Fishermen and seal conservation

Seal Work5hop13th European Cetacean Society Annual Conference5 April 1999, Valencia, Spain

,

\~: Fishermen and seal conservation:f:~ survey of attitudes towards monk seals

in Greece and grey seals in Cornwall

by D. GLAIN 1, S. KOTOMATAS 2 and S. ADAMANTOPOULOU 2,

I glain-dubray@yahoo.[r2 MOm/Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection

of the Monk Seal IS Solomou Str., 10682 Athens GreeceE-mail :[email protected]

Summary. - Two studies, carried out independently, investigated the seal-fisheries interac-tions for the Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus in Greece and the grey seal Hali-choerus grypus in tornwall, England. In both countries the attitude of fishermen towards seals,the problems of the fishery sector and proposed solutions were recorded. Fishermen and fishery- Irelated officials were interviewed. The results provide evidence that seals do have an impact onfishermen activities leading to a loss of profit. Even though, 61.5 % of fishermen in Greece and83 % in Cornwall complained that seals have an adverse effection their activities, they do notconsider seals as their most important problem. The results, concerning suggested solutions tothe seal issue, show that fishermen are open to initiatives which may not only address their pro-blems, but also the seal conservation issues.

Resume. - Deux etudes, menees independamment l'une de l'autre, ont examine les interac-tions de la peche avec Ie phoque moine de la Mediterranee Monachus monachus en Grece, et Iephoque gris Halichoerus grypus en Cornouailles, Angleterre. Dans les deux pays, l'attitude despecheurs envers les phoques, les problemes du secteur de la peche et les solutions proposees ontete recenses. Des entretiens ont ete conduits aupres des pecheurs et des autorites. Les deuxetudes montrent que les phoques ont bien un impact sur les activites des pecheurs qui peutengendrer une perte de profit. Bien que 61.5 % des pecheurs en Grece et 83 % en Cornouaillesse plaignent que les phoques aient un impact negatif sur leur activite, ils ne pensent pas que lesphoques soient leur probleme Ie plus severe. Les solutions suggerees, en ce qui concerne Ie sujet"phoques »,montrent que les pecheurs sont ouverts II. des initiatives visant II. resoudre non seule-ment leurs problemes, mais aussi la protection des phoques.

KEY WORDS: Seal conservation, fishermen, Greece, Cornwall, Mediterranean monkseal, grey seal.

INTRODUCnON

::$.' Seals and fishermen have been known to interact since antiquity (Northridge and~ Hofman 1999). Today, fishermen are often considered to have an adverse effect on""- '~

, ;d Mammalia, t. 65, n° 3, 2001 : 309-317.

,I

310 MAMMALIA

several seal species, while at the same time seals are considered competitors to fishe-ries. This is the case particularly for the Mediterranean monk seal, Monachus monachus(Hermann), in Greece and the grey seal, Halichoerus grypus (Fabricius), in the UK.

The Mediterranean monk seal is a critically endangered species (IUCN 1996). Itsworld population is estimated to be 400-500 individuals, with two main survivinggroups in Greece in the Eastern Mediterranean and in Mauritania and Morocco on the ,Atlantic coast of Northwest Africa (Reijnders et al. 1993). In Greece, the species is ,widely distributed in both Aegean and Ionian seas (Adamantopoulou et al. 1999). ,Habitat destruction, as well as, human related mortality is considered to be the mainthreat to its survival throughout its range (Reijnders et al. 1993). A recent study(Androukaki et al. 1999) provided evidence that deliberate killing is the most frequentcause of death in the Mediterranean monk seal in Greece.

The grey seal, Halichoerus grypus, while common .in Britain, is relatively rareworld-wide (Berry 1996; Corbet and Harris 1990). About half of the species worldpopulation breeds in Britain, mainly in Scotland (Pomeroy et al. 1994). The grey sealis listed in Annex II of the European Union Habitats Directive. The species populationin SW England is small (400-500 individuals) and, apart from Brittany in France, it isthe southernmost limit of the species range in the eastern Atlantic (Corbet and Harris1990). The interactions of both seal species with fisheries arise from the fact that fishrepresent a common resource (Harwood 1987 ; Northridge and Hofman 1999) and asfish stocks decline, these potential interactions intensify. Studies have been carried outboth in Greece and in Cornwall, England in order to investigate the interactions bet-ween seals and fishermen (MOm 1994, 1996 ; Glain 1998).

