See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281643881

Recent Developments in Fishing Technology

Conference Paper · December 2009

CITATIONS READS
0 2,157

1 author:

M R Boopendranath
Central Institute of Fisheries Technology
146 PUBLICATIONS   508 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Energy analysis of fishing systems View project

Responsible fishing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by M R Boopendranath on 11 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 National Seminar on Indian Marine Fisheries – Sustainability at
Crossroads, 22-23 December 2009, College of Fisheries, Mangalore

Recent Developments in Fishing

Technology
M.R. Boopendranath
Central Institute of Fisheries Technology
P.O. Matsyapuri, CIFT Junction, Cochin-682 029, India
E-mail: [email protected]

Dynamic developments have taken place in the harvest technology of fish in the last
few decades. Among the most significant developments which affected the historical
evolution of fishing gear and practices have been (i) developments in craft technology and
mechanisation of propulsion, gear and catch handling (ii) introduction of synthetic gear
materials (iii) developments in acoustic fish detection and satellite-based remote sensing
techniques (iv) advances in electronic navigation and communication equipment (v)
awareness of the need for responsible fishing to ensure sustainability of the resources,
protection of the biodiversity and environmental safety and energy efficiency. Introduction of
powerful and highly efficient fish harvesting systems and fish detection methods and an
uncontrolled expansion in fleet size fuelled by ever increasing market demand for fish brought
about increasing pressure on the marine fishery resources. Unmistakable signs of overfishing
and negative impacts on the ecosystems have increasingly manifested in the recent years,
highlighting the need for scientific management of the fishery resources and adoption of
responsible fishing practices in order to ensure long-term sustainability of the resources and
their availability to the future generations. Directions associated with use and development of
fishing gear and practices delineated in the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries
focus on (i) selective fishing gear and practices, (ii) environment-friendly fishing gears and (iii)
energy conservation in harvesting. Technologies available for responsible fishing focus on
reducing bycatch of non-target species, protected species and juveniles; minimising the
environmental impact of fishing gear and their operation and minimising the energy use per
unit volume of fish landed, during fishing operations. In this paper, recent developments which
have taken place in fishing technology and practices are discussed, in the context of
sustainable fisheries.

Key words: Fishing technology, responsible fishing systems

1.0 Introduction

Fishing is an ancient occupation. The oldest fishing implements so far

identified are sophisticated harpoons, found in the territory of the Congo (ex-
Zaire), and dated to around 90,000 years (Yellen et al. 1995). About 200
million people are either directly or indirectly involved in this industry. About
43.5 million people directly depend on fishing for their livelihood (FAO, 2009).
Fishing contributes significantly to foreign exchange earnings of many
developing countries. Global capture fisheries production in 2006 was about
92 million tonnes, with an estimated first-sale value of over USD 91 billion,
comprising about 82 million tonnes from marine waters and a record 10 million
tonnes from inland waters (FAO, 2009).
Fisheries provide employment or gainful economic activity to nearly 14
million people in India. Marine fish production in India has reached 3.2 million

1
tonnes in 2008 which formed over 81% of the potential yield from the
Exclusive Economic Zone, from a meagre 0.4 million tonnes in 1947.

2.0 Indian fishing industry

The erstwhile Indo-Norwegian Project which was formed as a result of

a tripartite technical co-operation agreement signed in 1952, between India,
the USA and the United Nations for fisheries development, has made
important contributions in traditional craft motorisation and mechanisation.
Central Institute of Fisheries Technology (formerly Central Fisheries
Technological Research Station) was established in Cochin in 1957, with the
objectives of development of fishing industry in India. The programme for
mechanisation of the existing traditional crafts began with the posting of FAO
naval Architects to the Research Station. In 1955, experimental shrimp
trawling was conducted with 6.6 m LOA, 10 hp open motor boat, off Malabar
coast using a Gulf of Mexico type flat trawl of 9.6 m head line and
consistently impressive catches of shrimp was obtained from the shallow
coastal waters of 4-18 m depth (Kristjonsson, 1967). This finding gave a major
fillip in commercial shrimp trawling in India and increasing demand for shrimps
for the processing industry caused rapid development of the otter trawling in
Indian waters. This was soon followed by various technological developments
including offshore expansion in the area of operation. At present the focus is
to expand the fisheries into even deeper waters and diversification of fishing
to areas such as tuna longlining.
Growing concern is being expressed world-wide about the impact of
excess fishing capacity on the sustainability of fishery resources and on the
economic viability of fishing operations. The problem of excess capacity has
received international and national focus in recent years. Fitzpatrick (1995)
has estimated a 270% increase in the average fishing technology coefficient
between 1965 and 1995 which indicates large scale increase in technological
efficiency and precision in fishing practices.

2.1 Changes in Indian fishing fleet

Marine fishing fleet in India consists of (i) non-mechanized (artisanal)

sector using country craft and traditional gears, (ii) motorised sector using
traditional craft with outboard motor(s) (OBMs) (9.9-120 hp) and, more
recently, inboard engines (IBM) (89-156 hp); (iii) mechanized sector (8.5-16.7
m LOA; 89-156 hp; and (iv) deep sea fishing sector (>16.7m LOA; 156 hp and
above). There has been significant structural changes in the fishing fleet over
last few decades. Contribution of mechanised boats to the total marine fishing
fleet increased from 14 to 25% and motorised craft from 4 to 32 %, over the
years from 1985 to 2005, while the that of non-motorised craft decreased
from 83 to 44% (Fig. 1).

2
 180000
Mechanised boats
160000
Motorised craft
140000
Non-motorised craft
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
1985 1995 2005

Fig. 1 Structural changes in marine fishing fleet in India, during 1985-2005

(source: CMFRI, 1998; 2006)

Marine fishery potential of the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)

is estimated at about 3.93x106 t. About 58% of the resources is available at a
depth of 0-50 m, 35% at 50-200 m and 7% from beyond 200 m depth. The
present catch of 3.2x106 t forms about 81% of the estimated fishery potential
and is largely derived from the intensively fished shelf waters. About 2,38,772
fishing crafts of various sizes and classes are under operation in marine
fisheries, consisting of 58,911 mechanised boats, 75,991 motorised crafts,
104,270 non-mechanised crafts (CMFRI, 2006).

