Loading

the effects of YOUR VOTE ON PULSE FISHING

16 January, Strasbourg

THE EFFECT OF YOUR VOTE ON PULSE FISHING

If you vote 'no':

75 TRAWLERS RETURN TO BEAM TRAWL

SPILLING 900.000 LITERS OF GASOIL A YEAR

BACK TO HIGH PENETRATION OF THE SEABED

DRAMATIC INCREASE OF UNWANTED CATCH

END OF INNOVATION

YEARS OF RESEARCH ON INNOVATIVE PULSE FISHING WILL END.

STEPS BACK ON SUSTAINABILITY

HIGHER CATCH OF UNDERSIZED FISH

MORE BENTHOS CAUGHT

AFFECTED SEABED

HIGHER FUEL CONSUMPTION

If you vote 'YES', YOU WILL GET:

20% REDUCTION OF SOIL DISTURBANCE BY LOW SEABED PENETRATION AND LOW FISHING SPEED.

Pulse fishing and its effects on the marine ecosystem and fisheries An update of the scientific knowledge.

Authors: Adriaan Rijnsdorp, Dick de Haan, Sarah Smith, Wouter Jan Strietman Wageningen University & Research Report C117/16

The impact of a bottom trawl on the benthos depends on the footprint of the gear used and the sensitivity of the benthic community. The great unknown in the assessment of the impact of pulse trawls is the lack of knowledge how the pulse stimulus affects the functioning of benthic organisms. The mechanical effects are probably lower because of the reduced mechanical disturbance. The replacement of tickler chains running across the net opening by electrodes running in longitudinal direction, has halved the bycatch of benthic invertebrates. In addition, the trawling footprint, defined as the sea floor area swept per hour trawling, is 23% lower than the footprint of the conventional beam trawl due to the reduction in towing speed from about 6.5 to 5 knots. In ecological terms these two factors constitute a highly positive contribution to diminishing the impact of trawling on the North Sea benthic ecosystem. Because the pulse trawl vessels showed a change in their spatial distribution, differences in habitat sensitivity need to be taken into account on top of the additional impact of electrical stimulation to assess the ultimate change in impact on the seafloor.

50% FUEL REDUCTION

'When compared to the conventional beam trawl technique, fuel consumption is significantly lower and, with it, also the CO2 emissions.

There are three reasons for this: 1. Pulse gear is lighter than beam trawl gear, 2. There is less contact with the seabed, 3. The vessels fish at lower speeds.

The use of pulse technique has therefore led to a substantial reduction in fuel consumption. For example, fuel consumption per day at sea for a >300 hp cutter involved in pulse fisheries is 46% lower than the same type of cutter involved in beam trawl fisheries; for a cutter fishing with SumWing technique, this percentage is 18%. For pulse cutters with an engine power of 300 hp or less, the difference with a beam trawl cutter in the same horse power class is 12%.'

ECONOMIC AND SPATIAL IMPACT STUDY, M.N.J. Turenhout, B.W. Zaalmink, W.J. Strietman, K.G. Hamon, Page 27, 4 Conclusion and discussion

A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION OF UNDERSIZED FISH AND BENTHIS FAUNA'

‘Compared to the catch of marketable sized sole, the bycatch of undersized fish in the pulse trawl is lower than in the conventional beam trawl. All experiments carried out show that the bycatch of benthic invertebrates is substantially reduced.’

ICES CM 2017/ SSGIEOM:11. 36 pp.

BETTER QUALITY FISH WHEN CAUGHT BY PULSE
THEREFORE I VOTE FOR PULSE FISHING!

VOTE IN FAVOUR OF THE COMPROMISE REACHED IN THE PECH COMMITTEE

MEET THE EXPERTS!

January 15th 18h N3.2 European Parliament Strasbourg

“Information on Pulse Fisheries in relation to the 16 Janaury Vote”

No application necessary.

Contact:

VisNed: Pim Visser 0031 653146220

Nederlandse Vissersbond: Durk van Tuinen 0031 642408572

Credits:

Flying Focus

Report Abuse

If you feel that this video content violates the Adobe Terms of Use, you may report this content by filling out this quick form.

To report a Copyright Violation, please follow Section 17 in the Terms of Use.