Ege Denizi’nde kıyı balıkçılığı ve deniz kuşları arasındaki bazı etkileşimler
Yıl 2020, Cilt: 37 Sayı: 2, 139 - 147, 15.06.2020Öz
Bu çalışmada, Ege Denizi'nde uygulanan çeşitli balıkçılık tiplerinin ikincil çekim etkileri sonucu balıkçılıkla etkileşime giren deniz kuşlarının bazı etkileşim tipleri ve sonuçlarının ortaya konması amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında Eylül 2016 ile Aralık 2018 tarihleri arasında İzmir, Aydın ve Muğla bölgesindeki balık çiftlikleri, küçük ölçekli balıkçılar (KÖB) ve dalyanlarda çalışan 80 balıkçı ile yüz yüze görüşmeler yapılmıştır. Balık çiftlikleri ve kıyı balıkçıları ile en çok etkileşime giren kuş türleri karabatak (Phalacrocorax carbo), gümüş martı (Larus michahellis), büyük akbalıkçıl (Ardea alba), az sayıda yelkovan (Puffinus yelkouan) ve akpelikan (Pelecanus onocrotalus)’dır. Akuakültür işletmelerinde çalışanlar %82 oranında kışın deniz kuşları ile etkileşime girdiklerini bildirirlerken, KÖB %50 ile yazın en çok etkileşime girmişlerdir. Balıkçıların mevsimlere göre deniz kuşları ile etkileşime girme oranları arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak önemli bulunmuştur (p<0,05). Akuakültür çalışanları %33 oranında deniz kuşlarını tüm gün gördüklerini ifade etmişler; bu oran KÖB için %21,7, dalyanlar için ise %15’dir. Bununla birlikte sabah saatlerinde akuakültür ve KÖB tarafından %11, dalyan balıkçısı tarafından ise %8,3 oranında su kuşları ile etkileşim içine girildiği tespit edilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Küçük ölçekli balıkçılık, dalyan, akuakültür, deniz kuşları, etkileşim
Destekleyen Kurum
Ege Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinasyon Birimi
Teşekkür
Bu çalışma Ege Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinasyon Birimi tarafından desteklenmiştir. Proje Numarası: 16-SÜF-015. Yazarlar ayrıca görüş ve bilgilerini içtenlikle paylaşan kıyı balıkçılarına teşekkürlerini sunar.
Kaynakça
- Aguado-Giménez, F., Eguía-Martínez, S., Cerezo-Valverde, J. & García-García, B. (2018). Spatio-temporal variability of ichthyophagous bird assemblage around western Mediterranean open-sea cage fish farms. Marine Environmental Research, 140, 126-134. DOI:10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.06.008
- Barrett, L.T., Swearer, S.E. & Dempster, T. (2018). Impacts of marine and freshwater aquaculture on wildlife: a global meta-analysis. Reviews in Aquaculture, 1–23. DOI:10.1111/raq.12277
- Beveridge, M.C.M. (2001). Aquaculture and wildlife interactions. In: Uriarte A., Basurco B. (eds.). Environmental impact assessment of Mediterranean aquaculture farms (pp 57-66). Zaragoza, CHIEAM
- Brothers, N.P., Cooper, J. & Løkkeborg, S. (1999). The Incidental Catch of Seabirds by Longline Fisheries: Worldwide Review and Technical Guidelines for Mitigation. FAO Fisheries Circular No. 937. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
- Croxall, J.P., Butchart, S.H.M., Lascelles, B., Stattersfield, A.J., Sullivan, B., Symes, A. & Taylor, P., (2012). Seabird conservation status, threats and priority actions: a global assessment. Bird Conservation International 22, 1–34. DOI:10.1017/S0959270912000020
- Croxall, J.P., Prince, J.P., Hunter, I., McInnes, S. & Copestake, P.G. (1984). The seabirds of the Antarctic Peninsula, islands of the Scotia Sea and Antarctic continent between 80°W and 20°W: their status and conservation. In: Croxall, J.P., Evans, P.G.H., Schreiber, R.W. (eds), Status and conservation of the world’s seabirds. Proceedings of the ICBP Seabird Conservation Symposium(pp. 637-666), Cambridge, U.K.: Symposium Book.