Estimates of optimum fleet size by Devaraj and Kurup (2000) for Indian
shelf waters (excluding islands) were 62748 consisting of 10998 mechanized
trawlers, 784 mechanized purse seiners, 3694 mechanized gillnetters, 2014
mechanised bag-netters (dol-netters), 1558 other mechanised boats, 14862
motorized crafts and 28837 non-motorized crafts. According these estimates,
the existing number (CMFRI, 2006) of mechanised trawlers were in excess by
a factor of 2.7, mechanised purse seiners 1.3, mechanised gillnetters 3.8,
mechanised bag-netters 4.4, other mechanised boats 3.6, motorized vessels
5.1 and non-motorized vessels 3.6 (Fig. 2).

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

10998
Mechanised trawlers 29241
784
Mechanised purse seiners 983
3694
Mechanised gill netters Optimum fleet size
14183 (Kurup and Devaraj,
2014 2000)
Mechanised bag netters 8862 Present fleet size
(CMFRI, 2006)
1558
Other mechanised boats 5642
19048
Total mechanised boats 58911
14862
Total motorised boats 75591

Fig. 2: Present (CMFRI, 2006) and estimated optimum fleet size (Kurup and
Devaraj, 2000) for marine fisheries of India

3
3.0 Recent developments in fishing technology

Dynamic developments have taken place in the harvest technology of

fish in the last few decades. Among the most significant developments which
affected the historical evolution of fishing gear and practices have been (i)
developments in craft technology and mechanisation of propulsion, gear and
catch handling (ii) introduction of synthetic gear materials (iii) developments in
acoustic fish detection and satellite-based remote sensing techniques (iv)
advances in electronic navigation and communication equipment (v)
awareness of the need for responsible fishing to ensure sustainability of the
resources, protection of the biodiversity and environmental safety and energy
efficiency. Introduction of powerful and highly efficient fish harvesting systems
and fish detection methods and an uncontrolled expansion in fleet size fuelled
by ever increasing market demand for fish brought about increasing pressure
on the world fishery resources. Unmistakable signs of overfishing and
negative impacts on the ecosystems have increasingly manifested in the
recent years, highlighting the need for scientific management of the world
fishery resources in order to ensure their long-term sustainability and
availability to the future generations

Major technological changes that have taken place in the capture

fisheries of India are:

 Introduction and popularization of synthetic fishing gear materials.

 Introduction of mechanised trawling and purse seining in mid-1950s.
 Expansion in mechanized fleet in terms of numbers, size, installed hp
and capacities and introduction of multi-day fishing.
 Improvement in efficiency and diversification of trawls, purse seines,
gillnets and lines, for mechanized sector.
 Expansion of fishing grounds for harvesting deep sea fishing for deeps
sea prawns, lobsters and cephalopods.
 Adoption of modern technologies such as echo sounder and GPS.
 Chartering and joint venture schemes.
 Motorization of traditional fishing crafts and expansion in fishing
grounds.
 Improvement of traditional fishing units, in terms of craft modernization,
gear materials, gear efficiency and dimensions.
 Introduction of ring seines in mid-1980s along south-west coast and
rapid expansion of ring seine units in terms of size of crafts,
horsepower of OBM, craft materials, increase in and overall dimensions
of the ring seines and mechanized purse line hauling.

3.1 Fishing vessels

The world fishing fleet numbered about 4 million vessels (2004). About
one-third of these were decked vessels, the remaining two-thirds were un-
decked vessels, generally less than 10 m in length. There is great diversity in
fishing vessels operating around the world which may range from a 2 metre

4
dug out canoes to factory trawlers exceeding 130 metres in length, where trip
durations range from a few hours to over a year.

Introduction of the use of ice and refrigeration machinery has greatly

increased the ability of the vessels to handle, process and store fish in good
condition onboard. Technological developments, such as hull design
optimisation, improvement in engine performance including turbo charging,
hydraulic hauling machinery, improved navigation equipments, fish finding
electronics have also had major effects on the efficiency and profitability of
fishing vessels. The introduction and widespread use of the outboard engine
has greatly changed small-scale fishing operations in developing countries.

Major developments have taken place in fishing vessels in craft

materials, hull optimization, engine performance, propulsion systems, gear
and catch handling deck equipment, onboard pre-processing, processing,
preservation and packaging systems, and energy conservation. In modern
large fishing vessels, the command console resembles the aircraft cockpit.
The navigation controls and main displays are shown on monitors in front of
the control position and increasingly these are shown on one large integrated
display. Instruments include navigational instruments which are used for the
navigation of the vessel while at sea and in harbour, other instruments used
for fish detection and during the fishing operation, including sonar and
electronic aids for the operation, radio communications which are important
for the safety and for general communications.

3.2 Fishing gear materials

Traditional fishing gears used in earlier years were less effective with
low productivity. They used to be made of natural fibres such as cotton,
manila, sisal, jute and coir. As these materials are vulnerable to bio
degradation, they have relatively short service life and incur high cost for
maintenance. In recent decades major advances have taken place in fibre
technology, along with the introduction of other modern materials. With the
introduction of man-made synthetic fibres in India the late 1950s, natural
fibers used for the fishing gears have been substituted by these synthetic
materials due to their high breaking strength, high resistance to weathering,
low maintenance cost, long service life and better uniformity in characteristics.
Most important synthetic fibres used in fisheries are polyamide (PA),
polyester (PES), polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP). Other synthetic
fibres, which are less widely used and generally restricted to Japanese
fisheries, are polyvinyl alcohol (PVAA), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and
polyvinylidene chloride (PVD). The introduction of synthetic materials with
high tensile strength properties has made it possible to bring out changes in
the design and size of fishing nets. Earlier, netting used to be fabricated
manually, which is laborious and time consuming. In recent years, machine
made nettings are almost exclusively used in fishing net fabrication.

3.3 Fishing gears

A wide array of fishing gears and practices ranging from small-scale

artisanal to large-scale industrial systems are used for fish capture. Fishermen

5
may use several fishing gears and methods appropriate for the species and
environmental and ground conditions. Fishing gears whether primitive or
sophisticated use five mechanisms in the capture process viz., gilling and
tangling (e.g. gill nets and trammel nets), trapping (e.g. traps, pound nets),
filtering (e.g. trawls, seines and other net fishing systems), hooking and
spearing (e.g. hook and line, harpoons) and pumping (e.g. fish pumps).

