Supertrawler banned just as new evidence of trawling impacts emerge

News that the Dutch owned “Abel Tasman” super trawler may have to leave Australian waters after the lower house passed laws to freeze its operations for at least two years is well received. Allowing the operation of the super trawler with current uncertainties on impacts would have been irresponsible.

Just last week, the publication of a paper by Spanish scientists in Nature provided evidence of major impacts and long lasting effects of trawling on the sea floor. This paper looked at bottom-trawling boats – a different method to that used by the mid-water trawler “Abel Tasman”. But it showed how little we know about the damage fishing can do.*

Trawl fisheries has a long history, but it is a brutal practice. This perception is not a recent sentiment of environmental softness, as France banned trawling in 15th Century as a practice that destroyed productive marine ecosystems and was punished with decapitation. I recommend a precautionary approach to trawling, but do not recommend such stringent penalties!

This early awareness and extreme zeal, however, did not help conserve the French seafloor ecosystems on the long run.

France, through the IFREMER is one of the leading nations in the exploration of the ocean depths. Their fleet of advanced submersibles and ultradeep ROVs and submersibles able to reach 6,000 m like Nautile, has been used intensively in recent years to explore deep corals ecosystems.

Deep corals have been known to grow in Norwegian fjords for over a century. However, only recently, these fascinating coral ecosystems have been observed and explored in any detail. These deep-coral ecosystems grow on a cold, dark environment, and generate complex habitats that provide refuge for fish and invertebrates.

Deep coral ecosystems like that protrayed in this photograph once paved the shelf edge of all continents. Photograph: IFREMER, 900 m depth off the Atlantic French coast. Courtesy Dr. Sophie Arnaud-Haond

As advanced technologies for deep sea exploration developed, deep coral ecosystems were found to be present along the continental shelfs and slopes of all continents, including Antarctica, forming a belt of coral that must have extended from 300 to 1,000 m depth along most of the 170,000 Km of shelf edge in the ocean.

But the initial excitement of these discoveries soon turned into concern as many of the corals discovered were completely trashed and devastated by trawlers. This was the fate of most of the deep corals that once paved the French Atlantic shelf edge, as French scientists discovered, with dismay, just last year.

Trawling has destroyed most of the deep coral ecosystems that paved the shelf edge of the Atlantic French coast. The smoking gun is still to be found. Photograph: IFREMER, 850 m depth off the Atlantic French coast. Courtesy Dr. Sophie Arnaud-Haond

Seagrass meadows in the Mediterranean were also damaged and injured by trawling boats that left deep scars in the meadows and opened, as the attached acoustic image illustrates.

Side scan sonar image showing trawling scars, as parallel lines, in a 7 m Mediterranean Posidonia meadow. Courtesy: A. Marhuenda.

How many seagrass meadows and coral shelfs may have been lost to trawling before been ever observed or documented? Many of these ecosystems will never recover or will recover after centuries.

The ecological damages of trawling are devastating, but are far deeper than hitherto realised. The article just published last week in Nature by Puig and coauthors (“Ploughing the deep sea floor”) showed that trawling in the NW Mediterranean disrupted the sea floor and caused, when conducted along slopes, a destabilistion of the sea floor leading to intense erosive impacts.

As stated by one of the coauthors in an interview, trawling if the sea floor can be compared to plowing agricultural land. However, the key difference is that agricultural fields are plowed only once a year, whereas in many fishing grounds around the world the sea floor is often “plowed” every day. There is no chance of ecosystem recovery.

I do not advocate for an immediate end of trawling, but will like to see this damaging practice be phased out within my life span. We cannot just pretend we do not see, for now we have the technology to see the damage trawling makes. While trawling in the Aegean Sea in a study of red shrimp in the Mediterranean, my friends in the crew of spanish R/V García del Cid were devastated when the net emerged carrying one toilet. An ironic portrait of what we treat our seas like.

Fisheries should be sustainable or shall not be, for our future will strongly depend on our capacity to maintain healthy marine ecosystems. Industry, regulators and scientists must work side by side to this end.

*This paragraph was updated by an editor after publication to clarify the author’s meaning.

Join the conversation

10 Comments sorted by

  1. Peter Ormonde

    Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.

    Farmer

    As I understand it the Abel Tasman/Magiris/Atlantic Star operates a mid-water trawl - well up off the sea floor. They are chasing small pelagic fish rather than bottom dwellers like cod and the like.

    That's not to give this factory ship a clean bill of health by any means - we have little notion of how this fishery fits into the ecology of the Southern Ocean food chain and only the barest suggestion of the appropriate harvest rates.

