taxonomical or functional relative was used instead. Finally, categories comprising unidentified marine fishes were split between fishing gears according to a weighted percentage of total gear usage for more specific taxa.

Nigeria Due to the multi-gear nature of Nigerian artisanal fishing, and the lack of concrete data on the species distribution for each fishing gear, data from 18 sources ranging from 1986 to 2017 were gathered to correlate fished taxa with gears used to catch them (Ssentongo et al. 1986; Adebiyi 1998; Moses 2000; Ofor 2002; Ambrose et al. 2005; Heddon 2006; Anyanwu and Kusemiju 2007; Nwafili and Gao 2007; FAO 2010b; Adeogun et al. 2011a; Adeogun et al. 2011b; Akinwumi et al. 2011; Nwosu et al. 2011; Kafayat et al. 2015; Ngodigha et al. 2015; Akintola and Fakoya 2016; International Labour Organization 2016; Olopade et al. 2017). Gear assigned to species- or genus-level taxa were also assigned to their respective families, orders, or classes, if those higher taxa did not include those gears. Some taxa included in the catch reconstruction could not be assigned gears directly from literature; in those cases, the gear distribution from closely related taxa was used. The catch assigned to each taxon was then split equally among gears found to be used to catch them. Unidentified marine fishes were split between fishing gears according to a weighted percentage of total gear usage for more specific taxa.

Senegal The artisanal fishery of Senegal is similar to that of Nigeria. While specific types of fish, such as small pelagics and coastal demersals, tend to be caught with certain types of gear, examples from up and down the coast illustrate a very mixed-gear fishery for capturing nearly all taxa. Less taxonomically specific information is available on gear use in the artisanal fisheries, however. A similar method to the one used for Nigeria was used here: collecting as much gear-to-taxon information available in the literature, establishing the mentions of gear use for each taxon collectively, then assigning equal parts of the catch to each gear mentioned (Bousso 1994; Charles-Dominique and Diallo 1997; Bousso 2000; Abaza and Jha 2001; Ambrose et al. 2005; CRODT 2007; Camara 2008; Kraan and Taal 2014; Pan et al. 2015). Some taxa included in the catch reconstruction could not be assigned gears directly from literature; in those cases, the gear distribution from closely related taxa was used. Finally, categories comprising unidentified marine fishes were split between fishing gears according to a weighted percentage of total gear usage for more specific taxa.

Asia Japan Landings data were available by species group and main gears for 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2007-2013 from the Ministry of Agriculture (2016). The gear breakdown was taken from this national data, and artisanal gears were identified and separated from the industrial gears according to the method used for Japanese industrial fishing above. This breakdown was interpolated between years where data were missing, and supplemented with other sources (Kask and Hiyama 1947; Chikuni 1985; Makino 2011; Popescu and Ogushi 2013; Delaney and Yagi 2017; Iseki et al. 2017).


43

South Korea Catch data were available by species group and main gears for 1990-2007 from the Korean Statistical Information Service (Anon. 2014).13 Taxa that were missing from the national breakdown were researched and assigned gears based on a variety of other sources (Chikuni 1985; Honma 1998; FAO 2003a; Teng 2007). The resulting gear breakdown was extrapolated back to 1950 and forward to 2015, with taxa missing from sources assigned gears based on taxonomic or functional similarity.

Thailand Catch data by gear is collected and published online for the small-scale sector by the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC) for 1976-2007. The data published for small-scale fisheries in the Gulf of Thailand and Indian Ocean (including Andaman Sea) was assumed to be representative of Thailand’s fisheries gear use during this time period. Data from 1976 was assumed to be constant from 1950-1976 and for 2007-2014. Small-scale gear-types were then assigned to overarching gears as presented in Table 2. National data were not available for some non-fish taxa. These non-fish taxa were assigned gear-types based on gears described for each taxa in Seilert and Sangchan (2001) if available. If information was not available, taxa were assigned to the gear “unknown class”.

Caribbean Cuba Despite having the largest total artisanal catch in the Caribbean, little concrete information about the proportion of catch per gear for various taxa is available for Cuba’s nearshore fisheries. A breakdown was created by gathering information on artisanal small-scale catches of taxa by gear from various sources. The primary source for general gear breakdown for all small-scale catches in Cuba was Joyce (1996), who provided a concrete anchor point for the mid-1960s, and a description of changes in fishing gears between the 1960s and 1970s. The gears used to catch various taxa during the various eras of fishing in Cuba were identified from literature and the proportions were weighted according to this general gear breakdown (Joyce 1996; FAO 2000; Claro et al. 2001; Doyon 2007). The exception to this was the spiny lobster fishery, which relied on several unique gear proportions found in the literature (Baisre 2000b). This method was used from 1950 to 2015, and taxa that could not be assigned a gear breakdown on their own were assigned one based on related or functionally similar taxa. Most literature presents the image of a rapidly-changing fishery during the revolutionary period, followed by a period of stagnancy after the establishment of exclusive economic zones, which severely limited Cuba’s offshore fishery efforts. Despite the new focus on shelf fisheries, little change has been documented in the fishing methods save for more nets introduced during the revolutionary period.

Europe Denmark Catches of taxa by gear were outlined in national data (Anon, 2004; 2005; 2006; 2011), and these distributions were used for the Denmark artisanal fisheries landings. Gaps were linearly interpolated; taxa not covered by the national data were assigned gear breakdowns of functionally similar taxa or were researched further in the event that no clear analogue could be found.

Norway Norway’s catch by gear is outlined by taxon in ICES’ historical and nominal catch databases (ICES 2011, 2017), including a spatial component. These spatialized gear distributions were applied to artisanal catches from Norwegian fisheries where possible; a general gear distribution was also created for each taxon that summarized catches by gear in all ICES areas, applied when spatially-specific data were not available.

United Kingdom The UK’s catch by gear is outlined by taxon in ICES’ historical and nominal catch databases (ICES 2011, 2017), including a spatial component. These spatialized gear distributions were applied to artisanal catches from British fisheries where possible; a general gear distribution was also created for each taxon that summarized catches by gear in all ICES areas, applied when spatially-specific data were not available.

13 www.kosis.kr


44

Oceania New Zealand Artisanal catch was assigned to gears based on a report by King (1986b) that displayed catch by artisanal and industrial gears. In the absence of other information, catch of taxa by gear was assumed to remain constant throughout the time series in order to assign gears to each listed taxa. In cases where artisanal and industrial fisheries used the same gears, the percentage of catch that was artisanal was used to normalize the percent breakdown for taxa using this gear type. Taxa within the same family and found in the same area were assumed to be caught by the same gear. When it was not possible to distinguish similar groups of taxa and no information existed, artisanal taxa were assigned to small-scale gears.

Papua New Guinea Artisanal gears were assigned to each taxa based on a survey of available literature (Van Pel 1956; Rapson 1962; Dalzell et al. 1996; Polunin and Roberts 1996; Chapman and Fusimalohi 1998; Friedman et al. 2008). In cases where more than one gear was listed as catching a taxa, the breakdown of catch by gear listed for taxa by Dalzell et al. (1996) was used to assign gears to these taxa and taxa that were assumed to be similar. In cases where multiple gears were assigned for a taxa that was not related to those listed in Dalzell et al. (1996), qualitative information from available literature were used to assign a breakdown. Where no information existed for multi-gear fisheries or there were two major gear types used to catch a taxa, catch was allocated evenly between gear types.

Tonga Artisanal gears were assigned to taxa in Tonga using the gear-types listed by taxa in Tu'avao et al. (1996). Taxa that were caught by net were further disaggregated into catch by cast nets and gillnets by assigning catch of all small pelagic taxa to cast nets (Tu'avao et al. 1996) and all other taxa that were caught by net were assigned to gill nets as it is the predominant gear. Taxa that were presented for catch by gear in (Bell et al. 1994) were allocated to gear types based on this breakdown and assumed to remain constant through time. For taxa that were not presented (Bell et al. 1994), but known to be caught by multiple gears, gears were assigned to the same breakdown as closely related taxa if available. Taxa that were caught by multiple gears that did not fall under a closely related breakdown were disaggregated based on an overall breakdown of gear-types, which was renormalized for each gear combination. This overall breakdown was an average from the 1987 breakdown for artisanal catch by gear (Bell et al. 1994) assuming this breakdown remained constant for 1950-1987 and then interpolated to the 2006 breakdown (Gillett 2011), which was held constant until 2015. Sources such as (Dalzell et al. 1996) and (Sawamura 1962) were also used to assign gear to taxa and investigate how gear use changed through time.

North America Canada Reconstruction of the Atlantic coast of Canada included artisanal gear data provided by the Government of Canada (Divovich et al. 2015a). Gear categories were updated to correspond with Table 2.

Three taxa are fished artisanally within Canada’s Pacific EEZ: abalone (Haliotis), lingcod (Ophiodon elongates), and butter clam (Saxidomus gigantean). Abalone were assumed to be caught entirely by artisanal diver throughout the time series (Fedorenko and Sprout 1982). Butter clams were assumed to be entirely collected by hand (Jamieson and Bourne 1986) as it is illegal to use any mechanical equipment or dredge to gather clams14. Information on gears used to catch lingcod were combined for artisanal and industrial fisheries. According to (DFO 2001, 2017), approximately 74% of total commercial catch of lingcod is taken by trawl and 26% by hook and line, with a small percentage caught by trolling by First Nations peoples. Trawl was assumed to be industrial based on Sea Around Us definitions and as a result, all landings of lingcod were assigned to small-scale lines to align with Table 2.

Catch by artisanal marine fisheries within Canada’s Arctic EEZ were assigned to gillnet15 for all taxa because it was the predominant gear-type for the major target species, Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus alpinus) and all other taxa were caught at levels less than 1 tonne annually.

14 http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/shellfish-coquillages-eng.html 15 http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/sustainable-durable/fisheries-peches/char-omble-eng.htm


45

Mexico Reconstruction of Mexico’s fisheries were originally assigned gear-types for artisanal fisheries for their Pacific and Atlantic EEZs (Cisneros-Montemayor et al. 2015). Gears were updated to correspond with overarching gear-types as listed in Table 2.

USA Reconstructions for mainland EEZs (East Coast, Gulf of Mexico, West Coast, Subarctic) of the USA already included gear provided by the National Marine Fisheries Service for artisanal catch (Doherty et al. 2015a; Doherty et al. 2015b; McCrea-Strub 2015). These were updated to correspond to the new gear types in Table 2. Landings in the Subarctic region of the USA did not appear to report gear form 1990 onward. As a result, the proportion of catch caught by each gear in the last year that gears were assigned was held constant for 1990-2014 in order to assign gear to catch for each taxa in the subarctic region.

Artisanal catches from the Arctic section of USA’s EEZ were allocated to gear-types based on information available from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game16. All taxa were assumed to be caught using gillnets with two exceptions. Paralithodes and Stebidys keycucythys were assumed to be taken with traps and Salvelinus malma malma was assumed to be caught by lines (handline) based on information reported by Hayes et al. (2011).

Artisanal catch within the Hawaiian EEZ was allocated to artisanal gears based on target species for each gear type references in Pooley (1993). For taxa that were listed as caught by artisanal fisheries by both lines (includes trolling and handlines) and traps, taxa were assumed to be caught by the predominant gear-type, lines. Taxa that were not referenced and did not appear similar to listed taxa were assigned to an unknown gear-type.

South America Brazil Several publications have separately analyzed the use of fishing gears in Brazilian artisanal fisheries in the various regions of the country (Freire 2005; Diegues et al. 2006; Leite Jr and Petrere Jr 2006; Shinozaki-Mendes et al. 2007; Tubino et al. 2007; Castello et al. 2009; Bastos and Petrere 2010; Begossi et al. 2012; Bentes et al. 2012; Previero et al. 2013; Motta et al. 2014; Chao et al. 2015). To create the breakdown of gear used for various taxa in Brazilian mainland waters, the information on all gears used in various regions was collected from these publications and summarized by region: North, Northeast, Southeast, and South. Where possible, the percentage of catch caught with a particular gear for a given taxon was used from the most relevant publication; otherwise, the catch was allocated equally to all major gears. Where a taxon could not be found in the literature, its closest taxonomical or functional relative was used instead. The regional gear distributions were also summarized into a general gear distribution for the whole of Brazil: this was used when there was no specific gear information for a particular taxon in one of the regions. Finally, categories comprising unidentified marine fishes were split between fishing gears according to a weighted percentage of total gear usage for more specific taxa.

Chile Information on gear used by artisanal fisheries in Chile to catch various taxa was collected from the literature (Van Waerebeek and Reyes 1994; Defeo and Carlos Castilla 1998; Bonfil et al. 2005; Project GloBAL 2007; Godoy et al. 2010; Gatica et al. 2015; Gobierno de 2016; Vargas-Caro et al. 2017). Due to a dearth of information on artisanal gear use in Chile, taxa were generally assigned to a single fishing gear, unless more detailed information was available. Catch was assigned to multiple gears based on best available proportions in the literature: otherwise, the catch was split equally among all gears found.