Fishing gears are classified based on the principles of capture,

design and technical features and operational methods. FAO defines and
classifies the main categories of fishing gear as follows:

 Surrounding nets (including purse seines);

 Seine nets (including beach seines and boat, scottish/danish seines);
 Trawl nets (including bottom: beam, otter and pair trawls, and midwater
trawls: otter and pair trawls);
 Dredges;
 Lift nets;
 Falling gears (including cast nets);
 Gillnets and entangling nets (including set and drifting gillnets; trammel
nets);
 Traps (including pots, stow or bag nets, fixed traps);
 Hooks and lines (including handlines, pole and lines, set or drifting
longlines, trolling lines);
 Grappling and wounding gears (including harpoons, spears, arrows,
etc.);
 Stupefying devices.

In the past, technological development of fishing gear and methods was

aimed at increasing production, by increasing efficiency of the gear systems.
However, in the present situation of overfishing, increased awareness of the
environmental and ecological impacts of fishing, fishing gear development is
focused on the development of responsible fishing gear systems, with
improved size-selective and species-selective properties, decreased impact
on the environment and non-target resources, and sustainability of fish stocks.

Among the great variety of harvesting systems available around the

world, the most significant in commercial fisheries are purse seines and
trawls, followed by lines, gill nets and entangling nets and traps.

Surrounding nets are roughly rectangular walls of netting rigged with

floats and sinkers, which after detection of the presence of fish are cast to
encircle the fish school. Surrounding nets are generally operated in the
surface layers. Purse seines are the predominant type of surrounding nets, in
which the bottom of the net is closed after encircling the fish school, by a
purse line. Mini purse seine or ring seine used in the traditional motorized
sector belong to this category. Seine net is a long wall of netting supported by
floats and sinkers, which are operated by surrounding areas of water with
potential catch. They are usually operated in the coastal or shallow waters
where bottom or surface act as natural barriers. Trawl nets are conical bag

6
nets with two wings and a codend where catch is concentrated, operated by
towing from one or two boats. Based on the position in water column where
they are operated, trawls are classified into mid water trawls or bottom trawls.
Gill nets and entangling are rectangular walls of netting kept erect by means
of floats and sinkers and positioned in the swimming layer of the target fish,
which catch the fish by holding them in the mesh by gilling or entangling.

4.0 Technologies for responsible fishing

Technologies available for responsible fishing focus on reducing

bycatch of non-target species, protected species and juveniles; minimising the
environmental impact of fishing gear and their operation and minimising the
energy use per unit volume of fish landed, during fishing operations.

4.1 Bycatch reduction in fishing

The term bycatch refers to non-targeted species retained, sold or

discarded for any reason. Catch process and production of bycatch during
trawling are represented in Fig. 3. ‘Target catch’ is the species or species
assemblage primarily sought in a fishery (e.g. shrimps and cephalopods),
‘incidental catch’ is the retained catch of non-targeted species and ‘discarded
catch’ is that portion of catch returned to the sea because of economic, legal
or personal considerations. Bycatch includes both discarded and incidental
catch. In addition to the non-targeted finfishes and invertebrates, bycatch also
involve threatened and protected species like sea turtles.
g
ACCESSIBLE FISH RESOURCES

FISHING GEAR SYSTEM (TRAWL)

GEAR AVOIDANCE
FISH ENCOUNTERING FISHING
ESCAPE DURING CATCHING GEAR SYSTEM
PROCESS

GROSS CATCH

TARGET CATCH BY CATCH

(RETAINED)

DISCARDS INCIDENTAL CATCH

(RETAINED)
SURVIVAL

INCIDENTAL FISHING
MORTALITY

Fig. 3: Catch process and bycatch production in trawling

The importance of reducing bycatch and minimizing ecological impacts of

fishing operations has been emphasized by scientists and fishery managers and
recognized by fishermen. The shrimp trawl is a nonselective gear that commonly
has an associated catch of non-targeted organisms such as finfish and

7
miscellaneous invertebrates. Trawl fisheries in different parts of the world are now
being required to use bycatch reduction devices as result of pressure from
conservation groups and legal regimes introduced by the governments. The Code
of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO, 1995; 1996) stresses the need for
developing selective fishing gears in order to conserve resources, protect non-
targeted resources and endangered species like sea turtles.
Some of the advantages in reducing the amount of unwanted bycatch
caught in shrimp trawls are (i) Reduction in impact of trawling on non-targeted
marine resources, (ii) Reduction in damage to shrimps due to absence of
large animals in codend, (iii) Shorter sorting times, (iv) Longer tow times, and
(v) Lower fuel costs due to reduced net drag (Boopendranath et al., 2008).
Approaches and technologies for reducing bycatch in major fishing gear
systems are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Approaches for reducing bycatch in major fishing gear systems

Fishing gear Gear design related Operation related approaches

system approaches

Trawls Trawl design; mesh size; Choice of fishing area, fishing

bycatch reduction devices depth, fishing time and season.
and turtle excluder devices;
juvenile and trash fish
excluder devices.

Purse seines Seine design and seine depth Choice of fishing area, fishing
appropriate for schools of depth, fishing time and season;
target species; mesh size; Capability of vessel and crew to
excluder devices, aprons and use selective manoeuvres.
Medina panel.

Gill nets Mesh size; netting material; Choice of fishing area, fishing
hanging ratio; use of scaring depth, fishing time and season.
devices and acoustic
deterrents

Lines Hook design, shape and Choice of bait type and bait size,
size; hook spacing. fishing area, fishing depth, fishing
time and fishing season; Use of
dyed baits, side sets, subsurface
line setting chutes and bird
scaring steamers to deter birds;
Use of circle hook and deep
setting line to minimise sea turtle
bycatch; Use of rare earth
magnets to deter sharks.

Traps Trap design; optimised trap Choice of bait type, fishing area,
mouth; escape windows. fishing depth, fishing time and
season.