- Díaz López, B. (2017). Temporal variability in predator presence around a fin fish farm in the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology, 38, e12378. DOI:10.1111/maec.12378
- Gilman, E., Boggs, C. & Brothers, N. (2003). Performance assessment of an underwater setting chute to mitigate seabird bycatch in the Hawaii pelagic longline tuna fishery. Ocean and Coastal Management, 46, 985–1010. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2003.12.001
- Le Bot, T., Lescroël, A. & Grémillet, D. (2018. A toolkit to study seabird–fishery interactions. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 75,1513-1525. DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsy038
- Jiménez, S., Domingo, A. & Brazeiro A. (2009). Seabird bycatch in the Southwest Atlantic: interaction with the Uruguayan pelagic longline fishery. Polar Biology, 32,187–196. DOI:10.1007/s00300-008-0519-8
- Jiménez, S., Abreu, M., Pons, M., Ortiz, M. & Domingo, A., (2010). Assessing the impact of the pelagic longline fishery on albatrosses and petrels in the southwest Atlantic. Aquatic Living Resources, 23, 49‐64. DOI:10.1051/alr/2010002
- Løkkeborg, S. (1998). Seabird bycatch and bait loss in long-lining using different setting methods. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 55, 145–149. DOI:10.1006/jmsc.1997.9997
- Morant, P.D., Brooke, R.K. & Abrams, R.W. (1983). Recoveries in Southern Africa of seabirds breeding elsewhere. Ringing and Migration, 4,257–268. DOI:10.1080/03078698.1983.9673818
- Moreno, C.A., Rubilar, P.S., Marschoff, E. & Benzaquen, L. (1996). Factors affecting the incidental mortality of seabirds in the Dissostichus eleginoides fishery in the southwest Atlantic (Subarea 483, 1995 season). CCAMLR Science, 3, 79–91.
- Nel, D.E., Ryan, P.G. & Watkins, B.P. (2002) Seabird mortality in the Patagonian toothfish longline fishery around the Prince Edward Islands, 1996–2000. Antarctic Science, 14,151–161 . DOI:10.1017/S0954102002000718
- Petersen, S.L., Honig, M.B., Ryan, P.G. & Underhill, L.G. (2009). Seabird bycatch in the pelagic longline fishery off southern Africa. African Journal of Marine Science, 31,191–204. DOI:10.2989/AJMS.2009.31.2.7.879
- Robertson, G., Moe, E., Haugen, R. & Wienecke, B. (2003) How fast do demersal longlines sink? Fisheries Research, 62,385–388. DOI:10.1016/S0165-7836(02)00276-X
- Robertson, B.A., & Hutto, R.L. (2006) A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology, 87(5), 1075–1085. DOI:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1075:AFFUET]2.0.CO;2
- Ryan, P.G. & Watkins, B.P. (2002) Reducing incidental mortality of seabirds with an underwater setting funnel. Biological Conservation, 104, 127–131. DOI:10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00174-4
- Sullivan, B.J., Brickle, P., Reid, T.A., Bone, D.G. & Middleton, D.A.J. (2004). Trials to test mitigate devices to reduce seabird mortality caused by warp cable strike on factory trawlers. CCAMLR WG-FSA 04/79. Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, Hobart, Australia. 21 p.