The present study attempted to assess the attitude of fishermen towards seals andthe perceived damage to fisheries caused by seals. It also solicited fishermen's propo-sals for resolving this perceived conflict. Results were compared in order to define anintegrated approach to the conservation of the two seals species.

METHODS

In both countries face to face interviews with fishermen were conducted at theirmooring harbours. Researchers invested considerable effort in gaining the confidence '\of the local communities, so as to facilitate a co-operative attitude to answering ques-tions.

A. Greece

The survey was carried out between 1991-1998 by the Rescue and InformationNetwork (MOm 1994, 1996). This network, covers all Greece and IS in continuouscommunication with more than 1000 members including, port police authorities,fishery and veterinary services, fishing co-operatives, coastal municipalities and localinhabitants, through mail and direct visits to coastal areas.

Interviews of coastal fishermen were conducted at mooring ports throughout theAegean Sea. This group of fishermen use mainly trammel nets and bottom long lines incoastal waters, and thus they are potentially most affected by seals. Only one personper boat was interviewed, usually the boat owner. Fishermen using trawls and purse "-seines, as they are less affected by seals, as well as, fish farmers, who are reporting .~damages by seals with increasing frequency, were interviewed opportunistically. Offi-cials of fishery-related authorities (port police and fishery services) were also intervie-wed in order to compare their answers to those of fishermen. -

FISHERMEN AND SEAL CONSERVATION 311

Since researchers' interest in the Mediterranean monk seal may influence thefishermen's answers and bias them towards exaggerating the problem, the questionsasked were part of a wider discussion on a variety of matters related to the fisheriessector. Although the questions were standardised, prewritten forms (questionnaires)were not used, in order to keep the procedure as informal as possible and avoid a nega-tive reaction.

~, Five questions, out of the 15 asked, were directly related to the seal-fisheries inter-

actions and are included in this study:1. Do you have problems with seals?2. How serious are these problems? Three levels of concern were identified:a. very concerned about seal damageb. a bit concerned about seal damagec. not concerned about seal damage.3. What other problems do you face? (multiple answers possible).4. Which problem do you consider the most serious?5. What do you think would be the best solution to your problems? (multiple

answers possible).

Officials were requested to answer the above questions in terms of what thefishermen in their area believed..

B. England

In order to get the best understanding of the potential interactions between greyseals and fishermen, a range of interview techniques was used, including in-depth andstandardised interviews (Oppenheim 1992). Exploratory in-depth interviews wereconducted with fishermen representatives and conservation organisations, which provi-ded a preliminary understanding of the issues.

Face to face interviews were conducted with fishermen in harbours around Corn-wall, using a standardised questionnaire. For the questionnaire an analytic or cross-sec-tional survey design was adopted, that allowed relationships between different variablesto be investigated (Oppenheim 1992). "'

Since one of the objectives of this survey was to determine which fishermen aremost affected by seal activity, interviewed fishermen were categorised based on whe-ther they were i) not concerned, ii) a bit concerned or iii) very concerned.

The in-depth interviews suggested that full-time fishermen using fixed nets (gill,tangle and salmon nets) were those most likely to be affected by seals. Sampling focu-sed on these fishermen. Some fishermen (three part-time and one trawler-man) outsidethis category were also interviewed to verify the low level of interaction. Harbours hos-ting at least three full-time netters were selected for the questionnaire survey (Gray1995 ; Sea Fisheries Committee Cornwall 1996).

After being interviewed, fishermen were asked for details of other netters in thesame and/or different harbours. This « Snowballing technique » (Oppenheim 1992) wasconsidered necessary to generate confidence by giving greater credence to the intervie-

, wer and yielded a high return rate. Its drawback is that it is difficult to determine whe-" ther the sample is representative of the population surveyed. In order to compensate for

; this potential bias, a high proportion, between 22 % and 100 %, of fishermen was inter-viewed in each visited harbour. Only one person per boat was interviewed, usually theboat owner.