4.1.1 Trawl fisheries

An estimated average of 7.3 million t of bycatch are discarded
annually by the world’s marine fishing fleets of which over 50% is contributed

8
by trawl fisheries for shrimp and demersal fish (Kelleher, 2004). In addition to
the non-targeted finfishes and invertebrates, bycatch also involve threatened
and protected species like sea turtles. The contribution of juveniles and sub-
adults in the bycatch is also another cause for discard. While the discards is
very less in small trawlers engaged in daily fishing, more discards has been
reported from vessels engaged in multi-day fishing, mainly due to the
shortage of storage facilities. Kelleher (2004) has estimated total bycatch
discards in Indian fisheries at about 57817 t, which formed 2.03% of the total
landings.
Various types of bycatch reduction technologies have been developed
in the fishing industry around the world (Prado, 1993; Eayrs, 2005;
Boopendranath et al., 2006; Gibinkumar et al., 2006; Sabu et al., 2006;
Boopendranath et al., 2007; Kennelly, 2007; Boopendranath et al., 2008;
2009). Devices developed to exclude the endangered species like turtle, and
to reduce the non-targeted species in shrimp trawling are collectively known
as Bycatch Reduction Devices (BRDs). These devices have been developed
taking into consideration variation in the size, and differential behaviour
pattern of shrimp and other animals inside the net. BRDs can be broadly
classified into three categories based on the type of materials used for their
construction, viz., Soft BRDs, Hard BRDs, and Combination BRDs. Soft BRDs
make use of soft materials like netting and rope frames for separating and
excluding bycatch. Hard BRDs are those, which use hard or semi-flexible
grids and structures for separating and excluding bycatch. Combination BRDs
use more than one BRD, usually hard BRD in combination with soft BRD,
integrated to a single system. The salient features of some of the important
BRDs are described in the following sections.
Square mesh window

Escape windows made of large square mesh netting (square mesh

window) (Fig. 4) are provided on the upper side of the codend or belly and
they function based on the differential behaviour of fishes and shrimps. Fishes
that have entered the codend tend to swim back and escape through the
openings, at the top in the front section of the codend. Square mesh has the
advantage that the mesh opening is not distorted while under operation, unlike
diamond meshes (Broadhurst and Kennely, 1994; Brewer et al., 1998; FAO,
1997; Robins et al., 1999; Boopendranath et al., 2008).

Bigeye BRD

Bigeye BRD are simple slits (Fig. 4) provided on the upper side of the
codend or belly and they function based on the differential behaviour of fishes
and shrimps. Fishes that have entered the codend tend to swim back and
escape through the openings, at the top in the front section of the codend.

9
 Fig. 4 A view of square mesh (left) and Bigeye
BRD (right) installed in the trawl codend

Fisheye BRD

This is a rigid device facilitating the escapement of fish especially the

under sized fish from the codend. It consists of an oval or semicircular shaped
structure of about 200 mm in height and 300 mm in width with supporting
frames of stainless steel rods. This is attached at the top of the codend so as
to provide an escape opening (Fig. 5). This opening facilitates the escape of
fish which swim backward from the end of the codend (Brewer et al., 1998;
Pillai, 1998; Hannah et al., 2003; Burrage, 2004; Boopendranath et al., 2008;
Boopendranath, 2009).

Fig. 5 A view of Fisheye

BRD fitted to the trawl
codend

Rigid grid BRDs

Several designs of rigid grid sorting devices (Fig. 6) have been
developed for separation of shrimp from non-shrimp resources, such as
Nordmore grid (Isaksen et al., 1992), Juvenile and Trash Excluder Device
(JTED) (Chokesanguan et al., 2000) and Juvenile Fish Excluder cum Shrimp
Sorting Device (JFE-SSD) (Boopendranath et al. 2008). Operations with
Nordmore grid, in Norwegian waters, has shown a low shrimp loss of 2-5%.

10
 Fig. 6 Principle of operation of Rigid grid sorting device

Sieve net BRD

Sieve nets (also known as veil nets) are cone shaped nets inserted into
standard trawls which direct unwanted bycatch to an escape hole cut into the
body of the trawl leading to a second codend (Fig. 7). The large mesh funnel
inside the net guides the fish to a second codend with large diamond mesh
netting, while shrimps pass through large meshes and accumulate in the main
codend. Sieve nets are used in commercial shrimp fleets of The Netherlands,
Denmark, UK, France, Germany and Belgium (Polet et al., 2004; Revill and
Holst, 2004). Bycatch exclusion rates of 15-50%, with shrimp loss of 5-15%
has been reported in sieve net installed trawl operations in different fishing
grounds (Polet et al., 2004; Catchpole, 2008; Boopendranath et al. 2008).

Fig. 7 Perspective view of Sieve net BRD installed in

the trawl net

Juvenile Fish Excluder cum Shrimp Sorting Device (JFE-SSD)

Trawl fishermen in India as in other tropical fishing nations depend on
both finfish and shrimp catches to keep the commercial operations
economically viable. In India, 40% of the bycatch is contributed by juveniles
(Pillai, 1998). CIFT has evolved a unique solution for this problem by
developing the Juvenile Fish Excluder cum Shrimp Sorting Device (JFE-SSD)

11
(Fig. 8)(Boopendranath et al., 2008; WWF, 2009a). The JFE-SSD brings
down the bycatch of juveniles and small sized non-targeted species in
commercial shrimp trawl, at the same time enabling fishermen to harvest and
retain large commercially valuable finfishes and shrimp species. In addition,
the fishermen would benefit economically from higher catch values due to
improved catch quality, shorter sorting time, longer tow duration, higher catch
and lower fuel costs. JFE-SSD operations off Cochin (India) have realised
bycatch reduction up to 43% with a shrimp retention of 96-97%.

Fig. 8 Schematic diagram of JFE-SSD

CIFT-TED

Sea turtles are ancient and widely distributed species whose migratory
pattern extends throughout the oceans of the world. Marine turtles are
endangered species which are protected under the international conventions
such as Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) and Convention on
International Trade on Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES)
and under various national regulations. Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) are
recognized internationally as a convenient and effective measure for
protecting sea turtles from trawling-related mortality and also for reducing
bycatches in shrimp landings. TEDs are acknowledged as an important
conservation tool by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization,
fisheries biologists and sea turtle conservationists. Many trawl fisheries
throughout the world are now required to use TEDs (Mitchell et al. 1995;
CIFT, 2003; Boopendranath et al., 2006).

CIFT-TED is an efficient turtle excluder device developed at Central

Institute of Fisheries Technology (Cochin, India) with focus on reducing catch
losses, which is a cause of concern for trawler fishermen in adopting the
device. CIFT-TED is a simple single grid, hard TED design with top opening. It
consists of an oval frame measuring 1000x800 mm and is constructed with 10
mm Ø stainless steel rod (Fig. 9). Five vertical grid bars of 8 mm Ø stainless
steel rod are welded to the inside of the oval frame. The spacing between the
deflector bars is 142 mm and the maximum spacing between the frame and
the adjacent deflector bar is 90 mm. The frame was fixed in the TED
extension at 45° angle. Catch losses during the experimental operations due
to installation of CIFT-TED were in the range of 0.52-0.97% for shrimp and

12
2.44-3.27% for non-shrimp catch components (Dawson and Boopendranath,
2001; CIFT, 2003; Boopendranath et al., 2003).

