Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Pollution Bulletin

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /marpolbul

Strategy for mitigation of marine debris: Analysis of sourcesand composition of marine debris in northern Taiwan

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.04.0190025-326X/� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 2 2462 2192x5608; fax: +886 2 2463 3986.E-mail address: julia@ntou.edu.tw (H.-W. Huang).

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigation of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine dnorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.04.019

Fan-Jun Kuo, Hsiang-Wen Huang ⇑Institute of Marine Affairs and Resources Management, National Taiwan Ocean University, No. 2, Pei-Ning Road, Keelung 20224, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords:PlasticsPlastic-limit policyShoreline and recreational activitiesStrip transect

Six sites (two sites for each of rocky shores, sandy beaches, and fishing ports) in northern Taiwan wereselected to investigate the amount and density of marine debris in each of the four seasons and afterspring and neap tides from 2012 to 2013. The results indicate that marine debris was higher on rockyshores than sandy beaches and fishing ports. There is no significant difference between season and tide.The dominant debris was plastic-type, followed by polystyrene. The majority of debris originated fromrecreational activities, followed from ocean/waterway activities. The results suggest that the followingactions are needed: (1) continue and reinforce the plastic-limit policy; (2) increase the cleaningfrequency at rocky shores; (3) promote marine environmental education, with a goal of debris-freecoasts; (4) recycle fishing gear and to turn that gear into energy; and (5) coordinate between agenciesto establish a mechanism to monitor debris.

� 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Marine debris, also known as marine litter, is a matter of globalconcern. Marine debris is defined as any man-made objectdiscarded, disposed of, or abandoned that enters the coastal ormarine environment (NOAA, 2007). The sources of marine debrisare divided into land-based sources and ocean-based sources.Land-based sources include landfills, river-entrained refuse, themishandling and overflowing of sewage drainage systems, indus-trial waste, and coastal leisure and sightseeing. Ocean-basedsources include goods on ships, ships along cruise routes, derelictfishing gear (DFG) from fishing boats, waste discharge fromwarships and research vessels, offshore natural gas and oil extrac-tion facilities, and aquaculture facilities. All of these debris sourcesoriginate from human activities and industries (Mouat et al., 2010;UNEP, 2005).

The impact of marine debris can be categorized into three typesof impacts: the injury to or death of marine life, harm to marineecosystems, and effects on human lives and property (NOAA,2011b; UNEP, 2005; USEPA, 2012). Marine debris can result iningestion and entanglement. Seabirds, fish, turtles, and marinemammals often accidentally ingest marine debris (Baird andHooker, 2000; Bugoni et al., 2001; Carpenter et al., 1972;Gramentz, 1988; Hong et al., 2013; Laist, 1987; Moser and Lee,

1992; Ryan, 1988; Schrey and Vauk, 1987; Tarpley and Marwitz,1993). In marine ecosystems, marine debris can cause an invasionof alien species, thus affecting the marine ecosystem (Derraik,2002; Grassle et al., 1991; Winston, 1982). As for human healthand the economy, excessive coastal debris may discourage thepublic from visiting the beach, and thus may affect income relatedto coastal tourism (NOAA, 2011a).

In regard to the reduction in marine debris, Australia, Brazil,Chile, Norway, South Africa, United Kingdom, Uruguay, and theUnited States have implemented and maintained a beach debrissurvey program related to the Convention on the Conservation ofAntarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) since 1993(Edyvane et al., 2004). The United Nations Environment Pro-gramme (UNEP) approved the Honolulu Strategy and suggestedthat member nations adopt those measures accordingly in 2011(UNEP, 2011). At a national level, the Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) of the United States has applied a standardizedrecording sheet to evaluate the status of marine debris in the Gulfof Mexico along coasts of the United States since 1996 (Sheavly,2010). Korea took notice of this issue in 1999 and began to makeplans to reduce marine debris in 2003 (Jung et al., 2010). As forthe private sector, the Ocean Conservancy launched the Interna-tional Coastal Cleanup (ICC) plan in 1986 to create long-termmonitoring and surveys of the amount and types of coastal debris.The ICC plan became an international plan in 1989, and 97 coun-tries and regions were participants in this plan as of 2012 (TheOcean Conservancy, 2013).

ebris in

2 F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

In Taiwan, there were limited information and actions taken inrelation to marine debris until the government adopted CoastCoastal Environment Cleanup Operation Guidelines in 1997(Environment Protection Administration, 1997). The number ofparticipants and amount of marine debris cleared varied betweenyears, which was highest in 2004 and decreased thereafter(Fig. 1). On the other hand, Taiwan Kuroshio Education Foundation,launched a plan to remove beach debris in 2000. Beginning in2005, Tainan Community University has monitored marine debrisat the Erren River estuary once per month for the duration of threehours each time (Tainan Community University, 2013). Beginningin 2008, the Society of Wilderness has conducted beach cleanupsat 26 locations in Taiwan. In 2010, a number of non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) formed the Taiwan Ocean Cleanup Alliance(TOCA), invited many organizations to adopt and monitor thecoasts of Taiwan, and established a marine debris database as abasis for analysis and policy formulation (The Society ofWilderness, 2013). The participants increased from 370 in 2010to 6945 in 2012 (The Ocean Conservancy, 2010; The OceanConservancy, 2013). The percentage of shoreline and recreationalactivities (76.9%) and ocean/waterway activities (14.2%) of Taiwanwere higher than Global average (64.7% and 9.0% respectively). Thepercentage of smoking-related activities (7.3%), dumping activities(1.0%), and medical/personal hygiene (0.5%) of Taiwan were lowerthan global average (22.1%, 2.2%, and 2.0% respectively) (The OceanConservancy, 2013). Recent research in southern Taiwan showedthe percentage of plastic bags, and plastic bottles were lower thanNMDMP (National Marine Debris Program of the US EnvironmentalProtection Agency). The possible reason is the ‘‘Plastic RestrictionPolicy’’ and the ‘‘Compulsory Trash-sorting Policy’’ adopted andimplemented by Taiwan Environmental Agency since 2002 (Liuet al., 2013).