- Tasker, M.L., Camphuysen, C.J., Cooper, J., Garthe, S., Montevecchi, W.A. & Blaber, S.J.M. (2000). The impacts of fishing on marine birds. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57: 531–547. DOI:10.1006/jmsc.2000.0714
- Watkins, B.P. Petersen, S.L. & Ryan, P.G. (2008) Interactions between seabirds and deep-water hake trawl gear: an assessment of impacts in South African waters. Animal Conservation, 11, 247–254. DOI:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00192.x
- Wiedenfeld, D.A. (2012). Analysis of the Effects of Marine Stewardship Council Fishery Certification on the Conservation of Seabirds. USA: American Bird Conservancy
- Zydelis, R., Small, C. & French, G. (2013). The incidental catch of seabirds in gillnet fisheries: A global review. Biological Conservation, 162: 76-88. DOI:10.1016/j.biocon.2013.04.002
Some interactions between coastal fisheries and sea birds in the Aegean Sea
Yıl 2020, Cilt: 37 Sayı: 2, 139 - 147, 15.06.2020Öz
In this study, it is aimed to determine the some interactions between various fishery types and seabirds, results of this interaction and sea bird species that have been interacting due to secondary attraction factors. A total of 80 fishermen, working in fish farms, small scale fishery (SSF) and lagoons located in Izmir, Aydın and Muğla were face-to-face interviewed between September 2016 and December 2018. The great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), yellow-legged gull (Larus michahellis), great white egret (Ardea alba), some yelkouan shearwater (Puffinus yelkouan) and great white pelican (Pelecanus onocrotalus) are the bird species that have an interaction with coastal fishermen and sea-cage fish farms. 82% of employees in sea-cage fish farms mentioned that they have an interaction with sea birds in winter, besides %50 of SSF have an interaction with sea birds in summer. The difference between interaction rate according to seasons has been found as statistically significant (p<0.05). 33% of employees in fish farms expressed that they see sea birds during the day. This ratio is 21.7% and 15% for SSF and fishermen in lagoon, respectively. Furthermore, 8.3% of fishermen in lagoon, 11% of employees in fish farms and SSF mentioned that they have an interaction with seabirds especially in the morning time.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Small scale fishery, lagoon, aquaculture, seabirds, interaction
Kaynakça
- Aguado-Giménez, F., Eguía-Martínez, S., Cerezo-Valverde, J. & García-García, B. (2018). Spatio-temporal variability of ichthyophagous bird assemblage around western Mediterranean open-sea cage fish farms. Marine Environmental Research, 140, 126-134. DOI:10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.06.008
- Barrett, L.T., Swearer, S.E. & Dempster, T. (2018). Impacts of marine and freshwater aquaculture on wildlife: a global meta-analysis. Reviews in Aquaculture, 1–23. DOI:10.1111/raq.12277
- Beveridge, M.C.M. (2001). Aquaculture and wildlife interactions. In: Uriarte A., Basurco B. (eds.). Environmental impact assessment of Mediterranean aquaculture farms (pp 57-66). Zaragoza, CHIEAM
- Brothers, N.P., Cooper, J. & Løkkeborg, S. (1999). The Incidental Catch of Seabirds by Longline Fisheries: Worldwide Review and Technical Guidelines for Mitigation. FAO Fisheries Circular No. 937. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
- Croxall, J.P., Butchart, S.H.M., Lascelles, B., Stattersfield, A.J., Sullivan, B., Symes, A. & Taylor, P., (2012). Seabird conservation status, threats and priority actions: a global assessment. Bird Conservation International 22, 1–34. DOI:10.1017/S0959270912000020
- Croxall, J.P., Prince, J.P., Hunter, I., McInnes, S. & Copestake, P.G. (1984). The seabirds of the Antarctic Peninsula, islands of the Scotia Sea and Antarctic continent between 80°W and 20°W: their status and conservation. In: Croxall, J.P., Evans, P.G.H., Schreiber, R.W. (eds), Status and conservation of the world’s seabirds. Proceedings of the ICBP Seabird Conservation Symposium(pp. 637-666), Cambridge, U.K.: Symposium Book.