Fig. 9 Perspective diagram of CIFT-TED

4.1.2 Purse seine fisheries

Purse seines like other surrounding nets are not selective, schools are
judiciously selected after evaluating the presence of bycatch species
(operational selection). Bycatch species are commonly present in FAD-
assisted purse seining and more than 40 species of fish and cetaceans have
been reported from purse seine landings (Romanov, 2002; Pravin et al.,
2008). Special escape panels known as Medina panels, which are sections of
fine mesh that prevent dolphins from becoming entangled in the gear, and
back down manoeuvre have been deployed to prevent capture of dolphins in
purse seines (Ben-Yami, 1994). Selection of mesh size for the purse seine
appropriate for the target species, proper choice of fishing area, depth and
season could also lead to better selectivity of purse seines.

4.1.3 Gillnet fisheries

Bycatch in drift gill nets may include marine mammals, sea turtles and
sea birds, in addition to non-targeted fish species. Optimisation of gill net
mesh size and hanging coefficient according to the target species and size
group and judicious deployment of gill net in terms of fishing ground, fishing
depth and season in order to minimise the gear interaction with the non-
targeted species are important bycatch mitigation measures for gill net
fisheries (Table 1). Recent innovations have attempted to make the gill nets
detectable by marine mammals having echolocation abilities, using acoustic
pingers and specially treated netting. Acoustic pingers have been used to
deter beaked whale bycatch in gill net fisheries (Carretta et al., 2008).
Acoustic pingers are underwater sound-emitting devices (maximum level of
intensity equivalent to approximately 175 dB re 1 µPa @ 1m) attached to
fishing gear, which alert the mammal to the presence of the net and thus
decreasing the probability of entanglement. Use of acoustic pingers is now

13
mandatory in some fisheries in the US, Northwest Atlantic, California and in
Europe. Acoustic reflective polymaide netting treated with barium sulphate
has been reported to reduce bycatch of harbour porpoise in gill nets (Trippel
et al. 2003; Larsena et al., 2007).

Ghost fishing

Lost gill nets continue to gill and entangle fish and other marine
organisms leading to unwanted mortality as gill net material is non-
biodegradable. This process known as ghost fishing is a negative
characteristic of modern gill nets which is otherwise a simple, energy efficient
method of fishing particularly suited for scattered populations, requiring low
investment. One approach to minimise ghost fishing by lost gill nets, is to use
biodegradable natural fibre twines or time release elements to connect the
netting to floats (Hameed and Boopendranath, 2000). When floats are
separated due to the disintegration of these links, the gill nets lose their fishing
attitude and consequently lose the ability to ghost fish. Another approach to
prevent ghost fishing is to locate and retrieve lost fishing gear.

4.1.4 Hook and line fisheries

Optimized hook design and size and selection of bait type and bait
size appropriate for the target species and size class, proper choice of fishing
ground, depth and time of fishing are approaches for mitigation of bycatch
issues in hook and line fisheries and minimise gear interaction with other
species (Table 1). Interaction with sea birds during long line operation are
minimised using dyed bait, deploying bird scaring devices (streamers) in the
area where bait is set and by using sub-surface setting chutes for deployment
of branch lines. Sub-surface setting chutes, blue-dyed bait, weighted baits
and side-sets were reported to have reduced the bycatch of seabirds in the
Hawaiian longline tuna and swordfish fisheries (Gilman et al., 2003; ).

Sea turtle mortality in long line operations have been reduced by

using circle hooks in place of conventional J-hooks (Watson et al., 2005;
Kerstetter and Graves, 2006) (Fig. 10). Setting of tuna longlines at depths
greater than 100 m using weighted lines has been reported to reduce bycatch
of recreationally important fish species and protected species such as
seabirds and sea turtles (Beverly et al., 2009). Magnetic field generated using
rare earth magnets in the proximity of hook has been reported to deter sharks
and has been proposed for reducing the bycatch of sharks in pelagic long
lines (Stoner and Kaimmer, 2008; WWF, 2009b).

14
 Fig. 10 Conventional J-hook and circle hook with
improved selectivity

4.1.5 Trap fisheries

Traps generally have high species specificity and size selectivity and
offer high potential for survival of discarded non-targeted species and low
energy requirements in operations. However, disadvantage of trap fishing are
relatively high loss rate during operations and ghost fishing by lost traps
(Hameed and Boopendranath, 2000). Approaches to reduce bycatch in tap
fishing include optimised trap design and trap mouth configuration according
to the target species and provision of escape windows for juveniles and non-
target species in the design side and appropriate choice of bait type, fishing
area, fishing depth, fishing time and season in the operational side to
minimise gear interaction with non-target species (Tables 1).

5.0 Environment-friendly fishing gears

Depending on their impact on the environment, some fishing gears or

practices are more destructive than the other (Hameed and Boopendranath,
2000). Practices of using explosives and poisoning which are generally
banned, belong to the worst category. Passive fishing gears such as gillnets
and traps though having less impact on the physical environment have the
potential for causing unaccounted fishing mortality through ghost fishing by
lost and discarded fishing gears. Dragged gears as trawls, particularly when
they are heavily rigged, could cause severe damage to benthic fauna and
flora, which occupy the bottom substratum and contribute to the productivity of
the region. Efforts have been made to lessen the impact of bottom trawl on
the substratum, where possible by rigging them to operate a small distance
above the sea bottom as in semi-pelagic trawl. Lines and large uncovered
pound nets (set nets) are among the fishing gears which have minimal impact
on the environment.

5.1 Reducing bottom impact of towed gears

Direct and indirect impacts of bottom trawling on marine environment

and benthic communities are well known (Hall, 1999; Kaiser and de Groot,
2000; Barnes and Thomas, 2005); Meenakumari et al., 2009 and others).
Gear modifications to achieve the objective of reduced impact on

15
environment include lighter gear construction, semi-pelagic trawling, benthic
release panels and minimising contact area of the towed gear with seabed
(Carr and Milliken, 2003; CEFAS, 2003; Valdemarsen and Suuronen, 2003;
He, 2007)

5.2 Semi-pelagic trawl system

Demersal trawls are generally non-selective and a large number of

non-target species and juveniles are landed during trawling, in addition to its
impact on benthic communities. Resource specific trawls for semi-pelagic
resources have comparatively low impact on the benthic biota (Brewer et al.,
1996; He, 2007). CIFT Semi-pelagic Trawl System (CIFT SPTS-I) has been
developed as an alternative to shrimp trawling in the small-scale mechanized
trawler sector, after extensive field-testing (CIFT, 2007). The system consists
of an 18 m four panel semi-pelagic trawl with double bridles, front weights and
vertically cambered high aspect ratio otter boards of 85 kg each. It is capable
of attaining catch rates beyond 200 kg.h-1 in moderately productive grounds
and selectively harvest fast swimming demersal and semi-pelagic finfishes
and cephalopods, which are mostly beyond the reach of conventional bottom
trawls, currently used in commercial trawl fisheries in India.