Because of the growing concern regarding marine debris, thefirst step to take when formulating administrative measures is tounderstand the types and composition of coastal debris. Lots stud-ies have been conducted in the northern South China Sea, Chile, thecoastline of Japan, the Hawaiian Islands, the Falkland Islands, SouthAustralia, California, and west coast of the United States, withstudy sites including beaches, the sea surface, and the seafloor(Dameron et al., 2007; Edyvane et al., 2004; Keller et al., 2010;Moore et al., 2001; Otley and Ingham, 2003; Shiomoto andKameda, 2005; Thiel et al., 2003; Zhou et al., 2011). More weredone in sandy beaches than rocky shores (Thiel et al., 2013). In thisstudy, the amount and composition of marine debris were exam-ined along the northern coast of Taiwan, an area with the highestpopulation density in Taiwan. Characteristics and possible differ-ences in marine debris with seasons, tide types, locations, and

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Per

son

(100

0)

Coa

stal

Deb

ris

(100

0 m

t)

Weight(mt) Persons

Fig. 1. Outcome of coastal areas cleanup program resources: yearbook of environ-ment protection statistics of Republic of China, 2003–2013.

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigationorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolb

topographies were analyzed and used as a reference for planningmitigation measures and for proposing further administrativesuggestions.

2. Materials and methods

The coastline of New Taipei City in Taiwan is 122 km long and istortuous, complex, and rich in marine abrasion terrain. There are asmall number of beaches on the coast, along with 26 fishing ports.Twenty-six candidate sites that were accessible by foot, were atleast 100 m long, and contained well-defined topography wereselected and divided into two regions (E: east, W: west) and threetypes of topography (S: sandy beach, R: rocky shore, F: fishingport). Among them, 6 experiment sites were randomly chosen.These randomly chosen sites included Baishawan (SW), Jiashawan(SE), Jianzilu (RW), Longdong (RE), Tamsui fishing port (FW), andAodi fishing port (FE) (Fig. 2).

According to the location at which the debris was found, marinedebris was classified into three types: seafloor marine debris(SMD), floating marine debris (FMD), and beached marine debris(BMD) (Zhou et al., 2011). Depending on the location, one or moreof the following six methods could be used in the investigation ofthis debris: trawl net, diving facility, diver, snorkeling, sonar, andmanta tow. In particular, the strip transect method is applicableto the study of FMD and BMD (Hinojosa and Thiel, 2009;Shiomoto and Kameda, 2005; Thiel et al., 2003; Titmus andHyrenbach, 2011). In this research, the strip transect method wasused to estimate the density of debris (item/m2), and the rangeof the investigation was set to be 100 m � 10 m.

Because the amount and composition of marine debris could beaffected by the time of year and the tides (Thornton and Jackson,1998), the period from June of 2012 to May of 2013 was dividedinto four seasons in this study, including June to August 2012(summer), September to November 2012 (autumn), December2012 to February 2013 (winter), and March to May 2013 (spring)(Central Weather Bureau, 2013). During each season, we carriedout one survey within 24 h after the spring tide and another within24 h after the neap tide, amounting to a total of 48 surveys (3 geog-raphy types � 2 areas � 4 seasons � 2 tides).

As for the classification of marine debris, we classified the deb-ris into nine categories and 57 items based on information in theliterature (Keller et al., 2010; The Ocean Conservancy, 2010; Liuet al., 2013; Thiel et al., 2013) and on types found in pre-testrecordings. These nine categories are listed as follows: (1) generalplastic, including plastic bags, plastic bottles, plastic cups, cigarettebutts, and plastic fragments; (2) paper, including paper bags, andaluminum foil bags; (3) polystyrene, including disposable table-ware and fishing supplies; (4) metal, including iron aluminumcans, household appliances, and batteries; (5) glass, such as glassbottles and light bulbs; (6) rubber, such as tires, fishing boat fend-ers, and shoes; (7) fabric, including clothing, (8) nylon, includingfishing nets, and ropes; and (9) other, including disposable chop-sticks, furniture, and barbeque supplies.

The sources of debris were classified into five major categoriesaccording to ICC standards. These categories include shorelineand recreational activities, smoking-related activities, ocean/waterway activities, dumping activities, and medical/personalhygiene (The Ocean Conservancy, 2010).

Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze the total amount,density, and standard errors of densities of debris for differentsites, topographies, tides, and seasons. Because of a relatively smallsample size and, most likely, a non-normal distribution, we appliedthe Kruskal–Wallis H test to analyze the differences between thesites, topographies, seasons, and tide types (Keller, 2009) andemployed a post hoc multiple comparison of Duncan’s multiple

n of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris inul.2014.04.019

Fig. 2. Location of the survey sites in New Taipei City, Taiwan.

1.0

)

F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 3

range test to determine the differences between various groups.The analyses above were performed using SPSS 19.0.

