Do potentially seal-safe pingers deter harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in the vicinity of gillnets and thereby reduce bycatch?

• Main Author: Björklund Aksoy, Simon
• Format: Bachelor Thesis
• Language: English
• Published: Linköpings universitet, Biologi 2020
• Subjects: Acoustic Deterrent Device; Banana pinger; Bycatch; Commercial fishery; C-POD; Dinner-bells; Future Oceans pinger; Harbour porpoise; Behavioral Sciences Biology; Etologi; Ecology; Ekologi; Zoology; Zoologi; Phocoena phocoena
• Online Access: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-170512

Incidental bycatch in gillnets is a substantial threat to small cetaceans. Using Acoustic Deterrent Devices, “pingers”, have successfully reduced bycatch of harbour porpoises in gillnets. However, seals can use pingers as “dinner-bells” to easier find gillnets in order to raid and destroy them, further aggravating the existing conflicts between seals and coastal fisheries. Therefore, in the present study, the efficiency of two alleged “seal-safe” pingers, an experimental Banana pinger “SSB” and a Future Oceans F70 pinger “FO”, in deterring harbour porpoises from the vicinity of gillnets and thereby reducing bycatch in commercial gillnet fisheries, was tested. This was done by deploying click detectors, “C-PODs”, recording Detection Positive Minutes per hour, at each end of gillnets, provided with the two pinger types or no pingers at all. Bycatch instances were recorded into logbooks by participating fishermen and verified using video footage from on-board video cameras. Results showed that video monitoring was a reliable method for verifying the number of bycatches of porpoises and seals, but not seabirds, recorded in the fishermen’s logbooks. The experimental SSB pingers and the FO pingers significantly reduced porpoise presence, measured as Detection Positive Minutes per hour in the vicinity of the nets, compared to gillnets without pingers. However, the sample size was too small to yield a significant result regarding the bycatch reducing efficiency and dinner bell effect of the experimental pingers. Nevertheless, bycatch trends suggest that pingers did in fact reduce porpoise bycatch. Although both successful, FO pingers were slightly more efficient in deterring porpoises than SSB pingers. The SSB pinger sounds had bigger directionality variations than the FO pinger, which may have affected its deterrent effects. Therefore, additional trials are needed to further investigate this aspect.