Overview on some fisheries and aquaculture indicators

in the Black Sea Dr.V.Raykov, IO-BAS

EUROPEAN COMMISSIONDIRECTORATE-GENERAL

ENVIRONMENTDirectorate D - Water, Marine Environment & Chemicals

ENV.D.2 - Marine Environment & Water Industry

French ministry for ecology, sustainable development, transport and housing 24-25 April, 2012

Aims and Background

The satus and trends of Black Sea fisheries and aquaculture production in Black Sea region have been reviewed.The present state of fishing fleet, catches and regulated fish stock biomass as wellas trophic level of the catches have been presented and analyzed. For proper fisheries management it is important to know the fishing effort. One of the main problems in the Black Sea region is the lack of comprehensive information on fishing activity, catch quantities and composition and how they affect the current state of fish stocks.

Aims and Background The Black Sea has been subjected to very serious

environmental impacts since mid 20th century due to anthropogenic

dumping, huge chemical pollution mainly via Danube River, invasive species, nuclear pollution, climate change, over

fishing, illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. Riparian countries use same fishery resources mostly in migratory small

pelagics. In case of shared stocks, intergovernmental agreement is unavoidable. After the accession of Bulgaria and Romania

to the European Union, the Black Sea has become the sovereign responsibility of Common Fishery Policy of EU and GFCM.

Experimental

In the present paper analysis of the trend of fishing fleet capacity in the Black Sea region in terms of number of fishing vessels were performed.

Total catches of major commercial species by countries, two species (sprat and turbot) commercial fish stocks state and existent measures in the Black Sea region were presented and analyzed.

Trophic level of the main pelagic and demercal species was recognized as an important indicator for the contemporary state of the fisheries resources.

The marine aquaculture production for the 2001-2008 were estimated as low, as Turkey and Ukraine hold the first places as regards total aquaculture production in Black Sea region.

Total catch in Black Sea

RESULTS and DISCUSSION

Black Sea fishing fleet ,No of vessels

01 0 0 02 0 0 03 0 0 04 0 0 05 0 0 06 0 0 07 0 0 08 0 0 0

No.

vess

els

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

RESULTS and DISCUSSION

The Bulgarian and Romanian Annual Reports on the Efforts to Achieve a Sustainable Balance between Fishing Capacity and Fishing Opportunity during 2008 are prepared in accordance with the rules laid down in the Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1438/2002 and Guidelines for an improved analysis of the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities.

RESULTS and DISCUSSION

M arine f ishe ry f lee t o f bo th m em ber s ta tes can be asse ssed a s m u lti -com ponen t. T he m os t num erous g roup o f v esse ls a re sm a ll v esse ls (under 12 m LO A ) w h ich a re tack led w ith sev e ra l o f ne ts and ang ling gears . E v en they a re equ ipped w ith eng ine , they m ov e aw ay from 3 m ile zone v e ry ra re ly . M os t o f them a re pa rt - tim e used a t sea , du r ing the f ish ing seaso ns , peak m om ents m a in ly . B es ides , the sm a ll v esse l ow ners a re f ish ing a t sea in the ir f ree tim e , as supp lem en ta ry ac t iv ity .

Fishing fleetSummar ized data about the fish ing fleet o f the Republic of Bulgar ia and Ro mania 2008-2009.