0.614

0.182 0.133

0.165

0.023 0.047

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

fishing portAodi

fishing port

Den

sity

(it

em/m

2 (a)

0.398

0.149

0.035

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Den

sity

(it

em/m

2)

(b)

0.101

0.198 0.309

0.169

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Jianzilu Longdong Baishawan Jiashawan Tamsui

Rocky shores Sandy beaches Fishing ports

Spring Summer Autumn Winter

Den

sity

(it

em/m

2)

(c)

0.241

0.4

0.6

ity

(ite

m/m

2)

(d)

3. Results

3.1. Density

The 48 surveys recorded a total of 9319 items of debris. Thenumber of debris items was highest (1165) after the spring tideduring the second season at Jianzilu and lowest (2) after the springtide during the fourth season at Tamsui fishing port. From the per-spective of site locations, the debris density was highest at Jianzilu(0.614 ± 0.309 items/m2) and was lowest at Tamsui port(0.023 ± 0.018 items/m2). There were significant differences inthe amount of debris between locations (H = 32.864, p < 0.001).The amount of debris at Jianzilu was significantly higher than thatat the other five locations, and there were no significant differencesbetween these other five observation sites (Fig. 3a).

From the perspective of topography, rocky shorelines containedthe most debris (0.398 ± 0.326 items/m2), followed by sandybeaches (0.149 ± 0.084 items/m2), and fishing ports had the leastdebris (0.035 ± 0.023 items/m2). There were significant differencesbetween the different topographies (H = 27.214, p < 0.001). Thedebris found on rocky shorelines was significantly more abundantthan that found on sandy beaches and in fishing ports, and therewas no significant difference between the amount of debris foundon sandy beaches and in fishing ports (Fig. 3b).

From the perspective of the seasons, the greatest density of deb-ris was found in autumn (0.309 ± 0.354 items/m2 on average), andthe lowest debris density was found in spring (0.101 ± 0.167 items/m2) (Fig. 3c). From the perspective of tide types, the density ofdebris was found to be 0.241 ± 0.287 items/m2 after spring tidesand 0.148 ± 0.187 items/m2 after neap tides (Fig. 3d). There wasno significant difference in the density of marine debris betweendifferent seasons or between different tide types (H = 5.712,p = 0.127 for season; H = 1.966, p = 0.161 for tides).

0.148

0.0

0.2

gnirpSpaeN

Den

s

Fig. 3. Density of debris and standard deviation of debris density in each (a)location, (b) topography, (c) season, and (d) tide type.

3.2. Composition

Among the 57 types of debris, plastic fragments accounted forthe highest percentage (33.58%), followed by bottle caps(13.34%), fishery polystyrene (6.30%), cigarette butts (6.01%), rope

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigation of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris innorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.04.019

4 F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

(4.08%), and plastic bags (3.82%). The percentage of other types ofdebris accounted for less than 3% of all debris found (Fig. 4a). Thedominant type of debris was plastic, accounting for 6695 items(71.84%), followed by polystyrene, with 761 items (8.17%), nylon(5.44%), paper (5.37%), and rubber (5.06%). Other types of debrisaccount for less than 5% of items found (Fig. 4b).

The most diverse types of debris were found at Jianzilu. Thedebris found at Jianzilu included significant higher percentage ofglass (2.18%). Relatively more polystyrene was found at Longdong(29.88%, Table 1). The type of debris at other locations was primar-ily plastic, polystyrene, nylon, and paper.

The Kruskal–Wallis test indicated that most types of debris var-ied with topography. The paper and others of debris did not exhibitsignificant differences (p = 0.08 and 0.05 respectively). Other typesof debris exhibited significant differences between the different

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 4. Composition of (a) types, (b) categories, and (c) sources.

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigationorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolb

topographies. Plastic was found in relatively high amount(91.04%) on sandy beaches, and lowest in rocky shores (56.7%).The proportion of polystyrene, nylon, rubber, glass, metal, and fab-rics in rocky shore was higher than that on sandy beaches and infishing ports (Table 1).

As for seasons and tide types, only paper debris varied signifi-cantly with seasons (p = 0.007). The percentage of paper debrisfound during the spring (1.71%) was lower than that in other sea-sons. Other types of debris did not vary significantly with season orwith tide type (Table 1).

3.3. Sources

Debris sources were primarily shoreline and recreationalactivities (7034 items, 75.48%), followed by boats and fishing activ-ity (1498 items, 16.07%). Products of smoke-related activitiesaccounted for 8.02% of debris. Very few dumping and health/med-ical supplies were found in the debris, amounting to only 36 and 4items, respectively, which accounts for less than 0.5% (Fig. 4c).

The amount of medical/personal hygiene supplies was very low,without significant differences between these locations (H = 7.302,p = 0.199). The rest of the debris types differed with location(Table 2). The proportion of shorelines and recreational debriswas highest (80.66%) at Jinshawan, and ocean/waterway activitydebris (43.98%) was highest in Longdong. Products of smoke-related activities were relatively low at Longdong (0.68%) (Table 2).

As for differences between topography types, the amount ofmedical/personal hygiene was very low at all topography types,without significant differences between the topographies(H = 2.086, p = 0.352). All of the other types of debris sourcesexhibited significant differences between topographies (Table 2).Recreational debris accounted for the highest percentage of debris(79.16%) on sandy beaches. The proportion of debris resulting fromocean/waterway activities (30.91%), and dumping (0.57%) was rel-atively high on rocky shorelines, and products of smoke-relatedactivities accounted for a relatively low (2.19%). Sources of debrisdid not vary significantly with season and tide type (Table 2).

4. Discussion

4.1. Shoreline characteristics

The results indicated that the amount of debris is affected bytopography. The summation of plastic, paper, and polystyrene ofsandy beaches and fishing ports were more than 90%. The typesof marine debris in rocky shores were diversified with high density,and relatively high percentages of polystyrene, glass, metal, fabricand rubber. A survey in California also indicates that there is moredebris in rocky shore areas than that on sandy beaches. There arerelatively more beach cleaning activities on sandy beaches,whereas beach cleanup is relatively rare in rocky shore areas,and debris tends to become embedded in cracks between rocks,making it difficult to remove (Moore et al., 2001). In addition, therocky shorelines of northern Taiwan attract anglers, resulting inall types of refuse deposited on rocky shores.

