Aktuelle Möglichkeiten und Risiken der Fischerei im Nordost-Atlantik

Vom 24. August bis 02. September 1993 trafen sich in Kopenhagen Wissenschaftler aus Norwegen, Russland, Spanien, Kanada, Grönland und Deutschland, um Bestandsberechnungen (Assessments) für das Jahr 1993 an den Nordost-atlantischen Beständen des Kabeljau, Schellfisch, Seelachs, Rotbarsch und Schwarzen Heilbutt durchzuführen. Für die Bestandberechnungen standen der Arbeitsgruppe Daten des Jahres 1992 aus der kommerziellen Fischerei verschiedener Länder sowie Ergebnisse und Indices norwegischer und russischer Forschungsschiffe zur Verfügung. Die Assessments wurden mit der V.P.A. (Virtual Population Analysis), mit XSA (Extended Survivors Analysis) und der ADAPT-Methode gerechnet. Die wichtigsten Ergebnisse dieser Bestandberechnungen sowie die im November veröffentlichte Stellungnahme des ACFM (Advisory Committee on Fishery Management) sollen im nachfolgenden dargestellt werden.

The Ribble. Portrait of an estuary

Blackpool, Lytham St. Anne's and Southport are household names as popular leisure and holiday resorts the length and breadth of the land. Their location at the mouth of the estuary of the River Ribble is much less well known, yet this same estuary is of paramount importance to both the economy and the environment of North West England. Indeed, the Ribble Estuary is of international importance for interests as diverse as wintering and migrating wild birds on one hand to the modern aerospace industry on the other. This brochure provides a brief introduction to the estuary of the River Ribble including a historic overview of the people living near the estuary, agriculture and wildlife.

Annual report 2006 - North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES). Fifteenth meeting, Yokohama, Japan, October 13-22, 2006

◾ Report of Opening Session (p. 1) ◾ Report of Governing Council (p. 15) ◾ Report of the Finance and Administration Committee (p. 47) ◾ Reports of Science Board and Committees: Science Board Inter-sessional Meeting (p. 63); Science Board (p. 73); Biological Oceanography Committee (p. 87); Fishery Science Committee (p. 95); Marine Environmental Quality Committee (p. 105); MONITOR Technical Committee (p. 115); Physical Oceanography and Climate Committee (p. 125); Technical Committee on Data Exchange (p. 133) ◾ Reports of Sections, Working and Study Groups: Section on Carbon and Climate (p. 139); Section on Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms in the North Pacific (p. 143); Working Group 18 on Mariculture in the 21st Century - The Intersection Between Ecology, Socio-economics and Production (p. 147); Working Group 19 on Ecosystem-Based Management Science and its Application to the North Pacific (p. 151); Working Group 20 on Evaluations of Climate Change Projections (p. 157); Working Group 21 on Non-indigenous Aquatic Species (p. 159); Study Group to Develop a Strategy for GOOS (p. 165) ◾ Reports of the Climate Change and Carrying Capacity Scientific Program: Implementation Panel on the CCCC Program (p. 169); CFAME Task Team (p. 175); MODEL Task Team (p. 181) ◾ Reports of Advisory Panels: Advisory Panel for a CREAMS/PICES Program in East Asian Marginal Seas (p. 187); Advisory Panel on Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey in the North Pacific (p. 193); Advisory Panel on Iron Fertilization Experiment in the Subarctic Pacific Ocean (p. 197); Advisory Panel on Marine Birds and Mammals (p. 201); Advisory Panel on Micronekton Sampling Inter-calibration Experiment (p. 205) ◾ Summary of Scientific Sessions and Workshops (p. 209) ◾ Membership List (p. 259) ◾ List of Participants (p. 277) ◾ List of PICES Acronyms (p. 301) ◾ List of Acronyms (p. 303)

Annual report 2007 - North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES). Sixteenth meeting, Victoria, Canada, October 26-November 5, 2007