312 MAMMALIA

RESULTS

A. Greece .

During the study period (1991-1998), 113 interviews in 34 different mooring portsin the Aegean Sea were conducted. From the above interviews, 65 were conducted ;;with fishermen (61 coastal fishermen, 3 trawl and purse seine fishermen and 1 fish far- "mer) and 48 with relevant authorities. '

Existence of seal-fishery interactions

Concerning the existence of seal-fishery interactions (Table 1), the majority (40)of the fishermen interviewed, said that they have problems with seals. In contrast,fewer (arcsine t. = 16.39, P < 0.0001) interviewed officials thought that the localfishermen of their area considered seals as a problem.

Leverof concern about the seal-fishery interaction

Of those fishermen who considered the interaction as a problem, about half werevery concerned about seals (Table 1). None of the trawl or purse seines fishermenconsidered seals as a problem, while fish-farmers were very concerned. Officials, ove-rall, reported a lesser degree of concern.

TABLE 1. - Level of concern of fishermen about the existence of seal fishery interactions. based on inter-

views conducted with fishermen and fishery related officials in Greece and England.

. GREECE ENGLAN;D

Fishermen Officials Fishermen

Existence of interactions 61.5o/Ct 39.6% 83.0%

Very concerned 52.5% 22.2% 34.6%

Level of A bit 27.5% 66.7o/Ct 46.2%concern concerned ".

Not concerned 20;00/0 .1.lo/Ct .9.2%

Other problems of the fishery sector

Both fishermen and officials agreed and reported net damage due to dolphins andturtles, decline of fish stocks and illegal fishing with the highest frequency as importantissues for the sector (Table 2).

Main problem of fishery sector

From the problems reported, decreasing fish-stocks due to overfishing was regar-ded by far (45.4 % of the fishermen who responded) as the most important problem ofthe sector. .

While 20.5 % of the fishermen reported damages by dolphins and turtles as a key.:problem, only 11.4 % considered seals to be their most important problem. The level of ('

concern of fishermen is not associated with their evaluation of seals, as being theirmain problem. Of those fishermen who considered seals the most serious problem, only -


TABLE 2. - Responses of fishermen and fishery related officials in Greece on the problems of the fisherysector.

. DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM FISHERMEN OFFICIALS

Net damages by dolphins or sea turtles 28 17. Decreasing fish stocksloverfishing 26' 10

"-

.. Illegal fishing activities/lack of patrolling . 13 8Fishermen from other areas ,,;: i,. , . 5 3Amateur fishermen ' . 2-

Logistic problems (fuels, transportation offish, etc.) 3 . 2Pollution 4 2

Did not answer 22 20 '.

3 were very concerned. The very concerned fishermen considered the decrease of fishstocks and the illegal fishing activities as their « most serious problem ».

The interviewed officials considered damages by dolphins and sea turtles as themost ~serious (55. %) problem of fishermen, while damages by monk seals were notmentioned at all. Other reported «serious» problems were overfishing (30 %) andfishermen from other areas (15 %).

Proposed solutions

Financial compensation was found to be the most frequent solution proposed byfishermen, irrespective of their level of concern or of what they considered as beingtheir main problem (Table 3). Neither the fishermen level of concern, nor what theyconsidered as being their main problem was found to be associated to the proposedsolutions and only one fisherman considered the elimination of the monk seal as the "..best solution.

~(n, ..,; TABLE 3. - Proposed solutions to the problems of the fishery sector in Greece.

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS FISHERMEN OFFICIALSFinancial compensation 23 7

Restrictions to middle size fisheries II 2

Establishment of protected areas 7 5

Improved enforcement of existing regulations 7 IDevelopment of ecotourism sector I I

Improve structural organisation of fishery sector .. 0

c Elimination of seals 1 0.? Relax existing regulations of middle size fisheries 0 I;; No solution available ... 0

; Did not answer 27 35

314 MAMMALIA

B. England

52 questionnaires were administered to fishermen in 13 harbours around the Cor-nish coast, in June and July 1998. Q

Interactions between grey seals and fishermen "a

The great majority of fishermen (83.0 %) considered that grey seals have an ,1influence on their activity (Table 1). 78.7 % of the fishermen using tangle nets and 57.9 .% of the gill-netters complained about the influence of seals on their activity.