Venezuela Gear information for Venezuelan small-scale fisheries was collected from various sources dealing with the central and northeast regions of Venezuela (Cárdenas et al. 1991; Posada et al. 1996; Lárez et al. 2002; FAO 2005j; Cárdenas et al. 2009; Bjorkland 2011; Oliveiras et al. 2011). Where possible, information on catches by gear for taxa in a series of years was collected. Gear proportions for missing years were linearly interpolated between anchor points: if the gear proportion found for a given year represented the first or last year found in the literature, it was conserved and extended to the beginning or the end of the time series. Taxa for which there was 16 http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=commercialbyareanorthern.main


46

no catch-by-gear information found were assigned gears based on taxonomic or functional similarity to other groups. Finally, the catches of unidentified marine fishes (i.e., ‘Marine fishes nei’) were assigned gears based on a weighted catch proportions of all other taxa found in the literature search.

Global results Globally, bottom trawls have caught more ‘fish’ than any other gear (~28% from 1950-2014; Figure 1, Table 4). While purse seines used to catch 15% of global catches, they now account for over 25%; however, this has varied substantially over time due to high variability in the populations caught with purse seines (e.g., anchovies, sardines, etc.). Importantly, only two gears take the majority of all global catches: bottom trawls and purse seines. While industrial gears were the focus of this work, over 25 million tonnes were caught annually from 2000 to 2015 by ‘small-scale’ gears.

Major changes over this period have been the increase in catches attributed to a few major gear types such as bottom trawls, purse seines, and pelagic trawls. At the global level, the contribution of industrial longlines and gillnets make up a much smaller portion of global catches.

A major pattern of importance is the difference between different gear contributions to landings and discards, respectively. For example, bottom trawls (28% of total catch) account for 23% of global landings, but account for 58% of discards. Demonstrating the opposite pattern, purse seines (15% of total catch) account for nearly 29% of landings, but only 8% of discards.

Figure 1. Landings (a) and discards (b) by gear type with small-scale sectors aggregated


47

Table 4. Average gear use by decade in percentage with small-scale sectors aggregated.

Decade Bottom trawl Gillnets Longline Other Pelagic

trawl Purse seine

Small-scale Unknown

1950s 28.4 3.7 3.3 5.8 5.4 14.6 34.7 4.1 1960s 30.6 1.7 3.0 2.9 4.3 29.0 24.2 4.3 1970s 33.6 1.5 3.0 2.7 7.2 24.3 21.7 6.0 1980s 31.0 2.0 3.0 2.8 8.6 24.9 22.0 5.7 1990s 24.5 3.3 3.5 2.9 12.4 27.5 21.1 4.9 2000s 23.3 4.2 3.9 3.0 11.4 28.5 22.0 3.7 2010-14 23.6 5.1 4.2 3.0 10.8 24.4 24.3 4.5 Average 27.6 3.0 3.4 3.0 9.3 25.8 23.0 4.8

When looking at small-scale fisheries separately, gillnets and other entangling nets have caught the largest amount of fish over the 1950-2014 period (25%), followed by hook-and-line gear (20%), encircling nets such as purse seines (14%), and various pots and traps (12%). The yearly proportion of global artisanal catch per gear has generally remained stable over this time period, with the exceptions of encircling nets, whose proportion of the yearly global artisanal catch peaked at nearly 20% in the 1980s before falling to less than 10% during the 2000s and 2010s.

Table 5. Average artisanal gear use by decade in percentage.

Decade Gillnets Lines Purse seine Traps Hand or

tools Other nets

Seine nets

Other gear Bag nets Cast

nets 1950s 20.6 20.9 13.7 12.4 8.9 7.5 6.2 3.7 5.3 0.7 1960s 25.0 19.8 16.7 11.2 9.4 4.4 7.1 1.8 3.8 0.7 1970s 28.4 17.1 17.2 11.4 9.3 4.3 6.0 3.8 2.2 0.3 1980s 27.1 16.4 19.6 9.5 7.6 6.2 5.8 5.8 1.6 0.5 1990s 27.1 19.5 13.4 10.2 6.4 7.0 6.2 7.8 2.0 0.5 2000s 23.9 21.5 9.2 12.6 8.6 7.4 6.5 6.6 2.5 1.2 2010-14 22.0 22.0 8.0 13.2 10.3 8.1 5.6 6.2 2.9 1.6 Average 24.9 19.6 14 11.5 8.7 6.4 6.2 5.1 2.9 0.8

Discussion The major purpose of the present study was to create a global harmonization of fishing gear use data for the globally reconstructed catch data of the Sea Around Us (Pauly and Zeller 2016a). This will allow global and regional meta-analyses to be undertaken of catch by gear type as well as gear use patterns across the globe over the last 60+ years. The Sea Around Us will also make all these data publicly available as part of its open data policy (Pauly and Zeller 2016b).

Some of the trends in these data can be expanded with additional analyses. One area of importance is the value delivered by these gears, in comparison to their financial and ecological costs associated with their impacts (e.g., discards, bottom disturbance, catch of juveniles, etc.). We hope these data can serve as a source for many new analyses of fisheries gear use.

A limitation of this work is a dearth of relevant fishing gear data for every country and therefore for all reconstructed catches of the Sea Around Us database. Some countries had data available for a majority of the time period detailing their fisheries catches by species and gear (e.g., Norway, Scotland, and Sweden), while others had detailed information available only more recently (e.g., Denmark). Countries with the most limited amount of data have the most to gain by increasing their efforts in monitoring, quantifying, and reporting gear type use, as these can be used to understand the relative importance of different fisheries contributions to food and economic security of their countries.

While every effort was made to assign all industrial catches to a particular gear type, there were some cases where this was not possible. This is an area for future improvement; to both extend this understanding of fishing gear use to 100% of industrial catches and the small-scale sectors. However, as this work covers ~95% of industrial landings, we do contend that this work is global in coverage.

The current study made use of representative countries for seven regions of the world when deriving small-scale gear data. There are obvious challenges when extrapolating from a limited sample to represent a region.


48

However, we specifically chose the countries with the largest artisanal sectors, and thus most important in terms of catch, for each region to account for at least 24% of the region’s artisanal fisheries catch. In addition, we will continue to expand the number of countries considered in each region, and break down the world into more representative regions over time to refine the artisanal fisheries gear data.

Conclusion This study reconstructed fishing gear use from 1950-2014, and assigned the globally reconstructed catches of the Sea Around Us to 8 separate industrial gear categories and 10 separate artisanal gear categories, both with multiple gear types within most gear categories. These data will allow global and regional meta-analyses of catches by gear type to be undertaken for the last 60+ years.

Acknowledgements The Sea Around Us is a research initiative at the University of British Columbia and the University of Western Australia, supported by a number of philanthropic foundations, notably the Oak Foundation, Marisla Foundation, MAVA Foundation, Paul M. Angell Family Foundation, and Oceana. This study could not have been conducted without the previous extensive research of the authors and institutions cited in this report, and we thank their tireless efforts for making this work possible.


49

References Abaza H and Jha V (2001) The fisheries sector in Senegal. 109-120 p. Available at:

http://www.unep.ch/etu/publications/Synth_Senegal.PDF [Accessed: November 1, 2017]. Adebiyi OF (1998) Harmful Fishing Practices in the Coastal Belt of Nigeria : Use of Non-Selective Fishing

Gears.Cotonou. 21 p. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/an681e/an681e.pdf [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Adeogun OA, Solarin BB, Ambrose EE, Ogunbadejo HK, Bolaji DA, Orimogunje RO, Ajulo AA, Olusola AO, Aroriode RO and Adeogun MO (2011a) Crab Fishing and Socio-Economic Considerations in Lagos Lagoon System in Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Fisheries 8(2): 300-309.

Adeogun OA, Solarin BB, Ogunbadejo HK, Ambrose EE, Akinnigbagbe OR, Ajulo AA, Bolaji DA, Olusola OA and Adeogun MO (2011b) Economic performance of crab fishery in Lagos lagoon, Nigeria. International Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture 3(7): 118-125.

Aggrey-Fynn J (2008) The fishery of Balistes capriscus (Balistidae) in Ghana and possible reasons for its collapse. 110-110 p. Available at: http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ebook/dissts/Bremen/Aggrey2008.pdf [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Ainsworth C (2015) British Columbia marine fisheries catch reconstruction: 1873 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-62, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Akintola SL and Fakoya KA (2016) Governance and Social-Institutional Arrangement of Small-Scale Fisheries and Relationship with Non-Fishery Users in Badagry Creek , Lagos State , Nigeria. In Song AM, Bower S, Cooke S, Onyango P and Chuenpagdee R (eds.). Too Big To Ignore, St John's.

Akinwumi FO, Oa AIO and Ogundahunsi OA (2011) Characterization of Artisanal Fishery in the Coastal Area of Ondo State , Nigeria. International Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Soil Science 1(3): 83-89.

Al-Abdulrazzak D (2013a) Estimating total fish extractions in the United Arab Emirates: 1950- 2010. pp. 53-59 In Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: A recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Al-Abdulrazzak D (2013b) Reconstructing Kuwait’s marine fishery catches: 1950-2010. pp. 23-29 In Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: A recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Al-Abdulrazzak D (2013c) Total fishery extractions for Qatar: 1950-2010. pp. 31-37 In Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: A recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (2013a) Missing sectors from Bahrain's reported fisheries catches: 1950-2010. pp. 17-22 In Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: A recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries: 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (2013b) Reconstructing Iraq’s fisheries: 1950-2010. pp. 17-22 In Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: A recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Alava JJ, Lindop A and Jacquet J (2015) Marine fisheries catch reconstructions for continental Ecuador: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-34, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 25 p.

Alverson DL, Freeberg MH, Pope JG and Murawski SA (1994) A global assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. 233 p.

Ambrose EE, Solarin BB, Isebor CE and Williams AB (2005) Assessment of fish by-catch species from coastal artisanal shrimp beam trawl fisheries in Nigeria. Fisheries Research 71(1): 125-132.

Anon. (2014) 2014 수산연감 [Korean fisheries yearbook 2014]. Korean Fisheries Yearbook, Korea Fisheries Association, Seoul, South Korea. 589 p. p.

Anyanwu PE and Kusemiju K (2007) The Nigerian Tarpon: Resource Ecology and Fishery. pp. 115-128 In Ault JS (ed.). CRC Press.

Appledoorn R and Sanders I (2015) A 50 year reconstruction of fisheries catch in Puerto Rico. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-44, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Au A, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Cuba (1950-2009). pp. 25-32 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.


50

Baddyr M and Guénette S (2001) The fisheries of the Atlantic coast of Morocco 1950 1997. p. 15 In Zeller D, Watson R and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries impacts on the North Atlantic ecosystems: catch, effort, and national/regional data sets. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 9 (3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Baisre JA (2000a) Chronicle of Cuban marine fisheries, 1935-1995: trend analysis and fisheries potential. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 394. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. 26 p.

Baisre JA (2000b) The Cuban Spiny Lobster Fishery. pp. 135-152 In Phillips BF and Kittaka J (eds.). Fishing News Books.

Bale S, Frotté L, Harper S and Zeller D (2009) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for French Polynesia (1950-2007). pp. 53-65 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part 1. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Bale S, Rossing P, Booth S and Zeller D (2010) Denmark’s marine fisheries catches in the Baltic Sea (1950-2007). pp. 36-62 In Rossing P, Booth S and Zeller D (eds.), Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present. Fisheries Centre Research Report 18(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Barbosa M and Booth S (2009) East Timor’s fisheries catch reconstruction (1950-2009): Fisheries under different regimes. pp. 39-51 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Bastos GC and Petrere M (2010) Small-scale marine fisheries in the municipal district of Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil. Brazilian journal of biology = Revista brasleira de biologia 70(4): 947-953.

Baust S, Teh LCL, Harper S and Zeller D (2015) South Africa's marine fisheries catches (1950-2010). pp. 129-150 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Begossi A, Salyvonchyk S, Nora V, Lopes PF and Silvano RAM (2012) The paraty artisanal fishery (southeastern Brazilian coast): ethnoecology and management of a social-ecological system (SES). Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 8(1): 22-22.

Belhabib D (2015a) Fisheries of São Tomé and Príncipe, a catch reconstruction 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-67, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 13 p.

Belhabib D (2015b) Gabon fisheries between 1950 and 2010: a catch reconstruction. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-08, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p.