Report of Opening Session (p. 1). Report of Governing Council (p. 15). Report of the Finance and Administration Committee (p. 65). Reports of Science Board and Committees: Science Board Inter-Sessional Meeting (p. 83); Science Board (p. 93); Biological Oceanography Committee (p. 105); Fishery Science Committee (p. 117); Marine Environmental Quality Committee (p. 129); Physical Oceanography and Climate Committee (p. 139); Technical Committee on Data Exchange (p. 145); Technical Committee on Monitoring (p. 153). Reports of Sections, Working and Study Groups: Section on Carbon and Climate (p. 161); Section on Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms in the North Pacific (p. 167); Working Group 19 on Ecosystem-based Management Science and its Application to the North Pacific (p. 173); Working Group 20 on Evaluations of Climate Change Projections (p. 179); Working Group 21 on Non-indigenous Aquatic Species (p. 183); Study Group to Develop a Strategy for GOOS (p. 193); Study Group on Ecosystem Status Reporting (p. 203); Study Group on Marine Aquaculture and Ranching in the PICES Region (p. 213); Study Group on Scientific Cooperation between PICES and Non-member Countries (p. 225). Reports of the Climate Change and Carrying Capacity Program: Implementation Panel on the CCCC Program (p. 229); CFAME Task Team (p. 235); MODEL Task Team (p. 241). Reports of Advisory Panels: Advisory Panel for a CREAMS/PICES Program in East Asian Marginal Seas (p. 249); Advisory Panel on Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey in the North Pacific (p. 253); Advisory Panel on Iron Fertilization Experiment in the Subarctic Pacific Ocean (p. 255); Advisory Panel on Marine Birds and Mammals (p. 261); Advisory Panel on Micronekton Sampling Inter-calibration Experiment (p. 265). 2007 Review of PICES Publication Program (p. 269). Guidelines for PICES Temporary Expert Groups (p. 297). Summary of Scientific Sessions and Workshops (p. 313). Report of the ICES/PICES Conference for Early Career Scientists (p. 355). Membership (p. 367). Participants (p. 387). PICES Acronyms (p. 413). Acronyms (p. 415).

Our living oceans: report on the status of U.S. living marine resources, 6th edition

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is dedicated to the stewardship of living marine resources (LMR’s). This is accomplished through science-based conservation and management, and the promotion of healthy ecosystems. As a steward, NMFS has an obligation to conserve, protect, and manage these resources in a way that ensures their continuation as functioning components of healthy marine ecosystems, affords economic opportunities, and enhances the quality of life for the American public. In addition to its responsibilities within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), NMFS plays a supportive and advisory role in the management of LMR’s in the coastal areas under state jurisdiction and provides scientific and policy leadership in the international arena. NMFS also implements international measures for the conservation and management of LMR’s, as appropriate.NMFS receives its stewardship responsibilities under a number of Federal laws. These include the Nation’s primary fisheries law, the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act. This law was first passed in 1976, later reauthorized as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act in 1996, and reauthorized again on 12 January 2007 as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act (MSRA). The MSRA mandates strong action to conserve and manage fishery resources and requires NMFS to end overfishing by 2010 in all U.S. commercial and recreational fisheries, rebuild all overfished stocks, and conserve essential fish habitat.

Technical and mapping support for marine spatial planning: Final report

Washington depends on a healthy coastal and marine ecosystem to maintain a thriving economy and vibrant communities. These ecosystems support critical habitats for wildlife and a growing number of often competing ocean activities, such as fishing, transportation, aquaculture, recreation, and energy production. Planners, policy makers and resource managers are being challenged to sustainably balance ocean uses, and environmental conservation in a finite space and with limited information. This balancing act can be supported by spatial planning. Marine spatial planning (MSP) is a planning process that enables integrated, forward looking, and consistent decision making on the human uses of the oceans and coasts. It can improve marine resource management by planning for human uses in locations that reduce conflict, increase certainty, and support a balance among social, economic, and ecological benefits we receive from ocean resources. In March 2010, the Washington state legislature enacted a marine spatial planning law (RCW §43.372) to address resource use conflicts in Washington waters. In 2011, a report to the legislature and a workshop on human use data provided guidance for the marine spatial planning process. The report outlines a set of recommendations for the State to effectively undertake marine spatial planning and this work plan will support some of these recommendations, such as: federal integration, regional coordination, developing mechanisms to integrate scientific and technical expertise, developing data standards, and accessing and sharing spatial data. In 2012 the Governor amended the existing law to focus funding on mapping and ecosystem assessments for Washington’s Pacific coast and the legislature provided $2.1 million in funds to begin marine spatial planning off Washington’s coast. The funds are appropriated through the Washington Department of Natural Resources Marine Resources Stewardship Account with coordination among the State Ocean Caucus, the four Coastal Treaty Tribes, four coastal Marine Resource Committees and the newly formed stakeholder body, the Washington Coastal Marine Advisory Council.

East African Fisheries Research Organization Annual Report 1955/1956

This report covers the period 1st July, 1955, to 30th June, 1956. As printing has been delayed for various reasons, reference should be made to certain important proposals put forward since the 30th June. Just after the close of the year a meeting of the Lake Victoria Fisheries Board was held at Entebbe on 26th July. At this meeting disagreement arose between the representatives of the three East African Governments on the subject of whether or not existing restrictions on fishing in Lake Victoria should be retained. This organization holds strongly to the view that the existing restrictions on fishing should be retained, Kenya holds similar views, but Uganda and Tanganyika were in favour of a proposal to lift these restrictions. This question was discussed a month earlier by the Director with the Colonial Office Fisheries Advisory Committee and they also advised the Lake Victoria Fisheries Board against lifting the restrictions.