On rocky shorelines, the amount of debris was highest at Jian-zilu. The survey results indicate that this location is open spacethat is managed by the local cleaning department. This area iscleaned once every month. Other locations included in the surveyare managed as scenic areas and are cleaned once a weak or asoften as every day. The fishing ports have an artificial topographyand are cleaned by local government every day, the amount of deb-ris is lowest in fishing ports. These results indicate that the amountof beach debris is affected by cleaning frequency.

n of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris inul.2014.04.019

Table 1Percentage of marine debris by categories by topography.

Sources Plastic Polystyrene Nylon Paper Rubber Metal Glass Fabric Other

Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

LocationJianzilu 66.70%c 11.28% 6.54%b 2.38% 6.63%a 3.56% 5.23% 3.13% 8.65%a 11.71% 1.82%a 2.34% 2.18%a 1.67% 1.07%a 1.20% 1.17%a 0.87%Longdong 46.75%d 23.22% 29.88%a 10.76% 7.16%a 4.06% 2.43% 1.97% 5.14%a 6.32% 5.20%a 11.44% 0.50%b 0.52% 2.55%a 5.80% 0.38%b 0.82%Baishawan 95.04%a 6.33% 0.61%b 1.29% 0.98%b 1.01% 2.20% 2.75% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.28%b 0.52% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.90%b 2.11%Jinshawan 87.04%a,b 9.32% 2.05%b 3.05% 2.53%b 1.51% 5.84% 6.14% 1.14%b 1.56% 0.05%b 0.13% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 1.35%a 1.12%Aodi port 75.89%b,c 14.81% 4.27%b 4.21% 2.99%b 2.94% 16.14% 13.52% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.69%b 1.96%Tamsui port 80.74%a,b,c 15.88% 8.84%b 13.61% 2.48%b 4.09% 7.67% 7.80% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.27%b 0.77%p <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.062 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.01

TopographyRocky shores 56.73% c 20.42% 18.21%a 14.21% 6.89%a 3.69% 3.83% 2.91% 6.90%a 9.27% 3.51%a 8.16% 1.34%a 1.48% 1.81%a 4.11% 0.78% 0.91%Sandy Beaches 91.04%a 8.73% 1.33%b 2.38% 1.76%b 1.48% 4.02% 4.96% 0.57%b 1.22% 0.02%b 0.09% 0.14%b 0.38% 0.00%b 0.00% 1.12% 1.65%Fishing Ports 78.31% b 15.05% 6.56%b 10.01% 2.74%b 3.45% 11.91% 11.53% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.48% 1.46%p <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.083 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.05

SeasonSpring 77.73% 29.45% 10.44% 15.63% 3.35% 5.32% 1.71%b 2.59% 0.93% 2.01% 2.92% 9.59% 0.32% 0.73% 1.66% 4.81% 0.96% 1.74%Summer 68.04% 17.43% 11.26% 13.29% 4.28% 2.32% 9.67%a 7.17% 4.04% 10.63% 0.61% 1.51% 0.95% 1.67% 0.06% 0.20% 1.09% 1.86%Autumn 75.29% 19.59% 7.79% 10.99% 3.35% 4.02% 8.23%a 10.93% 3.69% 5.72% 0.65% 1.66% 0.43% 0.81% 0.09% 0.23% 0.48% 0.87%Winter 80.39% 14.49% 5.30% 8.45% 4.20% 2.97% 6.73%a 8.45% 1.30% 1.87% 0.53% 1.14% 0.28% 0.66% 0.61% 1.11% 0.65% 0.73%p 0.198 0.324 0.266 0.007 0.549 0.905 0.634 0.606 0.827

TideNeap tide 72.09% 24.86% 10.79% 14.61% 4.08% 4.39% 5.30% 6.15% 3.49% 8.36% 1.68% 6.79% 0.55% 1.26% 1.09% 3.44% 0.93% 1.65%Spring tide 78.64% 15.74% 6.61% 9.06% 3.51% 3.00% 7.88% 9.82% 1.49% 2.31% 0.68% 1.57% 0.43% 0.83% 0.11% 0.46% 0.66% 1.04%p 0.529 0.594 0.959 0.521 0.827 0.693 0.920 0.203 0.637

Note: 1. Significant difference is defined as p<0.05. 2. When there was significant difference among groups, the a,b,c,or d were added to show the difference. The groups with the same a,b,c, or d implied they were homogeneous, andthose with different letters were significantly different from the others.

F.-J.Kuo,H

.-W.H

uang/M

arinePollution

Bulletinxxx

(2014)xxx–

xxx5

Pleasecite

thisarticle

inpress

as:K

uo,F.-J.,Hu

ang,H.-W

.Strategyfor

mitigation

ofmarine

debris:A

nalysisofsources

andcom

positionofm

arinedebris

innorthern

Taiwan

.Mar.Pollut.Bull.(2014),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.m

arpolbul.2014.04.019

Table 2Percentage of marine debris by sources by topography.