- Díaz López, B. (2017). Temporal variability in predator presence around a fin fish farm in the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology, 38, e12378. DOI:10.1111/maec.12378
- Gilman, E., Boggs, C. & Brothers, N. (2003). Performance assessment of an underwater setting chute to mitigate seabird bycatch in the Hawaii pelagic longline tuna fishery. Ocean and Coastal Management, 46, 985–1010. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2003.12.001
- Le Bot, T., Lescroël, A. & Grémillet, D. (2018. A toolkit to study seabird–fishery interactions. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 75,1513-1525. DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsy038
- Jiménez, S., Domingo, A. & Brazeiro A. (2009). Seabird bycatch in the Southwest Atlantic: interaction with the Uruguayan pelagic longline fishery. Polar Biology, 32,187–196. DOI:10.1007/s00300-008-0519-8
- Jiménez, S., Abreu, M., Pons, M., Ortiz, M. & Domingo, A., (2010). Assessing the impact of the pelagic longline fishery on albatrosses and petrels in the southwest Atlantic. Aquatic Living Resources, 23, 49‐64. DOI:10.1051/alr/2010002
- Løkkeborg, S. (1998). Seabird bycatch and bait loss in long-lining using different setting methods. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 55, 145–149. DOI:10.1006/jmsc.1997.9997
- Morant, P.D., Brooke, R.K. & Abrams, R.W. (1983). Recoveries in Southern Africa of seabirds breeding elsewhere. Ringing and Migration, 4,257–268. DOI:10.1080/03078698.1983.9673818
- Moreno, C.A., Rubilar, P.S., Marschoff, E. & Benzaquen, L. (1996). Factors affecting the incidental mortality of seabirds in the Dissostichus eleginoides fishery in the southwest Atlantic (Subarea 483, 1995 season). CCAMLR Science, 3, 79–91.
- Nel, D.E., Ryan, P.G. & Watkins, B.P. (2002) Seabird mortality in the Patagonian toothfish longline fishery around the Prince Edward Islands, 1996–2000. Antarctic Science, 14,151–161 . DOI:10.1017/S0954102002000718
- Petersen, S.L., Honig, M.B., Ryan, P.G. & Underhill, L.G. (2009). Seabird bycatch in the pelagic longline fishery off southern Africa. African Journal of Marine Science, 31,191–204. DOI:10.2989/AJMS.2009.31.2.7.879
- Robertson, G., Moe, E., Haugen, R. & Wienecke, B. (2003) How fast do demersal longlines sink? Fisheries Research, 62,385–388. DOI:10.1016/S0165-7836(02)00276-X
- Robertson, B.A., & Hutto, R.L. (2006) A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology, 87(5), 1075–1085. DOI:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1075:AFFUET]2.0.CO;2
- Ryan, P.G. & Watkins, B.P. (2002) Reducing incidental mortality of seabirds with an underwater setting funnel. Biological Conservation, 104, 127–131. DOI:10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00174-4
- Sullivan, B.J., Brickle, P., Reid, T.A., Bone, D.G. & Middleton, D.A.J. (2004). Trials to test mitigate devices to reduce seabird mortality caused by warp cable strike on factory trawlers. CCAMLR WG-FSA 04/79. Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, Hobart, Australia. 21 p.
- Tasker, M.L., Camphuysen, C.J., Cooper, J., Garthe, S., Montevecchi, W.A. & Blaber, S.J.M. (2000). The impacts of fishing on marine birds. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57: 531–547. DOI:10.1006/jmsc.2000.0714
- Watkins, B.P. Petersen, S.L. & Ryan, P.G. (2008) Interactions between seabirds and deep-water hake trawl gear: an assessment of impacts in South African waters. Animal Conservation, 11, 247–254. DOI:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00192.x
- Wiedenfeld, D.A. (2012). Analysis of the Effects of Marine Stewardship Council Fishery Certification on the Conservation of Seabirds. USA: American Bird Conservancy
- Zydelis, R., Small, C. & French, G. (2013). The incidental catch of seabirds in gillnet fisheries: A global review. Biological Conservation, 162: 76-88. DOI:10.1016/j.biocon.2013.04.002
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
|---|---|
| Konular | Balıkçılık Yönetimi |
| Bölüm | Makaleler |
| Yazarlar |
|
| Proje Numarası | 16-SÜF-015 |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 15 Haziran 2020 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 19 Eylül 2019 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2020Cilt: 37 Sayı: 2 |