Belhabib D and Divovich E (2015) Rich fisheries and poor data: a catch reconstruction for Angola, 1950-2010, an update of Belhabib and Divovich (2014). pp. 115-128 In Belhabib D and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: West Africa, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Belhabib D, Doumbouya A, Copeland D, Gorez B, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2012a) Guinean fisheries, past, present and future? pp. 91-104 In Belhabib D, Zeller D, Harper S and Pauly D (eds.), Marine fisheries catches in West Africa, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Belhabib D, Gascuel D, Abou Kane E, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2012b) Preliminary estimation of realistic fisheries removals from Mauritania: 1950-2010. pp. 61-78 In Belhabib D, Zeller D, Harper S and Pauly D (eds.), Marine fisheries catches in West Africa, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Belhabib D, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2012c) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Morocco (North, Central and South), 1950-2010. pp. 23-40 In Belhabib D, Zeller D, Harper S and Pauly D (eds.), Marine fisheries catches in West Africa, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Belhabib D, Hellebrandt D, Allison EH and Pauly D (2015a) Equatorial Guinea: a catch reconstruction (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-71, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 24 p.

Belhabib D, Hellebrandt Da Silva D, Allison EH, Zeller D and Pauly D (2016) Filling a blank on the map: 60 years of fisheries in Equatorial Guinea. Fisheries Management and Ecology 23(2): 119-132.

Belhabib D, Koutob V, Gueye N, Mbaye L, Mathews C, Lam VWY and Pauly D (2013) Lots of boats and fewer fishes: A preliminary catch reconstruction for Senegal, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-03, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 34 p.

Belhabib D, Koutob V, Lam VWY, Matthew C, Lazar N, Ndiaye V, Tobey J and Pauly D (2014a) Beyond the unseen: a first collaborative model towards estimating illegal, unreported, and unregulated catches in Senegal. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-05, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 22 p.

Belhabib D, Koutob V, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015b) The marine fisheries of Togo, the 'Heart of West Africa', 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-70, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 28 p.


51

Belhabib D, Mendy A and Pauly D (2014b) Big fishing for small fishes: six decades of fisheries in The Gambia, 'the smiling coast of Africa's". Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-07, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 20 p.

Belhabib D and Pauly D (2015a) Benin fisheries: a catch reconstruction, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-03, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 13 p.

Belhabib D and Pauly D (2015b) Côte d‘Ivoire fisheries catch reconstruction, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-66, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 33 p.

Belhabib D and Pauly D (2015c) Fisheries in troubled waters: a catch reconstruction for Guinea-Bissau, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-72, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 21 p.

Belhabib D and Pauly D (2015d) Reconstructing fisheries catches for Cameroon between 1950 and 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-04, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 8 p.

Belhabib D, Pauly D, Harper S and Zeller D (2012d) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Algeria, 1950-2010. pp. 1-22 In Belhabib D, Pauly D, Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Marine fisheries catches in West Africa, 1950-2010, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Belhabib D, Ramdeen S and Pauly D (2015c) An attempt at reconstructing the marine fisheries catches in the Congo (ex-Zaire), 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-06, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Belhabib D, Willemse N and Pauly D (2015d) A fishery tale: Namibian fisheries between 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-65, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 17 p.

Bell LAJ, Fa'anunu U and Koloa R (1994) Fisheries resource profiles: Kingdom of Tonga. Forum Fisheries Agency. 197 p.

Bentes B, Isaac VJ, Espírito-Santo RVd, Frédou T, Almeida MCd, Mourão KRM and Frédou FL (2012) Multidisciplinary approach to identification of fishery production systems on the northern coast of Brazil. Biota Neotropica 12(1): 81-92.

Berger J, Smoker J and King KA (1986) Foreign and joint venture catches and allocations in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska fishing area under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 1977-84. Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center, NMFS, NOAA. 53 p.

Bjorkland RH (2011) An Assessment of Sea Turtle, Marine Mammal and Seabird Bycatch in the Wider Caribbean Region. 1-230 p. Available at: http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/5632 [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Boistol L, Harper S, Booth S and Zeller D (2011) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Mauritius and its outer islands, 1950-2008. pp. 39-61 In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstruction: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Bolje A, Marčeta B, Blejec A and Lindop A (2015) Marine fish catches in Slovenia between 1950 and 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-58, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 13 p.

Bonfil R, Simpfendorfer CA and Acuña E (2005) Southeast Pacific. pp. 186-192 In Folwer S, Cavanagh R, Camhi M, Burguess G, Cailliet G, Fordham S, Simpfendorfer CA and Musick J (eds.), Sharks, rays and chimaeras: the status of the chondrichthyan fishes. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Boonzaier L, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2012) A brief history of fishing in the Prince Edward Islands, South Africa, 1950-2010. pp. 95-101 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Report 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Booth S and Azar H (2009) The fisheries of St Helena and its dependencies. pp. 27-34 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Booth S and Knip D (2014) The catch of living marine resources around Greenland from 1950-2010. pp. 55-72 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Booth S and Pauly D (2011) Myanmar’s marine capture fisheries 1950-2008: Expansion from the coast to the deep waters. pp. 101-134 In Harper S, O’Meara D, Booth S, Zeller D and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries Catches for the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem since 1950. BOBLME-2011-Ecology-16. Report to the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem Project.

Booth S and Watts P (2007) Canada's arctic marine fish catches. pp. 3-16 In Zeller D and Pauly D (eds.), Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for key countries and regions (1950-2005). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 15(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Bousso T (1994) Typologie des engins et techniques de peche artisanale utilises au Siné-Saloum (Sénégal).Dakar, Sénégal. 111-111 p.


52

Bousso T (2000) Biodiversité et stratégies de pêche, exemple de pêcheries estuariennes du Sénégal.Dakar, Sénégal. 27-27 p.

Budimartono V, Badrudin M, Divovich E and Pauly D (2015a) A reconstruction of marine fisheries catches of Indonesia, with emphasis on Central and Eastern Indonesia, 1950 - 2010. pp. 3-26 In Pauly D and Budimartono V (eds.), Marine fisheries catches of Western, Central and Eastern Indonesia, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-61. University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Budimartono V, Badrudin M and Pauly D (2015b) Indonesian marine fisheries catches in the Western Indonesia (FAO area 57) and in the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem Project (BOBLME) area: a tentative reconstruction, 1950-2010. pp. 27-51 In Pauly D and Budimartono V (eds.), Marine fisheries catches of Western, Central and Eastern Indonesia, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-61. University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Bugoni L, Neves TS, Carvalho D and Peppes FV (2007) Hook-and-line fisheries in Brazil: description and impacts on seabirds. 17 p.

Bultel E, Doherty B, Herman A, Le Manach F and Zeller D (2015a) An update of the reconstructed marine fisheries catches of Tanzania with taxonomic breakdown. pp. 151-161 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Bultel E, Gascuel D, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zylich K (2015b) Catch reconstruction for the French Atlantic coasts, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-37, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 20 p.

Bultel E, Le Manach F, Ulman A and Zeller D (2015c) Catch reconstruction for the French Mediterranean Sea, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-38, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 20 p.

Bultel E, Lindop A, Ramdeen R and Zylich K (2015d) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for St. Barthélémy and St. Martin (French Caribbean, 1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-39, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Bultel E and Zylich K (2015) Fisheries catch reconstruction of the Western Atlantic French archipelago of Saint Pierre et Miquelon, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-42, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Bӑnaru D, Le Manach F, Färber L, Zylich K and Pauly D (2015) From bluefin tuna to gobies: a reconstruction of the fisheries catch statistics in Romania, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-48, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 10 p.

Camara MB (2008) Quelle gestion des pêches artisanales en Afrique de l’Ouest? Etude de la complexité de l’espace halieutique en zone littorale sénégalaise. 1-339 p.

Cárdenas JJ, Achury A and Guaiquirián YJ (2009) La Pesca Marítima Artesanal en el Oriente de Venezuela , Evolución y Comportamiento en los Últimos 20 Años. In Proceedings of the 62nd Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 2009, Cumana, Venezuela.

Cárdenas JJ, Silva JL and Mendoza J (1991) Evolucion de la flota pesquera artesanal maritima del nororiente Venezolano, entre los anos 1984 y 1990. Memoria de la Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales La Salle 51(135-136): 145-157.

Carreras M, Coll M, Quetglas A, Goñi R, Pastor X, Cornax MJ, Iglesia M, Massutí E, Oliver P, Aguilar R, Au A, Zylich K and Pauly D (2015) Estimates of total fisheries removal for the Balearic Islands (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-19, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 45 p.

Castello JP, Sunyé PS, Haimovici M and Hellebrandt D (2009) Fisheries in southern Brazil: A comparison of their management and sustainability. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 25(3): 287-293.

Castro JJ, Divovich E, Acevedo ADM and Barrera-Luján A (2015) Over-looked and under-reported: a catch reconstruction of marine fisheries in the Canary Islands, Spain, 1950–2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-26, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 35 p.

CCAMLR (2014) Fishery Report 2014: Exploratory fishery for Dissostichus spp. in subareas 88.1 and 88.2. Ceylan Y, ŞAhin C and Kalayci F (2014) Bottom trawl fishery discards on the Black Sea coast of Turkey.

Mediterranean Marine Science 15(1): 156-164. Chao NL, Frédou FL, Haimovici M, Peres MB, Polidoro B, Raseira M, Subirá R and Carpenter K (2015) A popular

and potentially sustainable fishery resource under pressure–extinction risk and conservation of Brazilian Sciaenidae (Teleostei: Perciformes). Global Ecology and Conservation 4: 117-126.

Chapman L and Fusimalohi T (1998) Report on second visit to three locations in Papua New Guinea 23 January - 2 May 1982. Unpublished Report No. 19, South Pacific Commission, Noumea, New Caledonia. 23 p.

Charles-Dominique E and Diallo M (1997) Le trémail , une innovation dans la pêche artisanale sénégalaise : processus de diffusion et fonctionnement.Dakar, Sénégal. 23-23 p.

Chikuni S (1985) The fish resources of the northwest Pacific. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper (266): 190 pp.-190 pp.


53

Cinco EA, Zylich K, Teh LCL and Pauly D (2015) The marine and estuarine fisheries of Brunei Darussalam, 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-29, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

Cisneros-Montemayor A, Cisneros-Mata M, Harper S and Pauly D (2015) Unreported marine fisheries catch in Mexico, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-22, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Cisneros-Montemayor AM, Cisneros-Mata MA, Harper S and Pauly D (2013) Extent and implications of IUU catch in Mexico's marine fisheries. Marine Policy 39: 283-288.

Clark MR, Rowden AA, Schnabel K and Tracey DM (2010) Deep-sea benthic sampling in the Kermadec region: Past, present, future. In Deep: Talks and thoughts celebrating diversity in New Zealand's untouched Kermadecs.

Claro R, Baisre JA, Lindeman KC and García-Arteaga JP (2001) Cuban fisheries: historical trends and current status. pp. 194-253 In Claro R, Lindeman KC and Parenti LR (eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.

Coll M, Carreras M, Cornax MJ, Massuti E, Morote E, Pastor X, Quetglas A, Sáez R, Silva I, Sobrino I, Torres MA, Tudela S, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015a) An estimate of the total catch in the Spanish Mediterranean Sea and Gulf of Cadiz regions (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-60, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 1-29 p.

Coll M, Carreras M, Cornax MJ, Massuti E, Morote E, Pastor X, Quetglas A, Sáez R, Silva I, Sobrino I, Torres MA, Tudela S, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015b) An estimate of the total catch in the Spanish Mediterranean Sea and Gulf of Cadiz regions (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-60, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 52 p.

Colléter M, Djibril AD, Hosch G, Labrosse P, Yvergniaux Y, Le Manach F and Pauly D (2015) Le développement soutenu de pêcheries artisanales : reconstruction des captures marines à Djibouti de 1950 à 2010 [With an extended English abstract]. pp. 13-26 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Corpus L (2014) Reconstructing Singapore’s marine fisheries catch, 1950-2010. pp. 137-146 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Crawford K, Harper S and Zeller D (2011) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Tuvalu (1950-2009). In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

CRODT (2007) Report D2.7 Senegal Case study presentation. 22-22 p. Dalzell P, Adams T and Polunin N (1996) Coastal fisheries in the Pacific islands. pp. 395-537 In Ansell A, Gibson

R and Barnes M (eds.), Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review34. UCL Press, London. Defeo O and Carlos Castilla J (1998) Harvesting and economic patterns in the artisanal Octopus mimus

(Cephalopoda) fishery in a northern Chile cove. Fisheries Research 38(2): 121-130. Delaney A and Yagi N (2017) The Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines. 14: 313-332. Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture (2013) Bottom otter trawl fishery - Lampara fishery: Fisheries

Management Plan. Ministry for Sustainability, the Environment and Climate Change, Malta. 76 p. DFO (2001) Lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus). DFO Stock Status Report A6-18, Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Pacific

Region. DFO (2017) Integrated fisheries management plan groundfish effective February 21, 2017 - summary. Fisheries

and Oceans Canada (DFO). 32 p. Diegues AC, Vasconcellos M and Kalikoski DC (2006) Artisanal Fisheries in Brazil. 72-72. Divovich E, Belhabib D, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015a) Eastern Canada, "a fishery with no clean hands": Marine

fisheries catch reconstruction from 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-56, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 37 p.