5.3 Benthic release panels

Benthic release panels are large square mesh drop out windows
provided ahead of the codend, to release unwanted benthic organisms
(Fonteyne and Polet, 2002; He , 2007)

4.4 Remote controlled otter boards (smart trawling)

Variable thrust vector devices (VTVD) which are based on Magnus

effect (towed rotating cylinders generate lateral forces perpendicular to the
axis of the cylinder and the towing direction) have been used to operate the
trawl at a set height above the sea bottom without causing any bottom impact
(Shenker, 2005). Acoustic control of otter boards has been pursued a another
possibility in this direction (CEFAS, 2003; He, 2007).

4.5 Ground gear modifications

Use of lighter ground gear has been known to reduce bottom impact
during trawling, without significantly affecting the catch rates (He, 2007).
Rollers, wheels and bobbins with their axes perpendicular to the direction of
towing have been proposed as an approach to reduce the bottom impact of
trawl gear, in addition to advantages of fuel saving due to reduction in trawl
drag (He, 2007).

4.6 Otter boards bridles and sweeps

High aspect ratio vertically cambered otter boards typically have lower
angle of attack and narrower footprint compared to traditional otter boards
(He, 2007). The area of seabed affected by high aspect ratio otter boards is
typically 40% of that affected by low aspect ratio otter boards with similar

16
board area. Use of shorter and lighter bridles and sweeps, where herding
effect is not important in the catching process, could reduce the impact on
seabed.

5. Energy conservation in fishing

Modern fishing is one of the most energy intensive methods of food

production. Passive fishing gear and practices such as gillnets and entangling
nets, lines and traps are less energy intensive than active dragged fishing
gears (Gulbrandson, 1986; Boopendranath, 2009). Among the fishing gears,
trawling utilises maximum energy in terms of energy spent per unit quantity of
catch and offers greater scope for energy conservation practices. Purse
seining comparatively spends much less energy per unit quantity of catch
landed, because of the large volumes of catch per operation. It may involve
such practices as selection and promotion of low energy fishing techniques
where possible; adoption of energy conservation practices and devices in
energy-intensive fishing systems where they are adopted due to exigencies of
the local situation; adoption of advanced technologies such as remote
sensing, acoustic fish detection, global positioning systems which will bring
down search time for fish and facilitate accurate location of the fishing ground;
and adoption of measures for development and improvement of coastal
fishing grounds, so that fishing can take place in the near shore waters rather
than distant waters.

Motorised and mechanised fishing is dependent on fossil fuels, which

are non-renewable and limited. Fossil fuels produces increased levels of
carbon dioxide in atmosphere contributing to green house effect and other
pollutants which are detrimental to the environment and human health. Green
house effect lead to irreversible climatic and oceanographic changes.
Moreover spiralling oil prices may severely affect the economic viability of
fishing as a means of food production. Many nations around the world have
undertaken large-scale programmes in energy conservation in consideration
of these implications.

World capture fisheries consumes about 50 billion litres of fuel annually

(1.2 % of the global fuel consumption) releasing an estimated 134 million
tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere at an average rate of 1.7 tonnes of CO2
per tonne of live-weight landed product (Tyedmers et al.,2005). Annual fuel
consumption by the mechanized and motorized fishing fleet of India has been
estimated at 1220 million litres which formed about 1% of the total fossil fuel
consumption in India in 2000 (122 billion litres) releasing an estimated 3.17
million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere at an average rate of 1.13 tonnes of
CO2 per tonne of live-weight of marine fish landed (Boopendranath, 2008).
Various approaches to energy conservation in fish harvesting have been
reviewed by Gulbrandson (1986), Wilson (1999), Boopendranath (2009) and
others and include the following:

 Low energy fishing techniques

 Low drag trawls
 Pair trawling

17
  Economic vessel speed
 Hull design and displacement optimisation
 Anti-fouling measures
 Choice of engines
 Right sizing of engines
 Emission standards
 Preventive maintenance of engines
 Reduction gear, propeller size and propeller nozzle
 Sail-assisted propulsion
 Use of advanced technology such as Echosounder, Sonar, GPS, PFZ
information, GIS, for fish finding and navigation
 Fleet management

6. Conclusion

Introduction of powerful and highly efficient fish harvesting systems and

fish detection methods have increased the fishing efficiency several fold, in
recent years. Recent developments in fishing technology focus on on reducing
bycatch of non-target species, protected species and juveniles; minimising the
environmental impact of fishing gear and their operation and minimising the
energy use per unit volume of fish landed, during fishing operations.

A wide range of proven technologies are readily available for adoption

under the responsible fishing regime, in the areas of bycatch reduction,
mitigation of negative environmental impacts and conservation of energy in
fishing. The degree of adoption of responsible fishing technologies is strongly
dependent on the robustness of the fisheries management system.
Technologies which have inherent advantages in terms of net profit such as
some of the fuel conservation measures (e.g. low drag trawl systems) have
been more easily adopted than others. Bycatch reduction technologies and
mitigation measures for environmental impacts of fishing have been mandated
and effectively implemented in several scientifically managed fisheries in the
world. However, its adoption in less effectively managed fisheries with open
access regime may require the active involvement of stakeholders in the
process, supported by a system of incentives and disincentives and training.
A rights based regulated access system based on a strong inclusive
participatory system of management seems to be necessary for facilitating
large scale adoption of responsible fishing technologies.

