GSTDTAP  > 地球科学
Opinion: Was the EU's ban on electric fishing the right decision?
admin
2019-02-19
发布年2019
语种英语
国家美国
领域地球科学
正文(英文)
Opinion: Was the EU’s ban on electric fishing the right decision?
Shrimp trailer. Credit: NOAA FishWatch

Last week, on 13 February 2019, the EU approved the ban on pulse trawling. This followed the vote for a ban by the European Parliament on 16 January 2018. Half of the 84 Dutch pulse trawling vessels must stop immediately; the other half will receive a transitional arrangement until July 2021. Outcomes of ongoing research can reopen the discussion.

Pulse is an innovative, electric fishing technique, which could partially replace conventional bottom trawling, especially beam trawling. Pulse trawling offers some advantages over conventional bottom trawling, such as a lower by-catch and lower fuel use. However, opponents point to valid concerns about the technique, such as the potential harm to electrosensitive fishes and the increased competition for small-scale fishers.

The NGO Bloom who strongly influenced the EU's decision about the ban of trawling point out that also beam trawling is not "a viable or acceptable option for Europe", but with their advocacy for a ban on pulse trawling, they have indirectly promoted beam trawling. The question is not if pulse trawling has . It has. The question is rather how the impacts of pulse trawling compare to those of conventional bottom trawling.

Animal welfare as a new argument in the debate

Besides the advantages and disadvantages mentioned above, an important further consideration is the overall , going beyond electrosensitive fishes. Compared to conventional trawling, animal welfare loss might be lower in pulse trawling. Fewer animals are affected and especially the many bottom-dwelling invertebrates are expected to suffer less because the seafloor is not disturbed anymore as in the case of beam trawling. This can outweigh larger harm induced on fewer fishes which are sensitive to the electric stimulation, most of which are targeted and will anyway be slaughtered soon after exposure.

Ecological pressures through cascading effects are also expected to be reduced in pulse trawling with less animals directly affected. Although a more efficient technology like pulse trawling could enhance overfishing, it is of little concern in Europe due to policy regulations and demand limits. Overall, the is still inconclusive, but speaks in favour of pulse trawling and, therefore, the ban seems premature.

Explore further: EU parliament calls for ban on electric pulse fishing

URL查看原文
来源平台Science X network
文献类型新闻
条目标识符http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/109429
专题地球科学
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
admin. Opinion: Was the EU's ban on electric fishing the right decision?. 2019.
条目包含的文件
条目无相关文件。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
查看访问统计
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[admin]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[admin]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[admin]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。