Direct predation, when bits or whole fish caught in the fishing gear are eaten, wasconsidered the main issue by all netters, who are affected by seals. Fishermen reportedthey would lose on average 6 % of their annual profit to predation by seals (4.7 % intangle nets and 1.3 % in gill nets). Competition was cited only 3 times, however, whenasked if they think seals are in competition with them, 61.5 % agreed. 81 % did notthink that seals damaged their gear.

Half the fishermen estimated catching an average of 3.2 seals per year (range: 0-20) in their nets. 80.5 % of « by-catch» seals are juveniles. 75 % of the fishermenthink interactions have increased overtime. This increase is explained by the perceivedrise in seal numbers by 43.6 % of these fishermen, but also that seals have discoveredthat « they can get an easy meal » from the nets (28.2 % of the fishermen). The lack offood supplies for seals to feed upon and the influence of the Seal National Sanctuaryare also cited each in 23 % of cases.

Due to the interactions with seals, 46 % of all the respondents have had to changetheir fishing methods to some extent. In slightly more than half the cases (54.2 %),fishermen respond that they might avoid certain areas where they have experiencedproblems, usually for a few days, seldom definitely. They can also decrease the effortput in tangle nets (in 41.7% of cases), and often put more effort into pots.

Level of concern about the seal-fishery interaction

The results with regards to the level of concern to fishermen are summarised inTable 1. All except one the « very concerned » fishermen considered something shouldbe done in order to limit the influence of seals on fishing, whereas only 30 % of the« not concerned» want something to be done. There is a significant association bet-ween the level of concern and the wish to see action taken (Xi = 12.01, p < 0.01).Similarly, the number of fishermen suggesting some sort of cull as a solution to theproblems created by seals is associated with the degree of concern (X22 = 17.39,P < 0.01). Significantly (X22 = 13.22, P < 0.01) more fishermen among the «veryconcerned» (77_8 %) report that they had to change their fishing methods because ofthe increase of interactions, compared to the « not concerned ~~ (10 %). There is a posi-tive correlation between the profit loss and the degree of concern, between «a bit -concerned» and «very concerned ~~ (r. = 0.649, n = 26, P < 0.01). The « very concer-ned » fishermen lose on average 10.2 % of their annual profit while those who are a bitor not concerned lose only 1.2 %.

Two main factors are associated to the degree of concern expressed by respon-dents: the distance off the coast at which fishing takes place (X22 = 6.25, p < 0.01) and :.the size of boat (X22 = 11.71, p < 0.01). Medium-sized boats (5-12 m), fishing between6 and 20 miles of the coast, seem to be most affected by seals. The great majority.(80 %) of the « not concerned » fishermen fish either between the coast and the 6-mile .limit or farther than 20 miles offshore.


There was a significant association between the harbour from where the respon-dents work and the degree of concern. Fishermen working from Newlyn, Helford andSt Ives were most concerned (xi = 17.15, p < 0.01) about seals and this associationmay reflect general community feelings towards the fishery industry as a whole, ratherthan actual levels of seal damage.

." Suggested action, Two thirds of the respondents (63.5 %) think something should be done in order

to limit the influence of seals on their activity, including .killing rogue seals or localand/or limited culls (54.5 % of the fishermen). Suggestions concerning the release ofseals by the National Seal Sanctuary (27.3 %) and non-lethal solutions (15.2 %), suchas the use of contraceptives or the deyelopment of pingers to deter $eals from nets weremade.

DISCUSSION

These two independent studies from countries with quite different cultural andsocial contexts allow us to draw a number of common conclusions.