Divovich E, Färber L, Shon S and Zylich K (2015b) An updated catch reconstruction of the marine fisheries of Taiwan from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-78, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 7 p.

Divovich E, Jovanović B, Zylich K, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015c) Caviar and politics: A reconstruction of Russia's marine fisheries in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov from 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-84, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 24 p.

Divovich E, Teh LCL, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015d) Preliminary reconstruction of Bermuda's marine fisheries catches, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-96, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 18 p.


54

Doherty B, Gibson D, Zhai Y, McCrea-Strub A, Zylich K, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015a) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Subarctic Alaska, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-82, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 34 p.

Doherty B, Harguth H, McCrea-Strub A, Jenkins LD and Figueira W (2015b) Reconstructing catches along Highway 101: Historic catch estimates for marine fisheries in California, Oregon and Washington from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-81, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 66 p.

Doherty B, Hauzer M and Le Manach F (2015c) Reconstructing catches for the union of the Comoros: uniting historical sources of catch data for Ngazidja, Ndzuwani and Mwali from 1950–2010. pp. 1-12 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Doherty B, Herfaut J, Le Manach F, Harper S and Pauly D (2015d) Reconstructing domestic marine fisheries in Mayotte from 1950–2010. pp. 53-66 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Doherty B, McBride MM, Brito AJ, Le Manach F, Sousa L, Chauca I and Zeller D (2015e) Marine fisheries in Mozambique: catches updated to 2010 and taxonomic disaggregation. pp. 67-82 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Donadi R, Au A, Zylich K, Harper S and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of marine fisheries in El Salvador, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-35, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 22 p.

Doyi BA (1984) Catalogue of small-scale fishing gear of Ghana. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/R0395E/R0395E00.htm#TOC [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Doyon S (2007) Fishing for the revolution. Transformations and adaptations in Cuban fisheries. Mast 6(1): 83-108.

Edelist D, Scheinin A, Sonin O, Shapiro J, Salameh P, Rilov G, Benayahu Y, Schulz D and Zeller D (2013) Israel: Reconstructed estimates of total fisheries removals in the Mediterranean, 1950-2010. Acta Adriatica 54(2): 253-263.

Etim L, Belhabib D and Pauly D (2015) An overview of the Nigerian marine fisheries subsector and a re-evaluation of its catch data over the past 60 years (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-68, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

European Union (2007) Pilot study report on the evaluation of discards of the Cyprus fishery. As part of Cyprus's national fisheries data collection programme, EU Data Collection Regulation (DCR) No 1543/2000, No 1639/2001 and No 1581/2004. 41 p.

Falkland Islands Government Fisheries Department (2005) Fishery statistics.9, FIG Fisheries Department, Stanley. 70 p.

Falkland Islands Government Fisheries Department (2015) Fishery Statistics.19, FIG Fisheries Department, Stanley. 96 p.

FAO (2000) Chronicle of Cuban marine fisheries (1935-1995). Trend analysis and potential. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, FAO, Rome. 26 pp. p.

FAO (2003a) Fisheries profile: South Korea. FAO (2003b) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Food and Agriculture

Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/SAU/profile.htm [Accessed: FAO (2003c) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The State of Kuwait. Food and Agriculture

Organization, Rome. FAO (2004) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - Ukraine. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. FAO (2005a) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Lithuania. Food and Agriculture

Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/docs/DOCUMENT/fcp/en/FI_CP_LT.pdf [Accessed:

FAO (2005b) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - Belize. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/blz/profile.htm [Accessed:

FAO (2005c) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Islamic Republic of Iran. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

FAO (2005d) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Kingdom of Belgium. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

FAO (2005e) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Cyprus. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

FAO (2005f) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Estonia. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.


55

FAO (2005g) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Finland. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/FIN/en [Accessed:

FAO (2005h) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Latvia. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/LVA/en [Accessed:

FAO (2005i) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Socialist Republic of Viet Nam.435, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/index/en/?iso3=VNM [Accessed:

FAO (2005j) Fishery Country Profile Venezuela. 38-38 p. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/VEN/es [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

FAO (2006a) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Union of Myanmar. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/MMR/profile.htm [Accessed:

FAO (2006b) Fishery country profile profil de la pêche par La Republica de Nicaragua. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/16919/en [Accessed:

FAO (2007a) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - Saint Lucia. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/LCA/profile.htm [Accessed:

FAO (2007b) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Federal Republic of Germany. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

FAO (2007c) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Namibia. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

FAO (2007d) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Poland. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/POL/en [Accessed:

FAO (2007e) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Russian Federation. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

FAO (2007f) General information on Ghana related to Fisheries.Accra. 15-28 p. FAO (2007g) Resumen Informativo sobre la pesca por paises La República de Panamá. Food and Agriculture

Organization, Rome. FAO (2008) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - Turkey. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

1689-1699 p. FAO (2009a) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Eastern Republic of Uruguay. Food and

Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/URY/es#CountrySector-PostHarvest [Accessed:

FAO (2009b) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Palau. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/PLW/en [Accessed:

FAO (2010a) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - Republic of Peru.Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/PER/profile.htm [Accessed:

FAO (2010b) Nigeria. pp. 39-50 In Country reports presented at the FAO FishCode-STF/CECAF/FCWC Subregional Workshop on the Improvement of Fishery Information and Data Collection Systems in the West Central Gulf of Guinea region. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report. Food and Agriculture Organization, Accra, Ghana.

FAO (2011) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Republic of Ecuador. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/ECU/es#CountrySector-PostHarvest [Accessed:

FAO (2013) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Kingdom of Denmark. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/DNK/en [Accessed:

FAO (2014) Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles - The Argentine Republic. Food and Agriculture Organization. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/ARG/es [Accessed:

FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture (1996) Fisheries and aquaculture in the Near East and North Africa: situation and outlook in 1996. FAO Fisheries Circular Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. 37 p.

Fedorenko A and Sprout P (1982) Abalone biology, fishery regulations, commercial catch (1952-1980), and current state of resources in British Columbia. Canadian Manuscaript Report of Fisheris and Aquatic Sciences 1648, Department of Fisheris and Oceans (DFO), Prince Rupert, B. C. 74 p.

Fisheries; MoAFa (2016) Survey on Marine Fishery Production. Forrester C, Beardsley AJ and Takahashi Y (1978) Groundfish, shrimp, and herring fisheries in the Bering Sea

and Northeast Pacific: historical catch statistics through 1970. Bulletin # 37, International North Pacific Fisheries Commission. 147 p.

Fredin RA (1987) History of regulation of Alaskan groundfish fisheries. NWAFC Processed Report 87-07, Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center, Seattle, Washington. 63 p.

Freire K (2005) Fishing impacts on marine ecosystems off Brazil. PhD thesis, University of British Columbia, Resource Management and Environmental Studies, Vancouver, Canada. 254-254 p.


56

Freire KMF, Aragão JAN, Araújo ARR, Ávila-da-Silva AO, Bispo MCS, Canziani GV, Carneiro MH, Gonçalves FDS, Keunecke KA, Mendonça JT, Moro PS, Motta FS, Olavo G, Pezzuto PR, Santana RF, Santos RA, Trindade-Santos I, Vasconcelos JA, Vianna M and Divovich E (2015) Reconstruction of catch statistics for Brazilian marine waters (1950-2010). pp. 3-30 In Freire KMF and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions for Brazil’s mainland and oceanic islands. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 23(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Friedman K, Kronen M, Pinca S, Magron F, Boblin P, Pakoa K, Awiva R and Chapman L (2008) Papua New Guinea Country Report: Profiles and results from survey work at Adra, Tsoilaunung, Sideia, and Panapompom (June to November 2006). Pacofroc Regional Oceanic and Coastal Fisheries Development Programme (PROCFish/C/CoFish), Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea, New Caledonia. 435 p.

Frotté L, Harper S, Veitch L, Booth S and Zeller D (2009a) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Guadeloupe from 1950-2007. pp. 13-19 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Frotté L, Harper S, Veitch L, Booth S and Zeller D (2009b) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Martinique, 1950-2007. pp. 21-26 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Report 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Funes M, Zylich K, Divovich E, Zeller D, Lindop A, Pauly D and Box S (2015) Honduras, a fish exporting country: Preliminary reconstructed marine catches in the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Fonseca, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-90, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

Gabriel O, Lange K, Dahm E and Wendt T, editors (2005) Von Brandt's Fish Catching Methods of the World, Fourth Edition edition. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford. 536 p.

Gatica C, Neira S, Arancibia H and Vásquez S (2015) The biology, fishery and market of Chilean hake (Merluccius gayi gayi) in the Southeastern Pacific Ocean. pp. 126-153 In Arancibia H (ed.), 1st edition. John Wiley and & Sons, Ltd.

Georges J, Ramdeen R, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catch for Antigua and Barbuda (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-13, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 18 p.

GFCM and FAO (2016) The State of Mediterranean and Black Sea Fisheries. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. 152 p.

Gibson D, Cardwell E, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015a) Preliminary reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands in EEZ equivalent waters (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-76, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 20 p.

Gibson D, Froese R, Ueberschaer B, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015b) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Germany in the North Sea (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-09, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p.

Gibson D, McCrea-Strub A and Zeller D (2015c) Updated reconstruction of Hawaiian fisheries 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-83, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 8 p.

Gibson D, Uberschaer B, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Preliminary reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Denmark in the Kattegat, the Skagerrak and the North Sea (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-25, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 12 p.

Gibson D, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015d) Preliminary reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for the Netherlands in the North Sea (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-46, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Gillett R (2009) Fisheries in the economies of the Pacific island countries and territories. Pacific Studies Series, Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines.

Gillett R (2011) Fisheries of the Pacific Islands. Regional and national information. RAP Publication 2011/03, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. 279 p.

Gillett R (2012) The Management of Tuna Baitfisheries : The Results of a Global Study The Management of Tuna Baitfisheries : The Results of a Global Study.

Glaser S, Roberts P, Mazurek R, Hurlburt K and Kane-Hartnet L (2015) Securing Somali Fishers. Secure Fisheries: Advancing Sustainable Fisheries, Denver, CO.

Gobierno de C (2016) Estado de situación de las principales pesquerías chilenas, año 2015. 93-93 p. Godoy N, Gelcich S, Vásquez Ja and Castilla JC (2010) Spearfishing to depletion : evidence from temperate reef

fishes in Chile from temperate reef fishes in Chile to Spearfishing depletion. Ecological applications 20(6): 1504-1511.

Greer K, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2012) Cocos (Keeling) Island and Christmas Island: brief history of fishing and coastal catches (1950-2010). pp. 1-13 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly


57

D and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Report 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Haas A, Harper S and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of Nicaragua's fisheries catches: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-23, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Haas A, Harper S, Zylich K, Hehre J and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of the Republic of the Marshall Islands fisheries catches: 1950-2010. pp. 121-128 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Haas A, Rongo T, Hefferman N, Harper S and Zeller D (2012) Reconstruction of the Cook Islands fisheries catches: 1950-2010. pp. 15-24 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D. (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Halouani G, Lasram F, Khalfallah M, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Tunisia (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-95, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p.

Harper S, Bothwell J, Bale S, Booth S and Zeller D (2009a) Cayman Island fisheries catches: 1950-2007. pp. 3-11 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Harper S, Frotté L, Bale S, Booth S and Zeller D (2009b) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for New Caledonia (1950-2007). pp. 67-75 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Harper S, Frotté L, Booth S, Veitch L and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for French Guiana from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-07, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p.

Harper S, Frotté L, Booth S and Zeller D (2009c) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Wallis and Futuna Islands (1950-2007). pp. 99-104 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Harper S, Guzmán HM, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Reconstructing Panama’s total fisheries catches from 1950 to 2010: highlighting data deficiencies and management needs. Marine Fisheries Review 76: 51-65.

Harper S, Zeller D and Sumaila UR (2011) Under the threat of oil: assessing the value and contribution of Belizean fisheries. pp. 152-160 In Palomares MLD and Pauly D (eds.), Too Precious to Drill: the Marine Biodiversity of Belize. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(6). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Hayes S, Bue F, Newland E, Busher W, EClark K, Evenson D, Borba B, Horne-Brine M and Bergstrom D (2011) Annual Management Report Yukon and Northern Areas 2005. Fishery Management Report No. 11-36, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, Alaska. 180 p.

Heddon S (2006) The Constraints of the Artisanal Fishing Industry in Lamu District. 58 p. Available at: http://www.oceandocs.org/bitstream/handle/1834/7347/ktf0290.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Hemmings M, Harper S and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of total marine catches for the Maldives: 1950-2010. pp. 107-120 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Honma Y (1998) Asian Hagfishes and their Fisheries Biology. In Jørgensen JM, Lomholt JP, Weber RE and Malte H (eds.), The Biology of Hagfishes. Chapman and Hall, London.