Sources Shoreline & recreational Ocean/waterway Smoking-related Dumping Medial/personal hygiene

Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE Mean SE

LocationJianzilu 77.68%a 7.10% 17.84%b 8.91% 3.71%b,c 3.98% 0.59%a 0.51% 0.18% 0.42%Longdong 54.79%b 13.43% 43.98%a 13.87% 0.68%c 0.90% 0.55%a 0.79% 0.00% 0.00%Baishawan 77.67%a 20.31% 1.20%d 1.01% 21.10%a 19.59% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.04% 0.11%Jinshawan 80.66%a 11.40% 4.02%c,d 2.49% 15.10%a,b 9.87% 0.22%a,b 0.63% 0.00% 0.00%Aodi port 71.27%a,b 14.02% 5.78%c,d 5.36% 22.94%a 13.89% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%Tamsui port 59.86%b 22.00% 11.80%b,c 12.23% 28.34%a 20.24% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%p 0.006 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.199

TopographyRocky shores 66.23%b 15.73% 30.91%a 17.58% 2.19%b 3.20% 0.57%a 0.64% 0.09% 0.30%Sandy Beaches 79.16%a 15.99% 2.61%b 2.35% 18.10%a 15.30% 0.11%b 0.45% 0.02% 0.08%Fishing Ports 65.57%b 18.77% 8.79%b 9.64% 25.64%a 17.00% 0.00%b 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%p <0.001 <0.001 0.023 <0.001 0.352

SeasonSpring 71.31% 20.39% 14.71% 21.20% 13.63% 17.67% 0.25% 0.60% 0.10% 0.35%Summer 65.15% 14.15% 16.69% 16.43% 18.07% 17.27% 0.09% 0.23% 0.00% 0.00%Autumn 68.73% 22.06% 13.58% 17.92% 17.32% 19.25% 0.34% 0.69% 0.03% 0.09%Winter 76.10% 12.86% 11.43% 11.98% 12.22% 11.69% 0.23% 0.43% 0.02% 0.06%p 0.332 0.554 0.812 0.758 0.790

TideNeap tide 67.40% 19.04% 17.22% 19.28% 15.10% 16.26% 0.22% 0.55% 0.06% 0.25%Spring tide 73.24% 16.10% 10.99% 13.48% 15.52% 16.81% 0.24% 0.47% 0.01% 0.04%p 0.257 0.445 0.959 0.401 0.523

Note: 1. Significant difference is defined as p<0.05. 2. When there was significant difference among groups, the a,b,c,or d were added to show the difference. The groups withthe same a,b,c, or d implied they were homogeneous, and those with different letters weresignificantly different from the others.

6 F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

4.2. Debris types

From the perspective of debris types, plastic debris was found inthe highest abundance. The percentage of plastic in other studies ofmarine debris was found to be between 16% and 90% (Bugoni et al.,2001; Derraik, 2002; Keller et al., 2010; Stefatos et al., 1999; UNEP,2005; Viehman et al., 2011; Thiel et al., 2013). The total percentageof plastic of this research, including general plastic and nylon, was79.2%. The results indicate that plastic remains the main type ofmarine debris. Most likely, plastic is so prevalent among marinedebris because it is convenient and therefore widely used andbecause it does not decompose easily. Due to the plastic-limitationpolicy implemented since 2002 (Liu et al., 2013), the percentage ofplastic bags (3.82%) were lower than NMDMP (9.0%) and in southTaiwan (4.5%, Liu et al., 2013). However, there are higher percent-age of plastic fragments should be cautious (Cole et al., 2011;Desforges et al., 2014). In the past four decades, both the amountand mass concentration of micro-plastic debris in the North Pacificincreased by two order of magnitude (Goldstein et al., 2012).Micro-plastics were abundant throughout the subsurface watersof the NE Pacific Ocean. Greater plastic abundance was detectedin coastal stations compared to offshore waters. The increasednearshore plastic concentrations suggested that sources may bedue to fishing, recreational boating, and/or wastewater effluent(Desforges et al., 2014).

Polystyrene and nylon, accounting for the following percentageof marine debris, was mainly composed of fishing gears, such asfishery polystyrene, rope, and fishing nets. There are 26 fishingports and more than two thousand small-scale fishing vessels innorthern Taiwan. The Marine Pollution Control Act clearly declaresthat wastewater, oil, waste and other polluting substances shallremain on board or be discharged into on-shore reception facilities,and the Fishing Port Act has prohibited fishermen from discardinggarbage at port. However, there is little enforcement or no recyclepolicy for fishing gears. At least 30% fishermen admitted and theywould dispose the fishing net/gears into sea (Chen and Liu, 2013).The discarded fishing gear by those fishing vessels would becomemajor sources of marine debris.

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigationorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolb

4.3. Sources of debris

The source of debris was primarily domestic shoreline and rec-reational activities in this study, accounting for 75.48% of debrissources, which was higher than the global average in 2010(68.16%) and Taiwan in 2010 (68.29%) (The Ocean Conservancy,2010) and Kaohsiung (64.3%) in 2009–2010 (Liu et al., 2013), andsimilar to the result of Taiwan in 2012 (76.90%) (The OceanConservancy, 2013). Research in the South China Sea also showedmost of beach marine debris (95%) were not ocean-based sourcesbut land-based sources. Most of them were attributed to coastal/recreational activity, because of the effect of human activities(Zhou et al., 2011). This high percentage is likely caused by thehigh number of tourist trips in northern Taiwan, where there aremore than 13 million tourists annually (Tourism Bureau, 2013).Many tourists carry food and recreational equipment that are notproperly disposed of, leading to a higher percentage of recreationaldebris than that found in other studies. The highest percentage ofrecreational debris on sandy beaches is reasonable because greaternumber of tourists visit sandy beaches. In addition, although thereare regulations to prohibit discarded garbage, some tourists arestill discarding the garbage incorrectly due to limited trash recep-tacles and low enforcement.