LOA Number Power, kW Gross tonnage, GT

Romania Bulgaria Romania Bulgaria Romania Bulgaria

under 12 m 423 2 438 2 711 47 347 547 4 286

12 m – 15 m 5 38 447 3 856 66 601

15 m – 24 m 5 57 1 654 9 296 376 1 903

over 24 m 6 12 1 841 3 305 746 1 583

Total 439 2 545 6 653 63 804 1 735 8 372

T he m o st o f fish ing vesse ls in U kra ine in 2002 w as a t the age o f 11 to 30 years o ld (70% ), the vesse ls o f the o lder bu ild ing m ade up 23% and o nly 7% w ere re la t ive ly new , no t o lder than 10 years o ld . In th is co nnec t io n the reduc t io n in nu m ber o f f ish ing f lee t s ince 2006 t ill 2008 m ade up 19 unit s o r 13% . In T urkey, 6 587 fish ing vesse ls w ere reg is te red in po rt s o f B lack sea . T he to ta l nu m ber o f t raw lers w as 543 , w hile purse se in ers w as 526 and m u lt i purpo se ( traw ler , purse se ine vesse ls ) w as 469 , ca r r ie r vesse ls w as 269 and sm all bo a t s w as 15 ,460 . M o st o f the t raw ler and purse se iners o pera ted in the B lack S ea dur ing the f ish ing seaso n .

Indicator: Catches by major species and areas:

A s ig n if ica nt d ecr ease o f t o t al la nd ing s in 2 0 0 8 u p to 3 9 0 tho u sand to ns in co m p ar iso n w ith 2 0 0 7 to t al cat ch o f 4 8 2 tho u sand to ns ha ve bee n o bser ved .

Total landings by countries in Black Sea

0

5 0 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 5 0 0 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 5 0 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 5 0 0 0 0 0

B u lg a r ia Ukr a in e Ro ma n ia Tu r ke y Ru s s ia n

Fe d e r a tio n

Ge o r g ia

C o u n t r ie s

La

nd

ing

s (

tho

us

an

d t

on

s)

T he h ig hest land in gs in the B lack S ea (20 0 1-2 00 8) have been rep o rted by T u rkey. A ll the rest o f the r ip ar ian co u ntr ies have to tal amou nt o f the catch es, be lo w 5 00 0 0 0 t .

Sub indicator:fish landings by major fish type

Landings by m ajor fish type (tonns), 2001-2008

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Ye a rs

ton

ns S helfish

Dem ercal

P elagics

T h e g re a t e st p e rc e n t o f t h e c a t c h b e lo n g s to t h e p e la g ic sp e c ie s (E .e n c ra sic o lu s, S p ra ttu s sp r a ttu s a n d T ra c h u ru s m e d ite rra n e u s ). T h e p e a k o f t h e c a t c h e s w a s in 2 0 0 7 . F ro m d e m e rc a ls, t u r b o t h a s t h e h ig h e st e c o n o m ic a l v a lu e . In 2 0 0 5 t h e la n d in g s w e re 2 0 5 3 0 .8 1 t. , t h e d e c re a se d in 2 0 0 6 u p to 9 2 8 6 .0 7 t, a n d a g a in in c re a se d in 2 0 0 7 a n d 2 0 0 8 (1 6 6 7 2 .12 t (2 0 0 7 ) a n d 1 7 4 0 7 .3 2 t (2 0 0 8 ). R a p a w h e lk (R .v e n o sa) la n d in g s a re p re v a ilin g fr o m s h e lfis h sp e c ie s, a s T u rk e y a n d B u lg a r ia c a t c h e s h a v e b e e n e x p o rt e d to t h e A s ia n m a r k e t , m o st ly.

C a tche s o f En g ra u lis e n cra sico lus b y co un tr ie s 2001-2008

Turkey, 2157139

Russian Federation, 18935.60

Georgia, 43939.5

Ukraine, 4298

Bulgaria, 666.57

Romania, 895.59

Georgia

Bulgaria

Ukraine

Romania

Turkey

Russ ian Federation

C a t c h e s o f S p r a t t u s s p r a t t u s b y c o u n t r ie s 2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 8