Hornby C, Arun Kumar A, Bhathal B, Pauly D and Zeller D (2015a) Reconstruction of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands marine fish catch from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-75, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 27 p.

Hornby C, Bhathal B, Pauly D and Zeller D (2015b) Reconstruction of India's marine fish catch from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-77, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 42 p.

Hornby C, Harper S, MacDonald J and Zeller D (2015c) Reconstruction of Suriname's marine fisheries catches from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-49, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 14 p.

Hornby C, Moazzam M, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of Pakistan’s marine fisheries catches (1950 – 2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-28, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 54 p.

Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture (2012) The main species. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20171017221702/http:/www.fisheries.is/main-species [Accessed:

ICES (2011) Historical Nominal Catches 1950-2010. Eurostat/ICES database on catch statistics. ICES (2017) Official Nominal Catches 2006-2015. Eurostat/ICES data compilation of catch statistics.


58

International Labour Organization (2016) Country Profile: Nigeria. 15 p. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/ilostat/faces/home/statisticaldata/ContryProfileId?_adf.ctrl-state=av7o13qpc_4&_afrLoop=15812330396702#! [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Iritani D, Färber L, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of fisheries catches for Bosnia-Herzegovina: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-15, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 7 p.

Iseki T, Machida M, Takeuchi H, Yagi Y and Uehara S (2017) Age and growth of red tilefish Branchiostegus japonicus from western Wakasa Bay, Japan, based on otolith analyses using the cross-section and surface methods. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi.

Jabatan Perikanan Malaysia (2011) Annual fisheries statistics 2010.Kuala Lumpur. 85 p. Jacquet JL and Zeller D (2007) Putting the 'United' in the United Republic of Tanzania: Reconstructing marine

fisheries catches. pp. 49-60 In Zeller D and Pauly D (eds.), Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for key countries and regions (1950-2005). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 15(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Jamieson G and Bourne N (1986) North Pacific workshop on stock assessment and management of invertebrates. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 92, Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), Ottawa.

Jovanović B, Divovich E, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015) Estimates of total Russian fisheries catches in the Barents Sea region (FAO 27 subarea I) between 1950 and 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-59, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

Joyce IT (1996) The fisheries of the Cuban insular shelf: culture, history, and revolutionary performance. 624-624 p.

Kafayat AF, Martins AA, Shehu LA, Abdulwakil OS and Abass MA (2015) Life-stages, exploitation status and habitat use of Lutjanus goreensis (Perciformes: Lutjanidae) in coastal marine environments of Lagos, SW Nigeria. International Journal of Tropical Biology 63(1): 199-212.

Kask JL and Hiyama Y (1947) Japanese Fishing Gears.Tokyo. 1-107 p. Kenya Maritime Authority (2015) Kenya Maritime Factbook: facts and figures from the maritime clusters. Keskin Ç, Ulman A, Iritani D and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of fisheries catches for Montenegro: 1950-2010.

Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-27, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p. Keskin Ç, Ulman A, Raykov V, Daskalov GM, Zylich K, Pauly D and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of fisheries

catches for Bulgaria: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-20, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 18 p.

Keskin Ç, Ulman A, Zylich K, Raykov V, Daskalov GM, Pauly D and Zeller D (2017) The marine fisheries in Bulgaria's exclusive economic zone, 1950-2013. Frontiers in Marine Science 4.

Khalfallah M, Dimech M, Ulman A, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015a) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for the Republic of Malta (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-43, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 12 p.

Khalfallah M, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015b) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Fujairah (UAE) (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-57, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 13 p.

Khalfallah M, Zylich K, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015c) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Oman (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-89, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p.

Khin MS (2008) Trends of development of Myanmar fisheries: with references to Japanese experiences. Visiting Research Fellow Monograph Series, Institute of Developing Economies. 58 p.

King M (1986a) Catch statistics for foreign and domestic commercial fishing in New Zealand waters, January-December 1983. Fisheries Research Division Occasional Publication Data Series No. 21, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wellington, New Zealand.

King M (1986b) Catch statistics for foreign and domestic commercial fishing in New Zealand waters, January-December, 1983. Fisheries Research Division Occasional Publication: Data Series No. 21, New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wellington, New Zealand.

Kleisner KM, Brennan C, Garland A, Lingard S, Tracey S, Sahlqvist P, Tsolos A, Pauly D and Zeller D (2015) Australia: reconstructing estimates of total fisheries removals 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-02, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 26 p.

Kraan M and Taal K (2014) Fisheries in Senegal: Exploration of opportunities for cooperation between Senegal

and the Netherlands. 24 p. Available at: http://doczz.fr/doc/109968/fisheries-in-senegal---nederlandse-ambassade-in-dakar--se [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Lárez AF, Marcano SJ, Mendoza JJ and Carrión AJ (2002) Coastal artisanal pelagic gillnet fishery in Juan Griego, Margarita Island, Venezuela (period 1993-1999). Memoria de la Fundación La Salle de Ciencias Naturales 157: 111-128.

Lassen H (2011) Industrial fisheries in the Baltic Sea. European Parliament, Brussels. 48 p.


59

Le Manach F, Abunge CA, McClanahan TR and Pauly D (2015a) Tentative reconstruction of Kenya's marine fisheries catch, 1950–2010. pp. 37-52 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Le Manach F, Bach P, Barret L, Guyomard D, Fleury PG, Sabarros PS and Pauly D (2015b) Reconstruction of the domestic and distant-water fisheries catch of La Réunion (France), 1950–2010. pp. 83-98 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Le Manach F, Bach P, Boistol L, Robinson J and Pauly D (2015c) Artisanal fisheries in the world's second largest Tuna fishing ground — reconstruction of the Seychelles' marine fisheries catch, 1950–2010. pp. 99-110 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Le Manach F, Chavance P, Cisneros-Montemayor A, Lindop A, Padilla A, Schiller L, D Z and Pauly D (2016) Global catches of large pelagic fishes, with emphasis on the high seas. pp. 34-45 In Pauly D and Zeller D (eds.), Global atlas of marine fisheries: a critical appraisal of catches and ecosystem impacts. Island Press, Washington D.C.

Le Manach F, Dura D, Pere A, Riutort JJ, Lejeune P, Santoni MC, Culioli JM and Pauly D (2011) Preliminary estimate of total marine fisheries catches in Corsica, France (1950-2008). pp. 3-14 In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstruction: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Report 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Le Manach F, Gough C, Harris A, Humber F, Harper S and Zeller D (2012) Unreported fishing, hungry people and political turmoil: the recipe for a food security crisis in Madagascar? Marine Policy 36(1): 218-225.

Le Manach F and Pauly D (2015a) First estimate of unreported catch in the French Îles Éparses, 1950-2010. pp. 27-36 In Le Manach F and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions in the Western Indian Ocean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 23(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Le Manach F and Pauly D (2015b) Update of the fisheries catch reconstruction of Corsica (France), 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-33, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 5 p.

Leitão F, Baptista V, Erzini K, Iritani D and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of mainland Portugal fisheries catches 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-08, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 30 p.

Leite Jr NO and Petrere Jr M (2006) Stock assessment and fishery management of the pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus brasiliensis Latreille, 1970 and F. paulensis Pérez-Farfante, 1967 in Southeastern Brazil (23° to 28° S). Brazilian Journal of Biology 66(1B): 263-277.

Lescrauwaet AK, Torreele E, Vincx M, Polet H, Mees J, Lindop A and Zylich K (2015) Invisible catch: a century of by-catch and unreported removals in sea fisheries, Belgium 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-18, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 18 p.

Lindop A, Bultel E, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015a) Reconstructing the former Netherlands Antilles marine catches from 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-69, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 22 p.

Lindop A, Chen T, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015b) A reconstruction of Colombia's marine fisheries catches. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-32, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Lindop A, Ixquiac-Cabrera M, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015c) A reconstruction of marine fish catches in the Republic of Guatemala. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-41, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 17 p.

Lingard S, Harper S, Aiken K, Hado N, Smikle S and Zeller D (2012a) Marine fisheries of Jamaica: total reconstructed catch 1950-2010. pp. 47-59 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Lingard S, Harper S, Ota Y and Zeller D (2011) Marine fisheries of Palau, 1950-2008: Total reconstructed catch. pp. 73-84 In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstruction: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Lingard S, Harper S and Zeller D (2012b) Reconstructed catches of Samoa 1950-2010. pp. 103-118 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Lorenzo MI, Defeo O, Roshan Moniri N and Zylich K (2015) Fisheries catch statistics for Uruguay. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-25, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 6 p.

MacDonald J, Harper S, Booth S and Zeller D (2015) Guyana fisheries catch: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-21, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 18 p.


60

Mahmoud H, Teh LSL, Khalfallah M and Pauly D (2015) Reconstruction of marine fisheries statistics in the Egyptian Mediterranean Sea, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-85, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

Makino M (2011) Fisheries Management in Japan. Springer Science & Business Media. 194 pp-194 pp p. Martín JI (2012) The small-scale coastal fleet in the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. Policy Department

Structural and Cohesion Policies, European Parliament, Brussels. 44 p. Available at: www.europarl.europa.eu/studies [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Matić-Skoko S, Soldo A, Stagličić N, Blažević D and Iritani D (2014) Croatian marine fisheries (Adriatic Sea): 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-26, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

McCrea-Strub A (2015) Reconstruction of total catch by U.S. fisheries in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-79, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 46 p.

Mendo J and Wosnitza-Mendo C (2014) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Peru: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-21, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 23 p.

Mendoza J (2015) Rise and fall of Venezuelan industrial and artisanal marine fisheries: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-27, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Miles E, Sherman J, Fluharty D, Gibbs S, Tanaka S and Oda M (1982) Atlas of Marine Use in the North Pacific Region. University of California Press, Berkely.

Miller D and Zeller D (2013) Reconstructing Ireland’s marine fisheries catches: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-10, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 48 p.

Mohammed E and Lindop A (2015a) Grenada: Reconstructed fisheries catches, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-40, University of British Columbia Vancouver. 27 p.

Mohammed E and Lindop A (2015b) St. Lucia, reconstructed fisheries catches, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-53, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 25 p.

Mohammed E and Lindop A (2015c) St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Reconstructed fisheries catches, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-54, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 27 p.

Mohammed E and Lindop A (2015d) Trinidad and Tobago: reconstructed fisheries catches, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-55, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 42 p.

Mohammed E, Lindop A, Parker C and Willoughby S (2015) Reconstructed fisheries catches of Barbados, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-16, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 28 p.

Moniri NR, Moniri NR, Zeller D, Zylich K, Al-Abdulrazzak D and Belhabib D (2013) Fisheries catch reconstruction for Iran, 1950-2010. pp. 7-16 In Al-Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: A recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Report 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Moses BS (2000) A review of artisanal marine and brackishwater fisheries of south-eastern Nigeria. Fisheries Research 47(1): 81-92.

Motta FS, Rosa MR, Namora RC and Gadig OBF (2014) Bony fishes (Teleostei) caught by small-scale fisheries off central to south coast of Sao Paulo State, Southeastern Brazil. Biota Neotropica 14(4): 1-7.

Moutopoulos DK, Tsikliras AC and Stergiou KI (2015) Reconstruction of Greek fishery catches by fishing gear and area (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-11, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 14 p.

Nader MR, Indary S and Moniri N (2014) Historical fisheries catch reconstruction for Lebanon (GSA 27), 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-11, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 19 p.

Nedreaas K, Iversen S and Kuhnle G (2015) Preliminary estimates of total removals by the Norwegian marine fisheries, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-94, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Nelson Jr. R (1985) Historical review of the coastal Pacific whiting, Merluccius productus, fishery. . Marine Fisheries Review 47(2): 39-41.

Ngodigha SA, Alagoa KJ, Daworiye P and Eremasi YB (2015) Catch composition of bag net used in Palaemon fishery in River Nun Estuary, Bayelso State Niger Delta, Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological Sciences 2(5): 119-125.

Nunoo FKE, Asiedu B, Amador K, Belhabib D and Pauly D (2014) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Ghana, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-13, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 25 p.

Nunoo FKE, Boateng JO, Ahulu AM, Agyekum KA and Sumaila RU (2009) When trash fish is treasure: The case of Ghana in West Africa. Fisheries Research 96(2-3): 167-172.

Nwafili SA and Gao TX (2007) Structure and dynamics of fisheries in Nigeria. Journal of Ocean University of China 6(3): 281-291.

Nwosu FM, Ita EO and Enin UI (2011) Fisheries management in Nigeria: a case study of the marine fisheries policy. International Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Soil Science 1(3): 70-76.