References

Barnes, P.W. and Thomas, J.P. (Eds) Benthic habitats and effect of fishing,
Am.Fish.Sco..Symp. 41, Bethesda, Maryland, 890 p.
Ben-Yami, M. (1994) FAO Purse Seining Manual, Fishing News Books Ltd., UK: 406
p.
Beverly, S., Curran, D., Musyl, M. , and Molony, B. 2009. Effects of eliminating
shallow hooks from tuna longline sets on target and non-target species in the
Hawaii-based pelagic tuna fishery Fisheries Research 96 (2-3): 281-288
Boopendranath, M.R. 2007. Possibilities for bycatch reduction from trawlers in India.
In: K.K. Vijayan, P. Jayasankar and P. Vijayagopal (Eds) Indian Fisheries – A

18
 Progressive Outlook, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Cochin, p.
12-29
Boopendranath, M.R. 2008. Climate change impacts and fishing practices, Paper
presented in Workshop on Impact of Climate Change in Fisheries,
15 December 2008, ICAR, New Delhi
Boopendranath, M.R. 2009. Responsible fishing operations. In: Handbook of
Fishing Technology (Meenakumari, B., Boopendranath, M.R., Pravin, P.,
Thomas, S.N. and Edwin, L. (Eds), Central Institute of Fisheries Technology,
Cochin: 259-295
Boopendranath, M.R. and Pravin, P. 2009. Technologies for responsible fishing - -
Bycatch Reduction Devices and Turtle Excluder Devices. Paper presented in
the International Symposium on Marine Ecosystems-Challenges and
Strategies (MECOS 2009), 9-12 February 2009, Marine Biological
Association of India, Cochin
Boopendranath, M.R. Percy Dawson, Pravin, P. Remesan, M.P. Raghu Prakash, R.
Vijayan, V. Mathai, P.G., Pillai, N.S., Varghese, M.D. and Ramarao, S.V.S.
2003. Design and Development of Turtle Excluder Devices for Indian
Fisheries In: K. Shanker and B.C. Choudhury (Eds) Marine Turtles of the
Indian Sub-continent, Universities Press (India) Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. p. 244-
267
Boopendranath, M.R., Pravin, P. Gibinkumar, T.R. and Sabu, S. (2006)
Development of bycatch reduction devices and turtle excluder devices in the
context of sustainable seafood production. Paper presented at National
Seminar on Seafood Production: Reflections, Alternatives and Environmental
Control, 23-24 February 2006, Goa.
Boopendranath, M.R., Pravin, P., Gibinkumar, T.R. and Sabu, S. 2008. Bycatch
Reduction Devices for Selective Shrimp Trawling, Final Report on ICAR Ad-
hoc Project, Central Institute of Fisheries Technology, Cochin, 220 pp.
Brewer, D. Eayrs, S. Mounsey, R., Wang, Y.G. 1996. assessment of an
environmentally friendly, semi-pelagic fish trawl, Fish. Res. 26: 225-237
Brewer, D., Rawlnison, N., Eayrs, S and Burridge, C. 1998. An assessment of
bycatch reduction devices in tropical Australian prawn trawl fishery. Fish. Res.
36:196-215.
Broadhurst, M.K. and Kennely, S.J. 1994. Reducing bycatch of juvenile fin fish
(Mulloway) in the Hawkesbury river prawn-trawl fishery using square mesh
panels in codends. Fish. Res. 19: 321-333.
Burrage, D.D. 2004. Evaluation of the Gulf Fisheye bycatch reduction device in the
Northern Gulf inshore shrimp fishery. Gulf Mex. Sci. 22(1): 85-95.
Carr, H.A. and Milliken, H. 2003. Conservation engineering: options to minimise
fishing’s impact to the sea floor. In: Dorey, E.M. and Pederson, J. (Eds).
Effects of Fishing Gear on the Sea Floor of New England. Conservation Law
Foundation, Boston, USA, 100-103
Carretta, J.V., J. Barlow, and L. Enriquez, 2008. Acoustic pingers eliminate beaked
whale bycatch in a gill net fishery. Marine Mammal Science, 24(4), ps 956-
961.
Catchpole, T. L., Revill, A. S., Innes, J., and Pascoe, S. 2008. Evaluating the efficacy
of technical measures: a case study of selection device legislation in the UK
Crangon crangon (brown shrimp) fishery. ICES Journal of Marine Science,
65: 267–275.
CEFAS, 2003. A Study on The Consequences of Technological Innovations in
Capture Fishing Industry and the Likely Effects upon Environmental Impacts.
Submitted to the Royal commission on Environmental Pollution, London, UK
Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Lowestoft, UK, 181 pp.

19
Chokesanguan, B., Ananpongsuk, S., Siriraksophon, S., Podapol, L. 2000. Study on
Juvenile and Trash Excluder Devices (JTEDs) in Thailand. SEAFDEC
Training Department, Samut Prakan, Thailand, TD/RES/47, 8 pp.
CIFT 2003. CIFT-TED for Turtle-safe Trawl Fisheries - A Success Story in
Responsible Fisheries. CIFT Special Bulletin No. 12 (English), CIFT, Cochin,
40 pp.
CIFT 2007. Responsible Fishing - Contributions of CIFT, CIFT Golden Jubilee
Series, Central Institute of Fisheries Technology, Cochin: 46 p
CMFRI .1998. Annual Report, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Cochin:
151 p.
CMFRI 2006. Marine Fisheries Census 2005 Part-1, CMFRI, Cochin: 97 p.
Dawson, P. and Boopendranath, M.R., 2001. CIFT-TED construction, installation and
operation. CIFT Technology Advisory Series - 5. CIFT, Cochin, 16 pp.
Eayrs, S. 2005. A Guide to Bycatch Reduction in Tropical Shrimp-Trawl Fisheries,
FAO, Rome, 110 pp.
FAO (2009) The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture:2008 (SOFIA), FAO
Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, FAO, Rome: 176 p.
FAO 1995. Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, FAO, Rome, 41 p.
FAO 1996. Fishing Operations, FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries
1, 26 pp.
FAO 1997. Report of the technical consultation on reduction of wastage in fisheries.
Tokyo, Japan, 28 October- 1 November 1996. FAO Fisheries Report No. 547,
Rome. FAO, 27 pp.
Fitzpatrick, J. 1996. Technology and Fisheries Legislation, In Precautionary
approach to fisheries, Part 2: Scientific papers, FAO Fisheries Technical
Paper 350/2. Rome, FAO. pp. 191-199.
Fonteyne, R. and Polet, H. 2002. Reducing the benthos bycatch in flatfish beam
trawling by means of technical modifications. Fish. Res. 55: 219-230
Gibinkumar, T.R., Sabu, S., Pravin, P., Boopendranath, M.R. (2005) Hard bycatch
reduction devices for trawls Paper presented at the 7th Indian Fisheries
Forum, 8-12 November 2005, Bangalore.
Gilman, E., Brothers, N. and Kobayashi, D. 2003. Performance assessment of
underwater setting chutes, side-setting, and blue-dyed bait to minimize
seabird mortality in Hawaii pelagic longline tuna and swordfish fisheries. Final
Report. U.S. Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council,
Honolulu.
Gulbrandson, O. 1986. Reducing Fuel Cost of Small Fishing Boats, BOBP/WP/27,
Bay of Bengal Programme, Madras:15 pp.
Hall, S.J. 1999. The effect o fishing on marine ecosytems and communities,
Blackwell, Oxford, UK, 244 pp.
Hannah, R.W., Jones, S.A., Matteson, K.M., 2003. Observations of fish and shrimp
behaviour in ocean shrimp (Pandalus jordani) trawls. Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife Marine Recourses Program 2040 S.E. Marine Science Drive
Newport, Oregon 97365, 28 p.
He, P. 2007. Reducing seabed contact of bottom trawls. In: Proc. Satellite workshop
on fishing Impacts – Evaluation, solution and Policy, October 2001, Tokyo,
Japan, 27-35
Isaksen, B., Valdemarsen, J.W., Larson, R.B., Karlsen, L., 1992. Reduction of fish
bycatch in shrimp trawls using a rigid separator grid in the aft belly. Fish. Res.
13: 335-352.
Kaiser, M.J. and de Groot, S.J. 2000. Effect of fishing on non-target species and
habitat, J. Anim. Ecol. 65: 348-358