Georgia, 74

Romania, 9362.06

Turkey, 64819

Russian Federation, 70320.80

Ukraine, 252763.575

Bulgaria, 36857.781

Georgia

Bulgar ia

Ukraine

Romania

Turkey

Russian Federation

C a tc h e s o f T r .m e d ite rra ne u s by c o u n tr ie s 2 0 0 1 -2 0 0 8

Turkey, 105058

Georgia, 155

Ukraine, 2430.92

Bulgaria, 874.7209

Russian Federation,

385.40

Romania, 119.14

G e o rg ia

B u lg a ria

U kra in e

R o m a n ia

Tu rke y

R u s s ia n Fe d e ra tio n

C a tc h e s o f P s e tta m a x im a b y c o u n tr ie s 2 0 0 1 -2 0 0 8

Ukraine, 1247.90

Romania, 266.61

Turkey, 5313

Georgia, 130Bulgaria,

397.9804

Russian Federation,

59.10

G e o rg ia

B u lg a ria

Ukra in e

Ro m a n ia

Tu rke y

Ru s s ia n Fe d e ra tio n

C at che s o f M .m e rlang u s b y cou n t r ie s 2001- 2008

G e o rg ia , 1 3 5

T u rke y, 5 5 2 6 9

Bu lg a ria ,

5 7 .4 1 4

R u ssia n F e d e ra t io n ,

1 4 2 5 .3 0

Ukra in e , 2 0 9 .7 6

R o m a n ia , 9 2 3 .3 2

Geor gia

Bulgar ia

Ukr aine

Romania

Tur key

Russ ian Feder at ion

C a t c h e s o f R a p a n a t h o m a s s i a n a b y c o u n t r i e s 2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 8

Ukra in e , 1 4 4 7 .5 2

T u rke y, 5 6 9 7 2

R u ssia n F e d e ra t io n ,

5 1 9 .3 0

Bu lg a ria , 1 7 2 6 9 .2 2 6

R o m a n ia , 0

G e o rg ia , 0

Geor gia

Bulgar ia

Ukr aine

Romania

Tur key

Russ ian Feder at ion

Biomass and fishing mortality

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Re

cru

its

10-9

0

50

100

150

200

250

SS

B 1

0-3

SSB RecruitsA

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Fis

hin

g m

ort

alit

y

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

Ca

tch

10-3

Landings F 1-3B

SPRAT

Length frequency composition of turbot

SSBvR, RvSSB, YvF and Yv SSB from landings with IUU catch included (average of ages 4-8 y). F0.1+0.18 Fmax= 0.342.

Rapa whelk

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

19

88

19

90

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

Lan

din

g (

ton

nes

)

BulgariaTurkey

UkraineRomania

Georgia

0

10

20

30

40

50

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Se

a s

na

il la

nd

ing

%

0

2

4

6

8

Go

no

do

so

ma

tik

ind

ek

s

Monthly percentage (in terms of weight) of Sea snail(including shell) GSI

70,0

40,326,3

5,7

57,2

100,9

0

30

60

90

120

150

Apr

il

Apr

il

May

May

June

June

June

June

June

July

July

July

July

Sep

t.

Sep

t.

Oct

.

Oct

.

Oct

.

CP

UE

(kg

/h/d

red

ge)

CPUE-Avarage

CPUE-April

CPUE-May

CPUE-June

CPUE-July

CPUE-Sept.

CPUE-Oct.

Polinom(CPUE-Avarage)

Picked dogfish

F Yield-per-Recruit, kg SSB-per-Recruit,kg TotalBio-per-recruit,kg

F zero 0 0 4011297 5171470

F0.1 0.2326 324466.1 1421640 2553269

Fmax 1.122 382488.6 260967.6 1300059

F 30% from MBP 0.2866 341614.9 1203448 2328730

Catch-curve analysis of Squalus acanthias from Black Sea

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

Years

Tot

al a

nd F

ishi

ng m

orta

lity

Z

F

TAC and quotas in Black Sea

Sprat

(2007) 15000 t

(2008) 15000 t

(2009) 12750 t

2007

2008

2009

Tur bot - TA Cs

( 2007) 100 t

( 2008) 100 t

( 2009) 98 t

2007

2008

2009

Management instruments

States Bulgaria Georgia Romania Russia Turkey Ukraine

Complete ban            Periodic ban            

Total Allowable Catch (TAC)            