61

O’Meara D, Harper S, Perera N and Zeller D (2011) Reconstruction of Sri Lanka’s fisheries catches: 1950-2008. pp. 85-96 In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstruction: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

OECD (n.d.) Country note on the national fisheries management systems -- Netherlands. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/netherlands/34430815.pdf [Accessed:

Ofor CO (2002) Exploitation rate and by-catch of Nematopalaemon hastatus (Crustacea: Palaemonidae) (Aurivillius, 1898) fishery in the Cross River estuary, Nigeria. Journal of Aquatic Sciences 17(1): 13-16.

Oliveiras A, González LW and Eslava N (2011) Parámetros pesqueros de la flota artesanal de la isleta, Isla de Margarita, Venezuela. Boletín del Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas 45(3): 299-323.

Olopade OA, Sinclair NG and Dienye H (2017) Fish catch composition of selected small scale fishing gears used in the Bonny River, Rivers State, Nigeria. Journal of Fisheries 5(1).

Otto RS (1981) Eastern Bering Sea crab fisheries. pp. 1037-1068 In Hood DW and Calder TA (eds.), The Eastern Bering Sea Shelf: Oceanography and Resources Vol. 2. Office of Marine Pollution Assessment, Juneau, AK.

Padilla A, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015) The fish and fisheries of Bouvet Island. pp. 21-30 In Palomares MLD and Pauly D (eds.), Marine Fisheries Catches of SubAntarctic Islands, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 23(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Palomares MLD and Pauly D (2011) A brief history of fishing in the Kerguelen Islands. pp. 15-20 In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Report 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Palomares MLD and Pauly D (2015) Reconstruction of the marine fisheries catches of the Falkland Islands and the British Antarctic Territories, 1950 to 2010. pp. 1-20 In Palomares MLD and Pauly D (eds.), Marine Fisheries Catches of SubAntarctic Islands, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 23(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Pan M, Ouréns R, Dione L, Samba I, Sánchez-Carnero N and Freire J (2015) Length-weight relationships for 13 fish species from a coastal artisanal fishery at Cape Verde peninsula (Senegal). Journal of Applied Ichthyology: 1-3.

Parker R and Tyedmers PH (2015) Fuel consumption of global fishing fleets: current understanding and knowledge gaps. Fish and Fisheries 16(4): 684-696.

Paula Rosso A and Pezzuto PR (2016) Spatial management units for industrial demersal fisheries in southeastern and southern Brazil. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research 44(5): 985-1004.

Pauly D (2009) The fisheries resources of the Clipperton Island EEZ (France). pp. 35-37 In Zeller D and Harper S (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 17(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Pauly D, Belhabib D, Blomeyer R, Cheung WWWL, Cisneros-Montemayor AM, Copeland D, Harper S, Lam VWY, Mai Y, Le Manach F, Österblom H, Mok KM, van der Meer L, Sanz A, Shon S, Sumaila UR, Swartz W, Watson R, Zhai Y and Zeller D (2014) China's distant-water fisheries in the 21st century. Fish and Fisheries 15(3): 474-488.

Pauly D and Le Manach F (2015) Tentative adjustments of China's marine fisheries catches (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-28, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

Pauly D, Ramdeen S and Ulman A (2015) Reconstruction of total marine catches for Aruba, Southern Caribbean, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-10, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 8 p.

Pauly D and Swartz W (2007) Marine fish catches in North Siberia (Russia, FAO Area 18). pp. 17-33 In Zeller D and Pauly D (eds.), Reconstruction of Marine Fisheries Catches for Key Countries and Regions (1950-2005). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 15(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Pauly D and Zeller D (2016a) Catch reconstructions reveal that global marine fisheries catches are higher than reported and declining. Nature Communications 7: 10244.

Pauly D and Zeller D, editors (2016b) Global Atlas of Marine Fisheries: A critical appraisal of catches and ecosystem impacts. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 486 p.

Persson L (2010) Sweden’s fisheries catches in the Baltic Sea (1950 – 2007). pp. 225-263 In Rossing P, Booth S and Zeller D (eds.), Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-2007. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 18(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Persson L (2015) Reconstructing total Swedish catches on the west coast of Sweden: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-24, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 10 p.

Persson L, Lindop A, Harper S, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Failed state: reconstruction of domestic fisheries catches in Somalia 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-10, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 38 p.

Pham CK, Canha A, Diogo H, Pereira JG, Prieto R and Morato T (2013) Total marine fishery catch for the Azores (1950-2010). ICES Journal of Marine Science 70(3): 564-577.


62

Piroddi C, Gristina M, Zylich K, Ulman A, Zeller D and Pauly D (2014) Reconstruction of Italy’s marine fisheries catches (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-22, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 41 p.

Polunin NVC and Roberts CM (1996) Reef Fisheries. Fish and Fisheries Series 20. Springer-Science. Business Media, B.V.

Pooley SG (1993) Hawaii's marine fisheries: Some history, long-term trends, and recent developments. Marine Fisheries Review 55(2): 7-19.

Popescu I and Ogushi T (2013) Structural and cohesion policies: Fisheries in Japan. Note. Report requested by the Committee on Fisheries, European Parliament.: 76-76.

Posada JM, González FJ and Hauschild M (1996) Status of spiny lobster fisheries in the "Archipiélago de los Roques" National Park, Venezuela. In Proceedings of the 44th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, 1996. 121-142 p.

Pramod G and Pitcher T (2006) An Estimation of Compliance of the Fisheries of North Korea with Article 7 (Fisheries Management) of the UN Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing. p. 1191 In Pitcher TJ, Kalikoski D and Pramod G (eds.), Evaluations of Compliance with the FAO (UN) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries2 (14). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Previero M, Minte-Vera CV and de Moura RL (2013) Fisheries monitoring in Babel: Fish ethnotaxonomy in a hotspot of common names. Neotropical Ichthyology 11(2): 467-476.

Project GloBAL (2007) Country Profile - Chile. 45 p. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20110305140804/http:/bycatch.nicholas.duke.edu/regions/ETP/Chile.pdf[Accessed:

Pruvost P, Duhamel G, Gasco N and Palomares MLD (2015a) A short history of the fisheries of Crozet Islands. pp. 31-36 In Palomares MLD and Pauly D (eds.), Marine Fisheries Catches of SubAntarctic Islands, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 23(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Pruvost P, Duhamel G, Le Manach F and Palomares MLD (2015b) A short history of the fisheries of Saint-Paul and Amsterdam Islands. pp. 37-45 In Palomares MLD and Pauly D (eds.), Marine Fisheries Catches of SubAntarctic Islands, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 23(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Raid T, Kornilovs G, Lankov A, Nisumaa A-M, Shpilev H and Jarvik A (2010) Recruitment dynamics of the Gulf of Riga herring stock: density-dependent and environmental effects. ICES Journal of Marine Science 67: 1914-1920.

Ramdeen R, Belhabib D, Harper S and Zeller D (2012a) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Haiti and Navassa Island (1950-2010). pp. 37-45 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D. (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Ramdeen R, Harper S and Zeller D (2014a) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Dominica (1950-2010). pp. 33-42 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Ramdeen R, Harper S, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014b) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for the British Virgin Islands (1950-2010). pp. 9-16 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Ramdeen R, Ponteen A, Harper S and Zeller D (2012b) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Montserrat (1950-2010). pp. 69-76 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(5). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Ramdeen R, Zylich K and Zeller D (2013) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for St. Kitts & Nevis (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-04, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

Ramdeen R, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014c) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Anguilla (1950-2010). pp. 1-8 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Ramdeen R, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of total marine catches for the US Virgin Islands (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-64, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 9 p.

Rapson DM (1962) Commerical species of fish in New Guinea waters. Fisheries Technical Meeting (Noumea, 5-13 February 1962), South Pacific Commission. 12 p.

Reis S, Sena-Carvalho D, Delgado J and Alfonso-Dias M (2001) Historical overview of the black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo Lowe, 1839) fishery in Madeira Island. 6 p. Available at: https://archive.nafo.int/open/sc/2001/scr01-103.pdf [Accessed: November 1, 2017].


63

Rossing P, Bale S, Harper S and Zeller D (2010a) Baltic Sea fisheries catches for Finland (1950-2007). pp. 85-106 In Rossing P, Booth S and Zeller D (eds.), Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 18(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Rossing P, Hammer C, Bale S, Harper S, Booth S and Zeller D (2010b) Germany’s marine fisheries catches in the Baltic Sea (1950-2007). pp. 107-126 In Rossing P, Booth S and Zeller D (eds.), Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 18(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Santos IT, Monteiro CA, Harper S, Zeller D and Belhabib D (2012) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for the Republic of Cape Verde, 1950-2010. pp. 79-90 In Belhabib D, Zeller D, Harper S and Pauly D (eds.), Marine fisheries catches in West Africa, Part 1. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(3). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Savada AM, editor (1993) North Korea: A Country Study. GPO for the Library of Congress, Washington. Sawamura Y (1962) The Fisheries of Tonga. Fisheries Technical Meeting (5-13 February 1962), South Pacific

Commission, Noumea, New Caledonia. 3 p. Schiller L, Alava J, Grove J, Reck G and Pauly D (2013) A reconstruction of fisheries catches for the Galápagos

Islands, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-11, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 38 p.

Schiller L, Alava JJ, Grove J, Reck Gn and Pauly D (2015) The demise of Darwin’s fishes: evidence of fishing down and illegal shark finning in the Galápagos Islands. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 25(3): 431-446.

Schneider W (1990) FAO species identification sheets for fishery purposes. Field guide to the commercial marine resources of the Gulf of Guinea.Rome. 1-268 p.

Seilert HEW and Sangchan S (2001) Small-scale fishery in Southeast Asia: a case study in southern Thailand. RAP Publication 2001/19, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. 63 p.

Semrau J and Ortega Gras JJ (2013) Fisheries in Denmark. European Parliament, Brussels. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/513972/IPOL-PECH_ET(2013)513972_EN.pdf [Accessed: November 1, 2017].

Seto K, Belhabib D, Copeland D, Vakily M, Seilert H, Sankoh S, Baio A, Turay I, Harper S, Zeller D, Zylich K and Pauly D (2015) Colonialism, conflict, and fish: a reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Sierra Leone, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-74, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 23 p.

Shinozaki-Mendes RA, Hissa F, Hazin V, Oliveira PGDE and Carvalho FCDE (2007) Reproductive biology of the squirrelfish , Holocentrus adscensionis ( Osbeck , 1765 ), caught off the coast of Pernambuco , Brazil. Scientia Marina 71(4): 715-722.

Shon S, Delgado JM, Morato T, Pham CK, Zylich K, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for Madeira Island, Portugal, from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-52, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 13 p.

Shon S, Harper S and Zeller D (2014a) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-20, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 11 p.

Shon S, Harper S and Zeller D (2014b) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for the Republic of Korea (South Korea) from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-19, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 13 p.

Simmons G, Bremner G, Stringer C, Torkington B, Teh LCL, Zylich K, Zeller D, Pauly D and Whittaker H (2015) Preliminary reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for New Zealand (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-87, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 33 p.

Smith N and Zeller D (2013) Bahamas catch reconstruction: fisheries trends in a tourism-driven economy (1950- 2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-08, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 28 p.

Sobolevskaya A and Divovich E (2015) The Wall Street of fisheries: the Russian Far East, a catch reconstruction from 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-45, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 65 p.

Ssentongo GW, Ukpe ET and Ajayi TO (1986) Marine fishery resources of Nigeria: A review of exploited fish stocks. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Rome.

Starnes WC (2002) Priacanthidae. pp. 1379-1385 In Carpenter KE (ed.). Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

Statistiska Centralbyrån [Central Bureau of Statistics] (1975) Yearbook of fishery statistics 1975. Sveriges officiella statistik [Sweden's official statistics], Stockholm. 54 p.


64

Sun P, Harper S, Booth S and Zeller D (2011) Reconstructing marine fisheries catches for the Kingdom of Tonga: 1950-2007. pp. 119-130 In Harper S and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstruction: Islands, Part II. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 19(4). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Swain P, McGrath S and Walter N (2012) Report of the ministerial inquiry into the use andoperation of foreign charter vessels. 130.

Swartz W (2015) Notes on the fisheries around Japan's so-called 'outer' or oceanic islands: Ogasawara (Bonin) and Daito Islands. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-17, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 5 p.

Swartz W and Ishimura G (2014) Baseline assessment of total fisheries-related biomass removal from Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zones: 1950–2010. Fisheries Science: 643-651.

Teh LCL, Kinch J, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014a) Reconstructing Papua New Guinea's marine fisheries catch, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-09, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 23 p.

Teh LCL, Shon D, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014b) Reconstructing Cambodia's marine fisheries catch, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-18, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 12 p.

Teh LCL and Teh LSL (2014) Reconstructing the marine fisheries catch of Peninsular Malaysia, Sarawak and Sabah, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-16, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 20 p.