The percentage of debris originating from vessel activity andfishery behavior was as high as 44% at Longdong. The KuroshioCurrent flows northeast of Taiwan and is the primary coastal fish-ing ground for Taiwan. There are also many fishing ports nearLongdong, resulting in the movement of DFG by ocean currentsand the accumulation of DFG in rocky terrain. The survey resultsare similar to the previous study in the Falkland Islands (Otleyand Ingham, 2003) indicated that 42% of the debris found at thatlocation is fishery debris. The Hawaiian Archipelago is recognizedas a hot spot for DFG (Dameron et al., 2007; Morishige andMcElwee, 2012), and there are frequent fishery activities in thisarea.

To reduce DFG, the Council of Agriculture of Taiwan entrustedNGOs to remove nets in offshore reef areas in 2002 and 2003(Chinese Diving Promotion Association and Chinese Diving

n of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris inul.2014.04.019

F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 7

Association, 2002; Chinese Taipei Diving Association et al., 2003),and some NGOs voluntarily removed debris on the seafloor ofKenting, southern Taiwan. However, these efforts have been verysporadic and fragmental because of limited sources of manpower,resulting in limited effects and in a considerable portion of DFGremaining on rocky shorelines.

4.4. Seasonal and tidal influence

Storm, tides, and El Niño might have impacts on marine debris.Debris deposition might be significantly greater during El Niñoevents as compared to La Niña events (Morishige et al., 2007). Itis also noted that typhoon Morakot pounded Taiwan in 2009, morethan three million trees fell and were washed away to occupy83.2% of the Taiwanese coastline, including 52 fishing harbors.Nearshore current and wave motion are the critical factors fordriftwood deposition (Doong et al., 2011).

For avoiding the results biased by extreme weather, thesesurveys are conducted only when there was no typhoon or bigstorm in previous weeks, especially in summer. As a result, therewas no significant difference between tides and season by thisresearch which is similar with the outcome in Chilean coast(Thiel et al., 2013).

4.5. Challenges and suggestions to reduce marine debris

In this research, most marine debris was domestic because itcould not be identified from foreign resources. Many researchesshowed that it is necessary to reduce marine debris to have localsolutions under the circumstances (Thiel et al., 2013; Zhou et al.,2011). This is to reiterate the importance to find the major sourceof marine debris and set priorities to reduce it.

In Taiwan, Article 5 of the Coastal Environment Cleanup Opera-tion Guidelines by Environment Protection Agency requires thatthe managing agency (local governments) should coordinate withschools, NGOs, and enterprises, or should employ workers toremove seashore refuse, thus educating the public and creatingjobs to alleviate the manpower shortage. However, due to budgetand personnel limitation, the implementation of the guidelines isnot monitored. For administrative regulations and enforcement,there are the Ocean Pollution Act and related regulations forprotection of marine water. However, law enforcement should bestrengthened to educate and warn tourists not to dispose littersin beaches.

Regarding the location and topography, this study found thatthere was a considerable amount of debris on rocky shorelineswith lower cleaning frequencies. These locations should be thepriorities for stronger cleanup measures.

Regarding the marine debris types, plastic debris accounted for65.95% of marine debris, clearly indicating that plastic is the maintype of marine debris. Since 2002, the Environmental ProtectionAdministration of Taiwan (EPA of Taiwan) has instituted restric-tions on the use of plastic shopping bags and disposable plastictableware. The promotion of this policy reduced the number ofplastic bags used by 58.34% and reduced the amount of plastic dis-posable tableware used by 86% in 2005 (Environment ProtectionAdministration Executive Yuan, 2013). Since 2011, the EPA ofTaiwan has encouraged national beverage chains and conveniencestores to set up recycling facilities for beverage cups and to providea NT $ 2–10 discount to consumers who bring their own reusablecups (Environment Protection Administration Executive Yuan,2013). The lower percentage of plastic bags from this researchmight be the effect of the plastic-limit policy. Therefore, if policiescan be effectively implemented, these policies should be able toreduce the amount of marine debris.

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigationnorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolb

In addition, the percentage of caps (13.08%) ranked secondamong individual debris items, and the amount of caps foundwas two to three times of that of PET bottles (2.23%) and of plasticdrinking bottles (2.09%). In Taiwan, at least 2.8 billion PET bottlesare used every year. Because of recycling incentives, 95% of thesePET bottles are recycled. However, half of these recycled bottlesdo not have caps. To address the prevalence of bottle caps amongmarine debris, government departments can improve upon theirpromotion of the recycling of bottle caps or can compile recyclingawards to encourage bottle recycling with caps.

Regarding the marine debris sources, the shorelines and recre-ation-type debris dominated northern Taiwan because there arelarge recreational population in that region. Education and advo-cacy are powerful tools, especially starting in childhood, and caneffectively change people’s habits (Derraik, 2002). Therefore, it issuggested that marine environmental education should be incor-porated into elementary and middle school curricula and activitiesto cleanup nearby beaches should be organized during the schoolyear. Meanwhile, to reduce the impacts of recreational activitieson nature, the concept of ‘‘Leave No Trace’’ should be promotedto the public, and event organizers should be requested to teachthe public to treat the environment properly with the correct atti-tude when hosting an event.

This study indicates that 16.1% of debris is DFG. This percentageis rather high. There are nearly 20,000 coastal and offshore vesselsin Taiwan, yet still no strategies or proposed measures exists toencourage the recycling of fishing gear. Jones (1995) suggested thatfishermen should be taught ways to improve waste disposal facil-ities at ports and to use non-plastic bait containers and fishing netrecycling programs to reduce fishery waste. It has been noted thatthe United States, Korea, and Japan have implemented fishing gearbuyback programs, and DFG and marine debris can then beconverted to energy (Dong-Oh, 2009; NOAA, 2013; Noh et al.,2010; Fishing Grounds Resources Division, 2013). Hence, althoughrecycling fishing gear may be time-consuming and may reducecabin space on a ship, the recycling of this gear can serve multiplepurposes if fishermen are educated to understand its significance.It is suggested that the Fishery Agency could reward fishermenwho recycle DFG, and the EPA of Taiwan develops or introducestechnology to convert recycled DFG into renewable energy.