20
Kelleher, K. 2004. Discards in the world’s fisheries marine - an update. FAO
Fisheries Technical Paper 470, Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome.
Kennelly, S.J. (Ed.). 2007. Bycatch Reduction in the World’s Fisheries, Reviews:
Methods and Technologies in Fish Biology and Fisheries Vol. 7, Springer,
The Netherlands, 288 p.
Kerstetter, D. W., and J. E. Graves. 2006. Effects of circle versus J-style hooks on
target and non-target species in a pelagic longline fishery. Fisheries Research
80:239-250.
Kristjonsson, H. 1967. Technique of finding and catching shrimp in commercial
fishing, Proc. FAO World Scientific Conference on the Biology and Culture of
Shrimps and Prawns. 12-24. June 1967, Mexico: 69 p.
Kurup, K.N. and Devaraj, M. (2000) Estimates of optimum fleet size for the exploited
Indian shelf fisheries, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Cochin.
Mar. Fish. Infor. Serv. T & E Ser., No.165 – July-August-September 2000: 2-
11.
Larsena, F., Eigaarda, O.R. and Tougaardb, J. 2007. Reduction of harbour porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena) bycatch by iron-oxide gillnets Fisheries Research
85(3): 270-278
Meenakumari, B., Bhagirathan, U. and Pravin, P. 2009. Impact of bottom trawling on
benthic communities: a review, Fish. Technol. 45(1):1-22
Mitchell, J.F., Watson, J.W., Foster, D.G. and Caylor, R.E. 1995. The Turtle Excluder
Device (TED): A Guide to better Performance, NOAA Technical Memorandum
NMFS-SEFSC-366, 35 pp.
Pillai, N.S., 1998. Bycatch reduction devices in shrimp trawling. Fishing Chimes 18
(7): 45-47.
Polet, H., Coenjaerts, J. and Verschoore, R. 2004. Evaluation of the sieve net as a
selectivity-improving device in the Belgian brown shrimp (Crangon crangon)
fishery. Fish. Res. 69: 35-48.
Prado, J. 1993. Selective shrimp catching devices: a review. INFOFISH International,
1/93: 54-60.
Pravin, P., Meenakumari, B. and Boopendranath, M.R.(2008) Harvest Technologies
for Tuna and Tuna like fishes in Indian seas and bycatch issues. In: Harvest
and Post-harvest Technology for Tuna (Joseph J., Boopendranath M.R.,
Sankar T.V., Jeeva J.C. and Kumar R., (Eds)), Society of Fisheries
Technologists (India), Cochin, 79-103 pp.
Revill, A. and Holst, R. 2004. The selective properties of sieve nets. Fish. Res. 66:
171-183
Robins, J.B., Campbell, M.J. and McGilvrey, J.G. 1999. Reducing prawn trawl
bycatch in Australia: An overview and an example from Queensland. Marine
Fisheries Review 61(3): 46-55.
Romanov, E.V. (2002) Bycatch in the tuna purse-seine fisheries of the western
Indian Ocean, Fish. Bull. 100(1): 90–105
Sabu, S., Gibinkumar, T.R., Boopendranath, M.R. and Pravin, P. (2005) Soft
bycatch reduction devices for trawling, Paper presented at the 7th Indian
Fisheries Forum, 8-12 November 2005, Bangalore.
Stoner, A. W., and S.M. Kaimmer., 2008. Reducing elasmobranch bycatch:
laboratory investigation of rare earth metal and magnetic deterrents with spiny
dogfish and Pacific halibut.. Fish. Res. 92:162-168.
Trippel, E.A, Holy, N.L. Palka, D.L. Shepherd, T.D. Melvin, G.D. and Terhune, J.M.
2003. Acoustic reflective net mesh reduces harbour porpoise bycatch. Marine
Mammal Science. 19: 240-243

21
 Valdemarsen and Suuronen, 2003. Modifying fihing gear to achieve ecosystem
objective, In: Siclair, M., Valdemarsen, G.(Eds) Responsible fiheries in the
marine ecosystems, FAO, Rome, 321-341
Watson, J.W., S.P. Epperly, A.K. Shah, and D.G. Foster, 2005. Fishing methods to
reduce sea turtle mortality associated with pelagic longlines. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 62, 965-981.
Wileman, D.A. (1984) Project Oilfish: Investigation of the Resistance of Trawl, The
Danish Institute of Fisheries Technology: 123 p.
Wilson, J.D.K. (1999) Fuel and Financial Savings for Operators of Small Fishing
Vessels, FAO Fish. Tech. Paper 383, FAO, Rome.
WWF 2009a. Modifying shrimp trawls to prevent bycatch of non-target species in the
Indian Ocean, Accessed 20 May 2009, www.smartgear.org/
smartgear_winners/smartgear_winner_2005/smartgear_winner_2005
WWF 2009b. Deterring sharks with magnets, Accessed 20 May 2009,
http://smartgear.org/smartgear_winners/smartgear_winner_2006/smartgear_
winner_2006grand/index.cfm
Yellen, J.E., Brooks, A.S., Cornelissen, E., Mehlman, M.J., Stewart, K. (1995) A
middle stone-age worked bone industry from Katanda, Upper Semliki Valley,
Zaire, Science 268: 553–556

22

View publication stats