In both stu'dies, fishermen perceive seals to have an impact on their activity,however the results obtained from Greek fishery officials suggest that the magnitude ofthis interaction may be exaggerated. Seals activity may lead to loss of income (decrea-sed fish catch, damaged gear), as well as, changes of fishing methods (avoidance offishing grounds, use of alternative gear) (Glain 1998). In Cornwall, it has been estima-ted that a maximum of 15 % of fishermen are likely to be seriously affected by the I'seals with a loss of up to 10 % of their annual profit (Glain 1998). Even higher valuesof profit loss have been reported for Greek fishermen in the Ionian Sea (Panou et at.1993; Karavellas 1994; Archipelagos 1998).

Seal-fishery interactions are connected with the general status of the small-scalefishery sector. The fishing industry in both countries is in dramatic decline pressuredby structural changes towards fewer, larger boats (Berry 1996). Fishermen have increa-sed fishing effort, but catches remain the same or decrease (Gwyer 1991; Stergiouet at. 1997). Compared with other factors affecting the fishery sector, the seal issue forGreek fishermen is low on the list of priorities, with overfishing amongst their mostserious problems. However, damage caused by seals or other marine animals mayappear to fishermen as one that might be more easily solved. This is the case in Greecewhere fishermen may illegaly kill monk seals. Nonetheless, very few fishermen in bothcountries considered that the best solution was to cull or kill the seals. In Cornwall,those in favour of some son of management of the seal population merely emphasisedthe need to kill the few rogue seals, which repeatedly hunt on the nets. In additionrecent research has indeed shown that reducing the number of seals did not cause areduction in damage to the fishing industry, panly because competitive species popula-tions, of seabirds or cetaceans, may increase in numbers to fill the gap left by seals

;. (Corbet and Harris 1990, Berry 1996).: A distinct divergence in the results obtained in the two countries is the fact that in. Greece most fishermen proposed financial compensation as the best solution to the seal

problem, while this was not proposed in Cornwall. Although direct financial compensa-tion may help change the fishermen's negative attitudes towards seals in the short-term,

316 MAMMAUA

it is logistically difficult to apply and the long-term impact of such a measure on thenature of the seal-fishery interactions and on the population status of the Mediterraneanmonk seal is unknown.

Both in Greece and England, the results concerning suggested solutions to the seal ~

issue show that fishermen are, at least in principle, open to action which may not onlyaddress their problems, but also the seal conservation issues. This shows that fishermen "-are willing to seek long-term solutions, and involving them through a participatory pro- Jcess appears to be an appropriate solution to the seal-fishermen issue. Involving local"communities in conservation is now widely regarded as the only way to achieveconservation of species which have an influence on people's activities. A participativeapproach takes into account the social and cultural influences, such as livelihoodconcern~ of local communities and seeks socially acceptable solutions (Clark and Mur-doch, 1997). In both countries, forums or working groups, involving all stakeholders,such as fishermen, authorities, conservationists and the tourism industry should be ini-tiated to provide long term solutions for both fishermen and seals.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank Mrs E. Androukaki for her contribution to the collecton of the data., We are also grateful to Dr. Carolyn Harrison for her comments on the manuscript. Both studies

would not have been possible without the participation and contribution of the fishermen and theauthorities of Greece and Cornwall, which we gratefully acknowledge. The project in Greecewas partially funded by the European Commission, D.G. XI, Contrat Nos. 4-3010(92)7829, B4-3040/95/009/AO/D2 and B4-3200/96/500. The project in Cornwall was partially funded byEnglish Nature.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADAMANTOPOULOU, S., E. ANDROUKAKI and S. KOTOMATAS, 1999. - The distribution of theMediterranean monk seal in Greece based on an Information Network. CfJIltribution tothe Zoogeography and Ecology of the Eastern Mediterranean Region. 1 : 399-404.

ANDROUKAKI E., S. ADAMANTOPOULOU, P. DENDRINOS, E. TOUNTA and S. KOTOMATAS, 1999. -

Causes of mortality in the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in Greece.Contribution to the Zoogeography and Ecology of the Eastern Mediterranean Region.1 : 405-411.

