Reactions of harbor porpoises Phocoena phocoena and herring Clupea harengus to acoustic alarms

Culik, Boris M.; Koschinski, Sven; Tregenza, Nick; Ellis, Graeme M.

doi:10.3354/meps211255

Cited by 114 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As described above, studies using theodolites to record surfacing positions of harbour porpoises have generally shown a clear zone of displacement around active pingers (e.g. Gearin et al 2000, Culik et al 2001; for an exception see Desportes et al 2006). Such displacement zones do not appear to occur with bottlenose dolphins; indeed Cox et al (2004) found no significant difference in the closest point of approach of dolphins to active or inactive pingers.…”

Section: How Do Pingers Work?mentioning

confidence: 99%

To ping or not to ping: the use of active acoustic devices in mitigating interactions between small cetaceans and gillnet fisheries

Dawson

Northridge²,

Waples³

et al. 2013

Endang. Species. Res.

110

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Active sound emitters ('pingers') are used in several gillnet fisheries to reduce bycatch of small cetaceans, and/or to reduce depredation by dolphins. Here, we review studies conducted to determine how effective these devices may be as management tools. Significant reductions in bycatch of harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena, franciscana Pontoporia blainvillei, common Delphinus delphis and striped dolphin Stenella coeruleoalba, and beaked whales as a group have been demonstrated. For harbour porpoise this result has been replicated in 14 controlled experiments in North America and Europe, and appears to be due to porpoises avoiding the area ensonified by pingers. Two gillnet fisheries (California-Oregon driftnet fishery for swordfish; New England groundfish fishery) with mandatory pinger use have been studied for over a decade. Bycatch rates of dolphins/porpoises have fallen by 50 to 60%, and there is no evidence of bycatch increasing over time due to habituation. In both fisheries, bycatch rates were significantly higher in nets sparsely equipped with pingers or in which pingers had failed, than in nets without any pingers at all. Studies of pinger use to reduce depredation by bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus generally show small and inconsistent improvements in fish catches and somewhat reduced net damage. Dolphin bycatch in these fisheries is rare, but still occurs in nets with pingers. Taken together, these studies suggest that the most promising candidates for bycatch reduction via pinger use will be gillnet fisheries in developed countries in which the bycaught cetaceans are generally neophobic species with large home ranges. We offer a set of lessons learned from the last decade of bycatch management.KEY WORDS: Gillnet · Bycatch · Dolphin · Porpoise · Pinger · Acoustic devices Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher Contribution to the Theme Section 'Techniques for reducing bycatch of marine mammals in gillnets'

show abstract

Section: How Do Pingers Work?mentioning

confidence: 99%

To ping or not to ping: the use of active acoustic devices in mitigating interactions between small cetaceans and gillnet fisheries

Dawson

Northridge²,

Waples³

et al. 2013

Endang. Species. Res.

110

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although in many studies (Trippel et al, 1999;Gearin et al, 2000, Culik et al, 2001, Wilson and Dill, 2002, it is proved that pingers do not negatively effect the catch rate of target species, Kraus et al (Kraus et al, 1997), asserted that pingers cause reduction in target catch rate in a study performed on Atlantic herring ( Clupea harengus ).…”

Section: Reduction Of Catch Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Technical Measures in Order to Decrease Interactions Between Dolphins and Fishermen: Pingers

Gönener¹,

Özsandıkçı²

2017

J Aquacult Eng Fish Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Almost all marine mammal species are in interaction with fishing activities and this interaction frequently results with the death of marine mammals in gillnet fisheries. This situation which results with the death of thousands of harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) is defined as by-catch ( non-target catch) in gillnet fisheries and in this way it is legalized at least partially. These inreactions between fisheries and dolphins cause ecologic and social concerns, while that means much more economic losses from the perspective of fishermen. In most of studies which aim to determine necessary measures to reduce by-catch of dolphins, gillnet fisheries is taken as basis and dolphin deterrent devices called pingers are used. In this subject many studies have been carried out in world, while only a few in Black Sea. However, it is still difficult to make an assessment for effectiveness of pingers. In addition to this, many studies including those of performed in Black Sea outline that pingers can keep harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) away from gillnets for 1-2 years but it is vital that monitoring the situation after this period.

show abstract

“…This site lacked a high observation point from which to take long-distance readings through traditional theodolite tracking such as that conducted by Cox et al (2004) and Culik et al (2001). To simplify analysis, a viodolite system was used to track the movements of the dolphins around the pinger array when they were in the focal arena in front of an onshore observation platform overlooking the study site.…”

Section: Land-based Observations (Humpback Dolphins Only)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic alarms elicit only subtle responses in the behaviour of tropical coastal dolphins in Queensland, Australia

Soto¹,

Cagnazzi²,

Everingham³

et al. 2013

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incidental bycatch in gill nets is the most serious of the global threats to marine mammals. Consequently, many management agencies wish to implement practical and efficient bycatch mitigation systems that both protect species of conservation concern and are readily adopted by fishermen. Australian snubfin Orcaella heinsohni and humpback dolphins Sousa chinensis occur in small fragmented populations along most of the remote coast of subtropical and tropical Australia, where they are caught in gillnet fisheries operated from small vessels. We experimentally investigated whether a commercially available acoustic alarm modified the behaviour of each of these species in the absence of a net. The movements and behaviour of both species changed subtly when the pingers were active, but the likelihood of the animals leaving an area was not significantly different from the controls. Our results suggest that this technological approach may not be effective in reducing the bycatch of these species. We suggest that further experimentation is unlikely to be cost effective and that government agencies should work with fishers and scientists to explore alternative mitigation measures.

show abstract

Reactions of harbor porpoises Phocoena phocoena and herring Clupea harengus to acoustic alarms

Cited by 114 publications

References 7 publications

To ping or not to ping: the use of active acoustic devices in mitigating interactions between small cetaceans and gillnet fisheries

To ping or not to ping: the use of active acoustic devices in mitigating interactions between small cetaceans and gillnet fisheries

Technical Measures in Order to Decrease Interactions Between Dolphins and Fishermen: Pingers

Acoustic alarms elicit only subtle responses in the behaviour of tropical coastal dolphins in Queensland, Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About