Teh LCL, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015a) Preliminary reconstruction of Thailand's fisheries catches: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-01, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 14 p.

Teh LCL, Zeller D, Zylich K, Nguyen G and Harper S (2014c) Reconstructing Vietnam's marine fisheries catch, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-17, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 10 p.

Teh LCL, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015b) FAO area 18 (Arctic Sea): Catch data reconstruction extension of Zeller et al. (2011) to 2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-14, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 5 p.

Teng S-K (2007) Republic of Korea. pp. 397-413 In De Young C (ed.), Review of the state of world marine capture fisheries management: Pacific Ocean. Food and Agriculture Organization.

Tesfamichael D and Ekawad AN (2012) Reconstructing Red Sea fisheries of Sudan: foreign aid and fisheries. pp. 51-70 In Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (eds.), Catch reconstruction for the Red Sea large marine ecosystem by countries (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Tesfamichael D, Govender R and Pauly D (2012a) Preliminary reconstruction of fisheries catches of Jordan and Israel in the inner Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea, 1950-2010. pp. 179-204 In Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (eds.), Catch reconstruction for the Red Sea large marine ecosystem by countries (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Tesfamichael D and Mehanna SF (2012) Reconstructing Red Sea fisheries of Egypt: heavy investment and fisheries. pp. 22-48 In Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (eds.), Catch reconstruction for the Red Sea large marine ecosystem by countries (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Research Report 20(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Tesfamichael D and Mohamud S (2012) Reconstructing Red Sea fisheries catches of Eritrea: a case study of the relationship between political stability and fisheries development. pp. 51-70 In Tesafamichael D and Pauly D (eds.), Catch reconstruction for the Red Sea large marine ecosystem by countries (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Research Report 20(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (2013) Catch reconstruction of the fisheries of Saudi Arabia in the Gulf, 1950-2010. pp. 39-52 In Abdulrazzak D and Pauly D (eds.), From dhows to trawlers: a recent history of fisheries in the Gulf countries, 1950 to 2010. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 21(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (2016) The Red Sea Ecosystem and Fisheries. Coral Reefs of the World 7. Springer Verlag, Dordrecht.

Tesfamichael D and Rossing P (2012) Reconstructing Red Sea fisheries catches of Saudi Arabia: National wealth and fisheries transformation. pp. 153-178 In Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (eds.), Catch reconstruction for the Red Sea large marine ecosystem by countries (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Research Report 20(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Tesfamichael D, Rossing P and Awadh H (2012b) The marine fisheries of Yemen with emphasis on the Red Sea and cooperatives. pp. 105-134 In Tesfamichael D and Pauly D (eds.), Catch reconstruction for the Red Sea large marine ecosystem by countries (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Trujillo P, Cisneros-Montemayor A, Harper S, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of Costa Rica's marine fisheries catches (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-31, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.


65

Tu'avao T, Kava V and Udagawa K (1996) Fisheries in the Tongatapu Island Group. Integrated Fisheries Survey Report, Ministry of Fisheries Tonga. Japan International Cooperation Volunteers (JOCV). Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). 126 p.

Tubino RdA, Monteiro-Neto C, Moraes LEdS and Paes ET (2007) Artisanal fisheries production in the coastal zone of Itaipu, Niterói , RJ, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Oceanography 55(3): 187-197.

Turner SJ, Thrush SF, Hewitt JE, Cummings VJ and Funnell G (1999) Fishing impacts and the degradation or loss of habitat structure. Fisheries Management and Ecology 6(5): 401-420.

Ullah H, Gibson D, Knip D, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Bangladesh: 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-15, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 10 p.

Ulman A, Bekişoǧlu Ş, Zengin M, Knudsen S, Ünal V, Mathews C, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2013a) From bonito to anchovy: A reconstruction of Turkey's marine fisheries catches (1950-2010). Mediterranean Marine Science 14(2): 309-342.

Ulman A, Çiçek B, Salihoglu I, Petrou A, Patsalidou M, Pauly D and Zeller D (2013b) The reconstruction and unification of Cyprus’s marine fisheries catch data, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2013-09, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 69 p.

Ulman A and Divovich E (2015) The marine fishery catch of Georgia (including Abkhazia) 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-88, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 25 p.

Ulman A, Saad A, Zylich K, Pauly D and Zeller D (2015a) Reconstruction of Syria’s fisheries catches from 1950-2010: Signs of overexploitation. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-80, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 26 p.

Ulman A, Shlyakhov V, Jatsenko S and Pauly D (2015b) A reconstruction of the Ukraine's marine fisheries catches, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-86, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 23 p.

Vali S, Rhodes K, Au A, Zylich K, Harper S and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of total fisheries catches for the Federated States of Micronesia (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-06, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

Valtýsson H (2014) Reconstructing Icelandic catches from 1950-2010. pp. 73-88 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

van der Meer L, Arancibia H, Zylich K and Zeller D (2015) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for mainland Chile (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-91, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 15 p.

van der Meer L, Ramdeen R, Zylich K and Zeller D (2014) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for the Dominican Republic (1950-2009). pp. 43-54 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Van Pel H (1956) Fisheries in Netherlands New Guinea. Aouth Pacific Commission, Noumea. 24 p. Van Waerebeek K and Reyes JC (1994) A note on incidental mortality of southern minke whales off western

South America. Gillnets and Cetaceans Special Is: 521-524. Vargas-Caro C, Bustamante C, Bennett MB and Ovenden JR (2017) Towards sustainable fishery management for

skates in South America: The genetic population structure of Zearaja chilensis and Dipturus trachyderma (Chondrichthyes, Rajiformes) in the south-east Pacific Ocean. PLoS One 12(2): 1-23.

Vasconcellos M and Gasalla MA (2001) Fisheries catches and the carrying capacity of marine ecosystems in southern Brazil. Fisheries Research 50(3): 279-295.

Veitch L, Booth S, Harper S, Rossing P and Zeller D (2010) Catch reconstruction for Estonia in the Baltic Sea

from 1950-2007. pp. 63-84 In Rossing P, Booth S and Zeller D (eds.), Total marine fisheries extractions by country in the Baltic Sea: 1950-present. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 18(1). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Villasante S, Macho G, Giraldez J, Rivero Rodriguez S, Isusu de Rivero J, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015a) Estimates of total fisheries removals from the Northwest of Spain (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-51, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 21 p.

Villasante S, Macho G, Isusu de Rivero J, Divovich E, Zylich K, Harper S, Zeller D and Pauly D (2015b) Reconstruction of Argentina's marine fisheries catches (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-50, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 16 p.

von Brandt A (1984) Classification of catching methods. pp. 274-328 In Fish catching methods of the world, 3rd edition. Fishing News Books, Surrey.


66

Vroome E (1957) De evolutie van de Oostendse vissershaven: een duizendjarige reuzenstrijd. Emile Vroome, Oostende. 48 p.

Watson R, C R and Y K (2006a) Fishing gear associated with global marine catches II. Trends in trawling and dredging. Fisheries Research 79: 103-111.

Watson R, Pang L and Pauly D (2001) The marine fisheries of China: Development and reported catches. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 9(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 50 p.

Watson R, Revenga C and Kura Y (2006b) Fishing gear associated with global marine catches I. Database development. Fisheries Research 79: 97-102.

Wolff N, Koschinski S and Klein L (2014) Lebendige Nordsee: Beispiele für vorbildliche fangmethoden und ihre Anwendbarkeit auf den Nordseeraum. Deutsche Umwelthilfe,, Berlin. 72 p.

Zeller D, Booth S, Craig P and Pauly D (2006) Reconstruction of coral reef fisheries catches in American Samoa, 1950-2002. Coral Reefs 25(1): 144-152.

Zeller D, Booth S, Davis G and Pauly D (2007a) Re-estimation of small-scale shery catches for U.S. flag-associated island areas in the western Pacific: the last 50 years. Fishery Bulletin 105(2): 266-277.

Zeller D, Booth S and Pauly D (2005) Reconstruction of coral reef- and bottom fisheries catches for U.S. flag islands in the Western Pacific, 1950-2002. Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, Honolulu. 113 p.

Zeller D, Booth S and Pauly D (2007b) Historical catch reconstruction for coral reef–and bottom–fisheries in the U.S. State of Hawaii, 1950 to 2002. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2007-06, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 25 p.

Zeller D, Cashion T, Palomares MLD and Pauly D (2017) Global marine fisheries discards: a synthesis of reconstructed data. Fish & Fisheries DOI: 10.1111/faf.12233.

Zeller D, Graham R and Harper S (2011) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Belize, 1950-2008. pp. 142-151 In Palomares MLD and Pauly D (eds.), Too Precious to Drill: the Marine Biodiversity of Belize. Fisheries Centre Research Report 19(6). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Zeller D, Harper S, Zylich K and Pauly D (2015) Synthesis of underreported small-scale fisheries catch in Pacific island waters. Coral Reefs 34(1): 25-39.

Zeller D, Palomares MLD, Tavakolie A, Ang M, Belhabib D, Cheung WWL, Lam VWY, Sy E, Tsui G, Zylich K and Pauly D (2016) Still catching attention: Sea Around Us reconstructed global catch data, their spatial expression and public accessibility. Marine Policy 70: 145-152.

Zeller D and Pauly D (2014) Reconstruction of domestic fisheries catches in the Chagos Archipelago: 1950-2010. pp. 17-24 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Zylich K, Harper S, Licandeo R, Vega R, Zeller D and Pauly D (2014a) Fishing in Easter Island, a recent history (1950-2010). La Pesca en Isla de Pascua, una historia reciente (1950-2010). Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-07, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 19 p.

Zylich K, Harper S and Zeller D (2012) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for the Kermadec Islands (1950-2010). pp. 61-67 In Harper S, Zylich K, Boonzaier L, Le Manach F, Pauly D and Zeller D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part III. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20(5), Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (Canada).

Zylich K, Harper S and Zeller D (2014b) Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for the Republic of Kiribati (1950-2010). pp. 89-106 In Zylich K, Zeller D, Ang M and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries catch reconstructions: Islands, Part IV. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 22(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Zylich K, Shon S, Harper S and Zeller D (2014c) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for the Republic of Vanuatu, 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2014-03, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 17 p.

Zylich K and van der Meer L (2015) Reconstruction of total marine fisheries catches for Juan Fernández Islands and the Desventuradas Islands (Chile) for 1950-2010. Fisheries Centre Working Paper #2015-92, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. 14 p.


67

Acronyms and Glossary17 Artisanal: Referring to small-scale fishers who are catching fish that is predominantly sold, i.e., small-scale commercial fishers. The distinction between small-scale and large-scale (i.e., *industrial) in this report is, for each country, the definition prevailing in that country. ‘Artisanal’ roughly correspond to ‘traditional’ in Malaysia, ‘municipal’ in the Philippines, and ‘petits métiers’ in France.

Bait/baitfish: Fish used to catch other fishes, e.g., in pole and line fishing, or in longlining for tuna. Here, unreported baitfish catches were mostly taken into account when reconstructing fisheries catches.

Beach seining: A fishing method where a net and a length of rope are laid out from and back to the shore and retrieved by hauling the net on to the shore. Often, the hauling is performed by a large group of people (e.g., from a village community), with the fish that are caught then shared between them. Beach seines are problematic in that they catch juvenile fish and thus contribute to growth overfishing.

By-catch/bycatch: That part of a fish catch that is caught in addition to the *target species because the fishing gear (e.g., a *trawl) is not selective. By-catch may be retained, landed and sold or used, or may be dumped at sea (see *discard).

Catch: The number or weight of fish or other animals caught or killed by a fishery, including fishes that are landed (*landings, whether reported in statistics or not), discarded at sea (*discard), or killed by lost gear (‘ghost fishing’).

CCAMLR: *Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources.

Commercial: Refers to a fishery whose catch is sold. This means that both *large-scale (or *industrial) and *small-scale fisheries (i.e., *artisanal, or petit métiers) are commercial fisheries, and that the term ‘commercial fisheries’ should not be considered synonymous with industrial or large-scale fisheries.

Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR): CCAMLR was established by international convention in 1982 with the objective of conserving Antarctic marine life. This was in response to increasing commercial interest in Antarctic krill resources, a keystone component of the Antarctic ecosystem and a history of over-exploitation of several other marine resources in the Southern Ocean. CCAMLR is an international commission with 25 members, and a further 11 countries have acceded to the Convention. Based on the best available scientific information, the Commission agrees a set of conservation measures that determine the use of marine living resources in the Antarctic.

Demersal: Organisms swimming just above or lying on the seafloor and usually feeding on benthic organisms.

Discard: Portion of catch that is thrown overboard, but which may be of important ecological or commercial value. Discards typically consist of ‘non-target’ species or undersized specimens of the target species. High-grading is a special form of (mostly illegal) discarding where a catch of target species is thrown overboard to make space in the hull (or accommodate under a *quota) fresher, larger, or otherwise more valuable catch of the same species.