ARCHIPELAGOS, 1998. - Technical-Economical investigation of the effects of the Mediterraneanmonk seal on coastal fisheries on the Western coast of Zakynthos island. Final report forWWF Greece within the framework of the EU LIFE-Nature programme: « The Mediter-ranean Monk Seal in Greece: Conservation in Action », contract B4-3200/96/500.

BERRY, C., 1996. - Marine resource utilisation, conservation and the law, potential conflicts inthe U.K. North Sea Monitor, 14 (1) : 6-9.

CLARK, 1. and 1. MURDOCH, 1997. - Local knowledge and the precarious extension of scientificnetworks,: a reflection on three case studies. Sociologia Ruralis, 37 (1), 38-60. ~

CORBET, G.B. and S. HARRIS (Eds.), 1990. - The Handbook of British mammals. Blackwell c;Scientific Publications, Oxford, 471-480. ;'

GLAIN, D., 1998. - Conservation of the grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) in Cornwall: study of ,seal circulation and interactions with fishermen. MSc thesis. -


GRAY, M.J., 1995. - The coastal fisheries of England and Wales, Part Ill: A review of their sta-tus 1992-1994. Fisheries Research Technical Report n° 100, Ministry of Agriculture,Fisheries and Food, Directorate of Fisheries Research, Lowesoft, 99 p.

" GWYER, D., 1991. - Fishing for trouble. Geographical Magazine, 63 (7), 20-23.

HARWOOD, J., 1987. - Population Biology of the Mediterranean Monk Seal in Greece. Sea Mam-,;; mal Research Unit. Cambridge.~ IUCN, 1996. - Red List of Threatened Animals. The World Conservation Union and Conserva-~ tion International, Gland, Switzerland.

KARAVELLAS, D., 1994. - The state of fisheries in the Ionian Sea with particular reference to thehabitat of the Mediterranean monk seal, Monachus monachus. WWF-Greece.

MOm/HELLENIC SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY AND PROTECTION OF THE MONK SEAL, 1994. - «Conti-

nuation of the Establishment of a Rescue Network for orphan, wounded and sick sealsand gathering of seal observation from the whole of Greece - function of the seal treat-ment and rehabilitation center in Alonnissos ». Final report for the European Commis-sion Project 4-3010(92)7829.

MOm/HELLENIC SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY AND PROTECTION OF THE MONK SEAL, 1996. - «MonkSeal Conser'iJation in Greece. Part 1. Coastal and Island Greece ». Final Report for theEuropean Commission Project B4-3040/95/009/AO/D2.

NORTHRIDGE, S.P. and R.G. HOFMAN, 1999. - Marine mammal interactions with fisheries.Pp. 99-119, in.. Conservation and management of marine mammals. Eds. J.R. Twiss Jr.and R.R. Reeves, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.

OPPENHEIM, A.N.,'1992. - Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement, PinterPublishers Ltd, London, 303 p.

PANOU, A., J. JACOBS and D. PANOS, 1993. - The endangered Mediterranean monk seal Mona-chus monachus in the Ionian Sea, Greece. Biological Conservation Vol. 64: 129-140.

POMEROY, P.P., S.S. ANDERSON, S.D. TwISS and B.J. MCCONNELL, 1994. - Dispersion and sitefidelity of breeding female grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) on North Rona, Scotland.Journal of Zoology, 233 : 429-447.

REIJNDERS P., S. BRASSEUR, J. VAN DER TORN, P. VAN DER WOLF, I. BOYD, J. HARWOOD,D. LAVIGNE and L. LoWRY, 1993. - Seals, Fur Seals, Sea Lions and Walrus. Status Sur-vey and Conservation Plan. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. ...,.,

SEA FISHERIES COMMITTEE CORNWALL, 1996. - Compiled list of the number of boats per har-bour. Unpublished.

STERGIOU, K.I., E.D. CHRISTOU, D. GEORGOPOULOS, A. ZENETOS and C. SOUMERZOGLOU, 1997.-The Hellenic seas: Physics, chemistry, biology and fisheries. Oceanography and MarineBiology.. an Annual Review, 35 : 415-538.

"

~

..

Documents

Fishermen and seal conservation