4.6. Further research

Because of the lack of public concern regarding marine debris,of manpower, and of funding in Taiwan, the understanding ofmarine debris is still incomplete, and it is important that limitedexisting resources are integrated into the investigation of marinedebris. Taking other countries as examples, the United States Gov-ernment created the interagency Task Force on Persistent MarineDebris and passing the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Con-trol Act in 1980s. Furthermore, the Interagency Marine DebrisCoordinating Committee (IMDCC) is established in 2004 tostrengthen the coordination among agencies. The IMDCC providesthe mechanism to ensure that these agencies increase their coordi-nation to address marine debris (NOAA, 2012). In addition, manyresearch organizations and institutions, NGOs, and yacht sailorsconducted marine debris monitoring while at sea. Their effortsare supported by agencies in the U.S. Federal government such asEPA and NOAA. For Korea, since 1999, Korea has developed strate-gies and measures to address marine debris. Korea proposed indi-vidual plans in 2003, including the Practical Integrated System forMarine Debris that proposed 4 innovative devices (Jung et al.,2010). Drawing from these aforementioned national practices,Taiwan could exploit existing research vessels from the FisheriesResearch Institute, Coast Guard Administration patrol boats, andother official boats to coordinate with current public affairs groups

of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris inul.2014.04.019

8 F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

to investigate marine debris in surrounding waters. Moreover, thegovernment of Taiwan could employ trawl boats to survey sub-marine debris, encourage fishermen to bring back salvaged marinedebris, and also develop or introduce equipments for investigatingand processing marine debris.

5. Conclusion

In this study, we conducted a detailed investigation of coastaldebris in the most densely populated area in northern Taiwan byanalyzing the variation in this debris with respect to seasons,topographies, compositions, and types of debris. This study is thefirst systematic investigation and analysis of marine debris inTaiwan on different topographies and during different seasonsand tides. The results indicate that the amount of debris varieswith site location, cleaning frequency, and the number of visitors,and no significant difference between seasons and tides. Thediversity and amount of debris were found to be highest on rockyshorelines, where debris from recreation and fishing gear wasrelatively high and where the percentage of plastic, polystyreneand nylon debris was highest. The amount of debris was relativelylow on sandy beaches and in fishing ports, where the cleaningfrequency is high and the cleaning difficulty is low.

Based on our analyses, it is suggested that the following actionsbe taken (1) Elimination: increase the cleaning frequency on rockyshores, install more trash bins, and strengthen law enforcement incoast areas; (2) Reduce: continue and reinforce the plastic-limitpolicy in Taiwan, and strengthen the promotion of bottle cap recy-cling; (3) Education: promote marine environmental education,with a goal of debris-free coasts, and organize beach-cleaningactivities to reduce the debris caused by the recreational popula-tion; (4) Recycle: to encourage fishermen to recycle fishing gearand to turn that gear into energy sources; and (5) Research: collab-oration between agencies and combine marine research vesselsand coastal patrols to establish a supervisory mechanism toobserve and control marine debris.

References

Baird, R.W., Hooker, S.K., 2000. Ingestion of plastic and unusual prey by a juvenileHarbour Porpoise. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 40, 719–720.

Bugoni, L., Krause, L.g., Virgı́nia Petry, M., 2001. Marine debris and human impactson sea turtles in southern Brazil. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 42, 1330–1334.

Carpenter, E.J., Anderson, S.J., Harvey, G.R., Miklas, H.P., Peck, B.B., 1972. Polystyrenespherules in coastal waters. Science 178, 749–750.

Central Weather Bureau, 2013. Analysis of Taiwan Seasonal Weather (in Chinese).http://www.cwb.gov.tw/V7/climate/climate_info/monitoring/monitoring_3.html.

Chen, C.-L., Liu, T.-K., 2013. Fill the gap: developing management strategies tocontrol garbage pollution from fishing vessels. Marine Policy 40, 34–40.

Chinese Diving Promotion Association, Chinese Diving Association, 2002. Report ofMonitoring of artifical reefs and cleanup of ghost nets in 2002 (in Chinese).Fisheries Agency, Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan.

Chinese Taipei Diving Association, Chinese Society of Natural Photography, ChineseUnderwater Activities Association, 2003. Report of Monitoring of artifical reefsand cleanup of ghost nets in 2003 (in Chinese). Fisheries Agency, Council ofAgriculture, Executive Yuan.

Cole, M., Lindeque, P., Halsband, C., Galloway, T.S., 2011. Microplastics ascontaminants in the marine environment: A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin62, 2588–2597.

Dameron, O.J., Parke, M., Albins, M.A., Brainard, R., 2007. Marine debrisaccumulation in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands: an examination of ratesand processes. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 54, 423–433.

Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: areview. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44, 842–852.

Desforges, J.-P.W., Galbraith, M., Dangerfield, N., Ross, P.S., 2014. Widespreaddistribution of microplastics in subsurface seawater in the NE Pacific Ocean.Mar. Pollut. Bull. 79, 94–99.

Dong-Oh, C., 2009. The incentive program for fishermen to collect marine debris inKorea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 58, 415–417.

Doong, D.-J., Chuang, H.-C., Shieh, C.-L., Hu, J.-H., 2011. Quantity, distribution, andimpacts of coastal driftwood triggered by a typhoon. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 1446–1454.