Distant-water fleet/fishery: The fleet of a country that is fishing in the *EEZ of another country (or the EEZs of other countries), or in *High Sea regions not adjacent to its own EEZ. Under UNCLOS, a distant-water fishery can be conducted in EEZ of a coastal state only with its explicit *access agreement, generally in exchange for compensation.

Domestic: Here, pertaining to a country’s or territory’s own *EEZ.

Driftnet: Nets hanging vertically in the water column, without being anchored to the bottom. The nets are keep vertical in the water by floats attached to a rope along the top of the net and weights attached to another rope along the bottom of the net. Drift nets generally rely on the entanglement properties of loosely affixed netting. Folds of loose netting, much like a window drapery, snag on a fish's fins and tail and wrap it up in loose netting

17 Originally adapted from the glossary in FishBase (www.fishbase.org), from Wikipedia and other sources, including Holt, S.J. 1960. Multilingual vocabulary for fishery dynamics. FAO, Rome, 42 p. The symbol * refers to an entry elsewhere in this list.


68

as it struggles to escape. However, driftnets can also function as gill nets if fish are captured when their head get stuck in its meshes. Drift nets are unselective, and thus kill thousands of marine mammals, turtles, and seabirds, beside the fish *bycatch. Prior to the 1960s, the size of drift nets was not limited, and they grew to lengths in excess of 50 km. In 1992, the UN banned the use of drift nets longer than 2.5 km long in the *High Seas.

DWF: *Distant-water fleet or fishery.

EEZ: *Exclusive Economic Zone

Effort (fishing): Any activity or devices deployed to catch fish, and that can be quantified. Thus, the number of nets of a certain type deployed in a set period is a measure of effort, as is the amount of fuel used by a fishing fleet, or the days fished per time period.

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): Generally, all waters within 200 nautical miles (370 km) of a country and its outlying islands, unless such areas would overlap because neighboring countries are less than 400 nautical miles (740 km) apart. If an overlap exists, it is up to countries to negotiate a delineation of the actual maritime boundary. Under UNCLOS, a country has special rights regarding the exploration and use of marine resources inside its EEZ, such as the power to control and manage all fishery resources in this zone. Not until 1982, with the adoption of UNCLOS, did 200 nm EEZs become formally adopted, and a country needs to formally declare its EEZ.

FAO: *Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): The only agency in the world tasked with annually assembling global fisheries statistics, and generally assisting member countries in managing their fisheries.

Finfish: Members of the taxonomic (*Taxon) class Pisces, i.e., aquatic animal with fins, as distinguished from *shellfish.

Fish/Fishes: The term ‘fish’ sensu stricto refers to the taxonomic (*Taxon) class Pisces (*Finfish) in the Subphylum Vertebrata, Phylum Chordata. In the wider sense, ‘fish’ refer to aquatic animals sought by fisheries, i.e., *Finfish + invertebrate *shellfish; the plural ‘fishes’ is used when explicitly referring to more than one species of *Finfish.

Fishery: A set of persons and gear interacting with an aquatic resource (one or several species of *fish) for the purpose of generating a *catch.

Fishing effort: *effort (fishing).

Fishmeal: Protein-rich animal feed product based on ground up fish, usually small *pelagic fishes such as anchovies and sardines, which are also directly consumed by people.

High Sea(s): The areas of the world ocean that is outside of the 200 mile *Exclusive Economic Zone of coastal states; the High Seas cover about 60% of the world ocean.

IATTC: *Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission

ICES: *International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.

Illegal: Fishing in violation of the laws of a fishery, either under the jurisdiction of a coastal state (i.e., within an *EEZ) or in high seas fisheries regulated by *Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMO). The Sea Around Us defines ‘illegal’ as fishing in the *EEZ waters of another country without explicit or implicit permission, and thus does not include non-compliance with domestic fishing laws by domestic fleets in their own *EEZ (i.e., poaching) under this definition.

Industrial: Referring to *large-scale fisheries that are catching fish for commercial marketing or global export, i.e., large-scale commercial fisheries. The distinction between large-scale and *small-scale (i.e., *artisanal) in this report is, for each country, the definition prevailing in that country, and is usually related to vessel size and gear type used. Note, however, that we define any gear type that is actively moved across the seafloor (e.g., bottom


69

and shrimp trawl) or through the water column (e.g., mid-water trawl) is always treated as industrial, irrespective of vessel size or local definition.

Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC): It is an international commission (a *Regional Fisheries Management Organization) that is responsible for the conservation and management of tuna and other marine resources in the eastern Pacific Ocean. The IATTC was created by the Convention for the Establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, signed between the United States and Costa Rica on May 31, 1949. In 2003, the members of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission signed the Antigua Convention, which strengthened the Commission's powers. Most members of the Commission ratified the Antigua Convention between 2004 and 2009, but as of 2011, the USA had not ratified the Antigua Convention. The headquarters of the IATTC are located in La Jolla, San Diego, California, United States. It has slightly more than 20 member countries

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES): The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (*ICES; founded in 1902) is the oldest intergovernmental organization in the world concerned with marine and fisheries science. It develops science and advice to support the sustainable use of the oceans in Europe, for the European Union, and associated partner countries. ICES is headquartered in Copenhagen, Denmark, and consists of a network of over 350 marine institutes in 20 member countries and beyond, and their work also extends into the Arctic, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, and the North Pacific Ocean.

Landings: Weight of the catch landed at a wharf or beach. Also: The number or weight of fish unloaded at a dock by *commercial fishers or brought to shore by *subsistence and *recreational fishers for personal use. Landings are reported at the points at which fish are brought to shore. Note that the catch = landing + *discards.

Large-scale (fishery): *Industrial.

Longline/Longlining: A line of considerable length, bearing numerous baited hooks, and that is usually set horizontally in the water column; used, e.g., in snapper, grouper, ling, and tuna fisheries. The line is set for varying periods up to several hours on the seafloor, or in the case of tuna, in mid-water water at various depths. Also a fishing line with baited hooks set at intervals on branch lines; it may be 150 km long and have several thousand hooks and can be on the sea bed or above it supported by floats. It may be anchored or drift free and is marked by floats.

Midwater: Trawling, net or line fishing at a water depth that is higher in the water column than the bottom of the ocean. It is contrasted with bottom (or benthic) fishing. Also known as *pelagic fishing.

NAFO: *Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization.

Nei: FAO acronym for ‘not elsewhere included’; a synonym for ‘other fish species’ or ‘other invertebrate species’ not specifically identified.

Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO): NAFO is an intergovernmental fisheries science and management organization that ensures the long-term conservation and sustainable use of the fishery resources in the Northwest Atlantic. NAFO manages the fisheries outside the *EEZs of the coastal states in the international waters of the Northwest Atlantic.

Pelagic: Living and feeding in the open sea; associated with the surface or middle depths of a body of water; free swimming in the seas, oceans or open waters; not in association with the bottom (benthic). Many pelagic fish feed on plankton.

Purse seine: A fishing net used to encircle *pelagic fish. The net may be of up to 1 km length and 300 m depth and is used to encircle surface schooling fish such as anchovies, mackerel or tuna. It is usually set at speed from a larger vessel while the other end is anchored by a small boat. During retrieval, the bottom of the net is closed or pursed by drawing a purse line through a series of rings to prevent the fish escaping.

Reconstruction (catch): A set of procedures to derive a coherent time series of likely total catches for all fisheries of a country or area from various sources, not necessarily including official catch statistics; also, the


70

product of these procedures. The word and concept are derived from the science of linguistics, which ‘reconstructs’ extinct words (and/or languages) from daughter languages.

Recreational fishing: This form of fishing, also called *‘sport’ fishing, is fishing for pleasure or in competition. This differs from *commercial fishing (both *artisanal and *industrial), where the main motivation is to catch fish for eventual sale, and from *subsistence fishing, where fish is mainly caught for personal or family and friends’ consumption.

Regional Fisheries Management Organization (RFMO): International governmental organization tasked with managing the fisheries of a region of the ocean (including the *High Sea areas) for the benefit of member states.

RFMO: *Regional Fisheries Management Organization.

SEAFDEC: *South East Asian Fisheries Development Center.

Shellfish: An aquatic animal, such as a mollusk or crustacean with a shell or shell-like external skeleton.

Small-scale: *Artisanal, *subsistence and *recreational.

South East Asian Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC): An autonomous inter-governmental body established in 1967, with a mandate to develop and manage the fisheries potential of the region by rational utilization of the resources for providing food security and safety to the people and alleviating poverty through transfer of new technologies, research and information dissemination activities. SEAFDEC consists of 11 member countries: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Spear fishing: Fishing with devices functioning like crossbow or airguns. Spear fishing using SCUBA is widely forbidden and should be everywhere. Spearfishing by *small-scale fishers is widely used in parts of the Caribbean and Asia-Pacific, where it can be highly selective.

Sport fishing: *Recreational fishing.

Subsistence fishing: A form of *small-scale (inshore) fishing (or ‘gleaning’), often practiced by women and children, where the catch (often small fish and invertebrates, particularly bivalves) is mainly caught for self- or family-consumption, or bartered against other commodities.

t : *tonne.

Target: This term has two meanings in fisheries. One refers to the fish (species or group) that are meant to be caught; this contrasts to *bycatch, which is caught because the gear targeting a certain resource type is not, or insufficiently selective. The other meaning of target refers to fisheries management, which often defines MSY as it associated fishing mortality (*FMSY) as a limit, with the target being slightly more conservative.

Taxon (plural: taxa): According to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, any formal unit or category of organisms (species, genus, family, order, class, etc.). Derived terms are taxonomist, taxonomic, taxonomically.

Territorial waters: The area beyond the tidal baseline of the open coasts of a country over which that country exercises full control and sovereignty except for innocent passage of foreign vessels. Set at a maximum of 12 nautical miles by the 1982 UNCLOS. The United States and a few other countries claim territorial waters only three nautical miles (see also *EEZ, often, if mistakenly, labeled ‘territorial waters’).

Tonne: a weight unit, corresponding to 1000 kilograms; used in this report as unit of catches. Equivalent to a ‘metric ton’.

Trammel net: A set-net consisting of three layers of netting, designed so that a fish entering through one of the large-meshed outer sections will push part of the finer-meshed central section through the large meshes on the further side, forming a pocket in which the fish is trapped.


71

Trash fish: The earlier and badly misleading name for the fraction of the *bycatch for which no market had been identified, and which was therefore *discarded (see also account for Guyana).

Trawl/Trawler/Trawling: Fishing methods where a vessel - a trawler - tows a large bag-shaped trawl net. A wide range of benthic (also called demersal or bottom) or *pelagic (mid-water) species of fish are taken by this fishing method. The trawl net usually features a buoyed head (top) rope, a weighted foot (bottom) rope and two heavy ‘otter’ doors to keep the net mouth open. Variation include beam trawls that use a horizontal beam instead of otter doors and foot rope to keep the net open, or pair-trawls in which two vessels are used to tow a single, often considerably larger net. Bottom trawling is unselective and destructive of habitats, and is gradually being banned from areas that people care about. All trawls are here considered *industrial gear, whatever the size of the vessel pulling them.

Trolling: A fishing method where baited hooks or lures are towed behind a boat. Not to be mistaken for *trawling.

USSR: The former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Soviet Union for short, was a state on the Eurasian continent that existed between 1922 and 1991, governed by the Communist Party of the USSR, with Moscow as its capital. Nominally a union of ‘Soviet Republics’, its government and economy were highly centralized. It has since separated into its constituent republics, as largely independent states. For maritime issues, the constituents are Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Russian Federation (Russia), and Ukraine.

WCPFC: *Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission.

Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission: The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) was established in 2004. The WCPF Convention draws on many of the provisions of the UN Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA) while reflecting the special political, socio-economic, geographical and environmental characteristics of the western and central Pacific Ocean region. The WCPFC seeks to address problems in the management of high seas fisheries resulting from unregulated fishing, over-capitalization, excessive fleet capacity, vessel re-flagging to escape controls, insufficiently selective gear, unreliable databases and insufficient multilateral cooperation in respect to conservation and management of highly migratory fish stocks. It has 26 members (Australia, China, Canada, Cook Islands, European Union, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, Indonesia, Japan, Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Republic of Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Chinese Taipei, Tonga, Tuvalu, United States of America, Vanuatu), 7 participating territories (American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, French Polynesia, Guam, New Caledonia, Tokelau, Wallis and Futuna) and 8 cooperating non-members (Ecuador, El Salvador, Mexico, Panama, Senegal, Liberia, Thailand, Vietnam).

Documents

ISSN 1198-6727 Fisheries Centre Research Reports...ISSN 1198-6727 Fisheries Centre Research Reports 2018 Volume #26 Number #1 A global fishing gear dataset for integration into the