Improving understanding of seabird bycatch in Scottish longline fisheries and exploring potential solutions

Section 7: Conclusions

The latest bycatch estimates for the fishery provided in this report are considerably lower and more reliable than the preliminary estimates produced by Northridge et al.(2020) but uncertainty around the estimates remains high and identified spatio-temporal biases in the sampling data may also affect their accuracy.

Despite the limited data used in the exploratory analyses within this project, when viewed against the findings from other similar fisheries, it indicates that the factors influencing bycatch rates in the hake fishery are multiple and complex. Consequently, there isn’t a single element of the fishing operation that can be focussed on as a basis for developing new mitigation approaches, nor is there an existing mitigation approach that is both acceptable to industry and which would guarantee the elimination of bycatch in the fishery.

Given the lack of a single clear and demonstrated mitigation approach that is suitable for the fishery, top-down regulatory approaches are unlikely to achieve much positive mitigation effect and may simply jeopardise the good relationship that has developed between industry, scientists and Government. A collaborative approach will more likely lead to tangible reductions in bycatch in the longer-term.

The UK and Scottish Government’s commitments to reducing seabird bycatch are clear, and the growing collaborative approach between this fishery sector and our scientific team is very positive and means that with further work it should be possible to develop and test mitigation approaches that are acceptable to industry and therefore have potential to be widely adopted in the fishery.

Clearly more data collection is needed to elucidate the factors influencing bycatch, and to improve the reliability of estimates and the biological/population implications of bycatch in the fishery. However, given industry’s desire to reduce bycatch there is no reason why general background data collection should not continue while mitigation trials are conducted concurrently. This would have the simultaneous effect of increasing knowledge of the impacts of the fishery whilst working towards suitable approaches for reducing that impact.

Our next steps in this work will be to work with industry to develop and implement trials of potential mitigation measures based on the literature review presented above and considering the skipper’s views on which approaches are most likely to be successful and practical. The choice of approach will be developed collaboratively but will be guided by industry.