Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T02:53:16.370Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - How many fish should we leave in the sea for seabirds and marine mammals?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2009

C. J. Camphuysen
By
R. W. Furness
Edited by
I. L. Boyd  and
S. Wanless
C. J. Camphuysen
Affiliation:
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
R. W. Furness
Affiliation:
Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Graham Kerr Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow C12 8QQ, UK
I. L. Boyd
Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
S. Wanless
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK
Get access

Summary

Harvesting reduces fish populations. Using empirical data and stock-recruitment models, a biomass limit reference point may be set to maintain recruitment. This minimum is often <20% of the biomass that would be present without fishing. However, such a low biomass might be inadequate to sustain top predators, especially where an exploited fish stock is a key food for wildlife. Another limit reference point might be devised to account for food needs of predators. Empirical evidence shows that bioenergetics estimates of the quantities of food required by top predators are inadequate to set reference points. Top predators such as marine mammals and seabirds show population declines or breeding failures when food stocks remain far above the minimum amount these predators need to eat. The density of the prey field for foraging predators is probably a crucial factor affecting their foraging performance. Not all species of seabirds or marine mammals are equally vulnerable to impacts on their populations through food shortage. It is possible to identify the aspects of predator ecology most likely to require high densities of food to permit economically profitable foraging. It may be useful to select for study ‘sensitive species’ of seabirds and marine mammals; this might permit the development – from empirical studies – of reference points based on the ecology of these species. Such reference points for ‘sensitive species’ could be used in a precautionary way as proxies to protect the broad community of dependent wildlife.