    And that is the point really. The decision to double the quota looks dodgy. There was no significant science on which this decision was based and moreover one of the companies participating in this discussion was planning a venture which would see it able to grab a sizeable chunk of the increased quota. This was not disclosed according to the minutes.

    That's why the Abel Tasman was sent packing - the whiff of impropriety in the decision and the operation of the committee charged with making quota decisions. It looks fishy.

    report
  2. Jack Arnold

    Director

    Good bye & good riddance Magiris!!

    There has been an admission of impropriety by the marine management authority that controls fishing quotas ... about time; they have been making similar 'mistakes' for over 40 years.

    If foreign interest want to utilise our resources then government needs to demand that all processing from raw materials to finished product occur in Australia rather than elsewhere. In mining this means refining at least to billet stage, but preferably fully rolled.

    report
  3. Nick Drew

    Executive Manager

    Disgraceful, The Conversation has failed with this one.

    As Peter points out the Magris was not intended to bottom trawl and this information has been freely available and well covered. To publish an article lauding the decision to ban the Magris based on the effects of bottom trawling is poor journalism, disingenuous and not what I was hoping to expect from The Conversation.

    Lift your game please editors.

    report
    1. David Healy

      Retired

      In reply to Nick Drew

      Very much agree with you, Nick.

      To make a case against the trawler on the business management grounds Peter and Jack describe in their posts is fair enough.

      To make a case based on an inaccurate portrayal of the way this particular ship operates is nonsense.

      report
    2. Venise Alstergren

      Venise Alstergren is a Friend of The Conversation.

      photographer, blogger.

      In reply to Nick Drew

      With a net that is longer than the Sydney Harbour Bridge, it is possible the Abel Tasman could fish at any depth it so chooses. The pro-trawler commentariat is indulging in idle semantics. Large marine areas in the world have been denuded of fish. Something which could scarcely have been caused by jetty based anglers using a hook and line.

      All trawlers should have stringent laws pertaining to their catches, and if the laws aren't strict enough, the law should be strengthened. To argue that a super-trawler, whose nets (doubled) are longer than the most famous Australian bridge aren't going to mean over fishing makes the pro super-trawler arguments look as ridiculous as Mr Bean.

      Those in favour could better spend their time in researching the depth of Australia's continental shelf.

      report
    3. Andy Saunders

      Consultant

      In reply to Venise Alstergren

      Venise: "forget the length, feel the width" to paraphrase someone or other.

      The length of the net has nothing to do with catching power, it's more to do with how big is the mouth.

      And nothing to do with the depth. Mid-water trawlers (the name may give a hint) don't fish the bottom - in fact they actively avoid the bottom as snagging causes damage or loss of nets.

      report
  4. Andy Saunders

    Consultant

    A decent article with an appalling first paragraph (and title).

    So I suspect the "super-trawler" reference has been added just to sex up the story.

    Carlos, you deserve the negative comments above as a result.

    report
    1. Fred Pribac

      logged in via email @internode.on.net

      In reply to Andy Saunders

      After pinning his colours to the mast in regard to the recent decsion re: the Abel Tasman in the first paragraph, the second paragraph clearly states that the Abel Tasman is "not" a bottom trawler and sets the topic for the rest of the article in regard to bottom trawling.

      The article is simply reminding us with a concrete example that we (including scientists) often get it wrong despite shrill and persistant choruses of "best practise", "bet practise".

      I found this article very interesting - a blue tick from me,

      report
    2. Andy Saunders

      Consultant

      In reply to Fred Pribac

      Yeah, Fred, but he in effect is saying "here is my opinion about something in the news, but then here is the story about something different" while missing out "and there isn't any real link between the two, even though they sound the same"

      As you say, the rest is interesting.

      report
  5. John Newton

    Author Journalist

    This is line fisherman Mark Eather's take on demersal - bottom - trawling;

    “There’s a big gorgeous mountain at the back of Hobart, Mount Wellington. If someone was to put a big steel rope up the face of that mountain from one end to the other and put a team of bulldozers at the bottom, and drag it down – how far would they get? They’d be shot on sight before they’d got a metre down. That’s what happens (to the ocean floor) with board trawling. Only worse. They throw a net over the top to make sure all the flora and fauna gets smashed up. Then they take a portion of what they’ve dragged down the mountain, turn it into woodchips and sell it cheap. That’s a brutal analogy, but it’s a fact. I’m not trying to put the trawler fishermen out of business. They’ve got families to feed. I’m just trying to change the way they fish. For twenty years I’ve advocated that demersal trawling should be abolished totally”

    Tend to agree

    report