Total Permitted Catch = Limit            

Minimum admissible size            

Periods for fishing bans            

Fishing Free Zones            

Prohibited fishing gears            

Allowable mesh size for nets            

Data Collection program 2007 – 2011

Pelagic surveys 2007 - 2011

Demersal surveys 2006 - 2010

Hydroacoustic survey 2010-2011

Country

Biomass

MSY (t)

(t) Gulland BH steepness, F0.1

Bulgaria

75 080.20

35 663

12 500

Romania

59 643 28 330

in the survey area 45 526.80

21 625

extrapolated

134 723.20 63 994

MSY – maximum sustainable yield

SPRAT

I n d ic a t o r: T ro p h ic le ve l

T ro p hic leve l o f the land ings (% ) o f m a in sp e c ie s 2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Year s

%

E.encras icolus

S.s prattus

T.m editerraneus

S.s arda

P.s altatrix

Alos a s p.

A.boyeri

P .m axim a

Mytilus s p.

R .venos a

Gobiida e

S.acanthias

M.m erlangus

3 .11

3

4 .37

4 .5 3

3 .59

33 .2

T r o p h ic le v e l (w w w . f is h b a s e .o r g) o f t h e p e la g ic , d e m e r c a l a n d s h e l lf is h s p e c ie s la n d in g s , 2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 8 .

I n d i c a t o r : A q u a c u lt u r e p r o d u c t i o n

T o ta l a q ua c ulture p ro d uc tio n in B la c k S e a

(2004) 2259 t

(2007) 745 t

(2006) 1216 t

(2003) 244 t

(2005) 4355 t

(2002) 1479 t

(2008) 1886 t

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

F i g u r e 1 4 . T ota l aquacu lture pro ductio n in the B lack S ea T he aquacu lture pro ductio n increased in 2004 (2259 t) and in 2005 (4355 t). T he reported da ta are fro m T urkey, U kraine and B u lgar ia , mo st ly. R o mania has no develo ped m ar ine aquacu ltu re sec to r; so me exper im enta l invest iga t io ns o n M .galloprovincialis exist. G eo rgia repo rted only fo r 2004, 400 t aquaculture pro ductio n. N o data fro m R u ss ian Federa t io n fo r the In 2008 o nly B u lgar ia , T urkey and U kraine repo rted fo r aquacu lture pro ductio n in B lack S ea .(T able 7).

A q ua c ulture prod uc tio n by c ountrue s , 200 2- 200 8

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Years

T o t a l p ro d u c t io n ( t o n s )

BULGARIA

GEORGIA

ROM ANIA

RUSSIA

TURKEY

UKRAINE

T urke y ho lds the firs t p la c e in a qua c u lture pro duct io n in the re g io n. In 2005, a pe a k o f a ro und 3 500 t ha s be e n r e c o rde d.

A nnua l produc tion of ma jor c omme rc ia l spe c ie s

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Y e a rs

tonns

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

BlueMussel

Fish+Natantia

The Black mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis) is the most popular species for artificial cultivation. In 2006 total blue mussel production increased, then decreased toward 2007-2008. Major fish species, object for cultivation in Turkey were Sea Bream (Sparus aurata), Sea Bass (Morone morone), trout (Oncorhinchus mykiss), as the majority of production came from the Aegean Sea and small quantities from the Black Sea .Blue mussel production in the Turkish part of the Black Sea has been reported for 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

For proper fisheries management it is important to know fishing effort. One of the main problems in the Black sea region is the lack of comprehensive information concerning the fishing activity, catch quantities and composition and how it affects the current state of fish stocks. We are aware that in the Fisheries sector is really difficult to produce authoritative reports on the catch quantities and composition on annual principle, which means that we do not have a clear picture in this matter and the analysis of the current state of the stocks is with a fair approach to accuracy. The communication between responsible authorities and data exchange on regional level is not systematic.