Type
Chapter
Information
Top Predators in Marine Ecosystems
Their Role in Monitoring and Management
 , pp. 211 - 222
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, T. W. (2001). Predator responses, prey refuges, and density-dependent mortality of a marine fish. Ecology, 82, 245–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, R. T. & Krasnov, J. V. (1996). Recent responses to changes in fish stocks of prey species by seabirds breeding in the southern Barents Sea. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 53, 713–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bax, N.J. (1991). A comparison of fish biomass flow to fish, fisheries, and mammals in six marine ecosystems. ICES Mar. Sci. Symp., 193, 217–24.Google Scholar
Bearhop, S., Thompson, D. R., Phillips, R. A. et al. (2001). Annual variation in great skua diets: the importance of commercial fisheries and predation on seabirds revealed by combining dietary analyses. Condor, 103, 802–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, I. L. & Murray, W. A. (2001). Monitoring a marine ecosystem using responses of upper trophic level predators. J. Anim. Ecol., 70, 747–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. R. (1989). Energy requirements and food consumption of Eudyptes penguins at the Prince Edward Islands. Antarct. Sci., 1, 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldow, R. W. G. & Furness, R. W. (2000). The effect of food availability on the foraging behaviour of breeding great skuas Catharacta skua and Arctic skuas Stercorarius parasiticus. J. Avian Biol., 31, 367–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldow, R. W. G. & Furness, R. W. (2001). Does Holling's disc equation explain the functional response of a kleptoparasite?J. Anim. Ecol., 70, 650–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Constable, A. J., de la Mare, W. K., Agnew, D. J., Everson, I. & Miller, D. (2000). Managing fisheries to conserve the Antarctic marine ecosystem: practical implementation of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57, 778–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croxall, J. P. & Prince, P. A. (1987). Seabirds as predators on marine resources, especially krill, of South Georgia waters. In Seabirds: Feeding Ecology and Role in Marine Ecosystems, ed. Croxall, J. P.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 347–68.Google Scholar
Diamond, A. W., Gaston, A. W. & Brown, R. G. B. (1993). Studies of High-Latitude Seabirds. 3. A Model of the Energy Demands of the Seabirds of Eastern and Arctic Canada, ed. Montevecchi, W. A.. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper 77. Ottowa, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
Durant, J. M., Anker-Nilssen, T. & Stenseth, N. C. (2003). Trophic interactions under climate fluctuations: the Atlantic puffin as an example. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270, 1461–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome, Italy: FAO.
Fauchald, P. & Erikstad, K. E. (2002). Scale-dependent predator–prey interactions: the aggregative response of seabirds to prey under variable prey abundance and patchiness. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 231, 279–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fauchald, P., Erikstad, K. E. & Skarsfjord, H. (2000). Scale-dependent predator–prey interactions: the hierarchical spatial distribution of seabirds and prey. Ecology, 81, 773–83.Google Scholar
Furness, R. W. (1978). Energy requirements of seabird communities: a bioenergetics model. J. Anim. Ecol., 47, 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furness, R. W. (1994). An estimate of the quantity of squid consumed by seabirds in the eastern North Atlantic and adjoining seas. Fish. Res., 21, 165–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furness, R. W. (2002). Management implications of interactions between fisheries and sandeel-dependent seabirds and seals in the North Sea. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 59, 261–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furness, R. W. (2003). Impacts of fisheries on seabird communities. Sci. Mar., 67 (Suppl. 2), 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furness, R. W. & Tasker, M. L. (2000). Seabird–fishery interactions: quantifying the sensitivity of seabirds to reductions in sandeel abundance and identification of key areas for sensitive seabirds in the North Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 202, 253–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garthe, S., Camphuysen, C. J. & Furness, R. W. (1996). Amounts of discards by commercial fisheries and their significance as food for seabirds in the North Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 136, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, D., Mangel, M., Parkes, G.et al. (2002). Scientific Review of the Harvest Strategy Currently Used in the BSAI and GOA Groundfish Fishery Management Plans. Report prepared for North Pacific Fishery Management Council, November 2002. Anchorage, Alaska: North Pacific Fishery Management Council.Google Scholar
Hollowed, A. B., Ianelli, J. N. & Livingston, P. (2000). Including predation mortality in stock assessments: a case study for Gulf of Alaska walleye pollock. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57, 279–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, G. L. (1997). Physics, zooplankton, and the distribution of least auklets in the Bering Sea: a review. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 54, 600–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, G. L. & Furness, R. W. (1996). Seabird–Fish Interactions, with Particular Reference to Seabirds in the North Sea. ICES Cooperative Research Report 216. Copenhagen, Denmark: ICES.Google Scholar
Jennings, S., Kaiser, M. J. & Reynolds, J. D. (2001). Marine Fisheries Ecology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
Klomp, N. I. & Furness, R. W. (1992). Non-breeders as a buffer against environmental stress: declines in numbers of great skuas on Foula, Shetland, and prediction of future recruitment. J. Appl. Ecol., 29, 341–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mavor, R. A., Parsons, M., Heubeck, M., Pickerell, G. & Schmitt, S. (2003). Seabird Numbers and Breeding Success in Britain and Ireland, 2002. UK Nature Conservation, No. 27. Peterborough, UK: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.Google Scholar
Mehlum, F. & Gabrielsen, G. W. (1995). Energy expenditure and food consumption by seabird populations in the Barents Sea region. In Ecology of Fjords and Coastal Waters, eds. Skjoldal, H. R., C. Hopkins, K. E. Erikstad & H. P. Leinaas. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier Science, pp. 457–70.Google Scholar
Mehlum, F., Hunt, G. L., Jr, Klusek, Z. & Decker, M. B. (1999). Scale-dependent correlations between the abundance of Brunnich's guillemots and their prey. J. Anim. Ecol., 68, 60–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murawski, S. A. (2000). Definitions of overfishing from an ecosystem perspective. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57, 649–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oro, D. & Furness, R. W. (2002). Influences of food availability and predation on survival of kittiwakes. Ecology, 83, 2516–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R. A., Caldow, R. W. G. & Furness, R. W. (1996). The influence of food availability on the breeding effort and reproductive success of Arctic skuas Stercorarius parasiticus. Ibis, 138, 410–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R. A., Catry, P., Thompson, D. R., Hamer, K. C. & Furness, R. W. (1997). Inter-colony variation in diet and reproductive performance of great skuas Catharacta skua. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 152, 285–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratcliffe, N., Catry, P., Hamer, K. C., Klomp, N. I. & Furness, R. W. (2002). The effect of age and year on the survival of breeding adult great skuas Catharacta skua in Shetland. Ibis, 144, 384–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeves, S. A. & Furness, R. W. (2002). Net Loss – Seabirds Gain? Implications of Fisheries Management for Seabirds Scavenging Discards in the Northern North Sea. Sandy, UK: RSPB.Google Scholar
Sainsbury, K. J., Punt, A. E. & Smith, A. D. M. (2000). Design of operational management strategies for achieving fishery ecosystem objectives. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57, 731–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, D.C., Hunt, G. L., Jr & Harrison, N. M. (1986). Mass and energy transfer to seabirds in the southeastern Bering Sea. Cont. Shelf Res., 5, 241–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, D.C., Hunt, G. L. & Powers, K. D. (1987). Energy flux to pelagic birds: a comparison of Bristol Bay (Bering Sea) and Georges Bank (Northwest Atlantic). In Seabirds: Feeding Ecology and Role in Marine Ecosystems ed. Croxal, J. P.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 259–77.Google Scholar
Sims, D. W. (2000). Can threshold foraging responses of basking sharks be used to estimate their metabolic rate?Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 200, 289–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Votier, S. C., Furness, R. W., Bearhop, S. et al. (2004). Changes in fisheries discard rates and seabird communities. Nature, 427, 727–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×