Natural and social science approaches are both needed to manage bird bycatch in small‐scale fisheries

Abstract

Abstract Puck Bay is one of the most important resting and wintering places for seabirds in the Baltic Sea. It is also an important, intensively used fishery ground for traditional small‐scale fisheries operating with gillnets. The protection measures proposed in the consultation for the Natura 2000 Puck Bay conservation plan encountered considerable resistance from small‐scale fishermen. The most serious problem was the gap in scientific knowledge and the proposed closure of gillnets in a substantial area of the bay for the period from November to April. The conditions of bird bycatch in Puck Bay for the period from 1 October 2014 to the end of April 2015 are considered from two perspectives: modelling of bycatch data collected during pilot monitoring by direct on‐board observation together with voluntary fishery logbooks and content analysis of fishermen's interviews. The results from both attempts indicate that solutions to minimize bird bycatch should be sought for winter (December–February) and for all net types. Bycatch is also influenced by depth and fishing area. The modelling results indicate that fishing time is also important. The bycatch in Puck Bay between October 2014 and April 2015 was estimated at 1,332 birds (95% confidence interval: 789–2,898). The estimation was subject to additional uncertainty due to quantitative data limitations. In conflicting situations that require fisheries management to protect the environment, the use of fisheries knowledge through social science methods is essential. The barrier to such interdisciplinary research seems to be a lack of trust not only between fishermen and scientists but also between natural and social scientists. Fishery management in Puck Bay should be based on the combination of continuous bird and bird bycatch monitoring with the integration of local fishery knowledge to minimize the scale of bycatch.

Topics & Concepts