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigationorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolb

Edyvane, K.S., Dalgetty, A., Hone, P.W., Higham, J.S., Wace, N.M., 2004. Long-termmarine litter monitoring in the remote Great Australian Bight, South Australia.Mar. Pollut. Bull. 48, 1060–1075.

Environment Protection Administration, 1997. Coastal Environment CleanupOperation Guidelines, EPA, Taiwan (Ed.), No. 35666. EPA, Taipei, Taiwan.

Environment Protection Administration Executive Yuan, 2013. Introduction toResources Recycling (in Chinese). EPA. http://www.ttv.com.tw/3r/Reduce/p16.htm.

Fishing Grounds Resources Division, 2013. Management of Fishing grounds:Strategies for Fishing, drifting debris mitigation in fishing grounds (inJapanese). In: Fishing Grounds Resources Division, Fisheries Agency, Japan (Ed.).

Goldstein, M.C., Rosenberg, M., Cheng, L., 2012. Increased oceanic microplasticdebris enhances oviposition in an endemic pelagic insect. Biol. Lett.. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2012.0298.

Gramentz, D., 1988. Involvement of loggerhead turtle with the plastic, metal, andhydrocarbon pollution in the Central Mediterranean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 19, 11–13.

Grassle, J.F., Lassere, P., McIntyre, A.D., Ray, G.C., 1991. Marine biodiversity andecosystem function. Biol. Int. Special Issue 23, 1–19.

Hinojosa, I.A., Thiel, M., 2009. Floating marine debris in fjords, gulfs and channels ofsouthern Chile. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 58, 341–350.

Hong, S., Lee, J., Jang, Y.C., Kim, Y.J., Kim, H.J., Han, D., Hong, S.H., Kang, D., Shim, W.J.,2013. Impacts of marine debris on wild animals in the coastal area of Korea.Mar. Pollut. Bull. 66, 117–124.

Jones, M.M., 1995. Fishing debris in the Australian marine environment. Mar. Pollut.Bull. 30, 25–33.

Jung, R.-T., Sung, H.G., Chun, T.-B., Keel, S.-I., 2010. Practical engineering approachesand infrastructure to address the problem of marine debris in Korea. Mar.Pollut. Bull. 60, 1523–1532.

Keller, G., 2009. Managerial statistics, eighth ed. South-Western Cengage Learning.Keller, A.A., Fruh, E.L., Johnson, M.M., Simon, V., McGourty, C., 2010. Distribution

and abundance of anthropogenic marine debris along the shelf and slope of theUS West Coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 692–700.

Laist, D.W., 1987. Overview of the biological effects of lost and discarded plasticdebris in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18, 319–326.

Liu, T.-K., Wang, M.-W., Chen, P., 2013. Influence of waste management policy onthe characteristics of beach litter in Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Mar. Poll. Bull. 72, 99–106.

Moore, S.L., Gregorio, D., Carreon, M., Weisberg, S.B., Leecaster, M.K., 2001.Composition and distribution of beach debris in Orange County, California.Mar. Pollut. Bull. 42, 241–245.

Morishige, C., McElwee, K., 2012. At-sea detection of derelict fishing gear in theNorth Pacific: an overview. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 65, 1–6.

Morishige, C., Donohue, M.J., Flint, E., Swenson, C., Woolaway, C., 2007. Factorsaffecting marine debris deposition at French Frigate Shoals, NorthwesternHawaiian Islands Marine National Monument, 1990–2006. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 54,1162–1169.

Moser, M.L., Lee, D.S., 1992. A fourteen-year survey of plastic ingestion by westernNorth Atlantic seabirds. Colonial Waterbirds 15, 83–94.

Mouat, J., Lopez Lozano, R., Bateson, H., 2010. Economic Impacts of Marine Litter.KIMO, Shetland.

NOAA, 2007. NOAA’s marine debris program. In: Commerce, U.S.D.o. (Ed.). NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.

NOAA, 2011a. Facts About Marine Debris & How You Can Help. National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration, U.S..

NOAA, 2011b. Understanding and preventing marine debris. National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration.

NOAA, 2012. 2010–2011 Progress report on the implementation of the MarineDebris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act. Silver Spring, p. 63.

NOAA, 2013. Fishing for energy. In: NOAA (Ed.), USA. http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/partnerships/fishing-energy. Access date: March 1 2014.

Noh, H.J., Kim, H.K., Kim, S.D., Han, S.G., 2010. Buyback Program for Fishing Gear andMarine Litter from Fishery Activities. In: Marine Environmental EmergencyPreparedness and Response Regional Activity Centre (Ed.), Republic of Korea.

Otley, H., Ingham, R., 2003. Marine debris surveys at Volunteer Beach, FalklandIslands, during the summer of 2001/02. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 46, 1534–1539.

Ryan, P.G., 1988. Effects of ingested plastic on seabird feeding: evidence fromchickens. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 19, 125–128.

Schrey, E., Vauk, G.J.M., 1987. Records of entangled gannets (Sula bassana) atHelgoland, German Bight. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18, 350–352.

Sheavly, S.B., 2010. National marine debris monitoring program-lessons learned.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Oceans and Coastal Protection Division,Marine Pollution Control Branch.

Shiomoto, A., Kameda, T., 2005. Distribution of manufactured floating marine debrisin near-shore areas around Japan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 50, 1430–1432.

Stefatos, A., Charalampakis, M., Papatheodorou, G., Ferentinos, G., 1999. Marinedebris on the seafloor of the mediterranean sea: examples from two enclosedgulfs in western greece. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 38, 389–393.

Tainan Community University, 2013. Long-term monitoring of beach litters (inChinese). http://163.26.52.242/~beach/.

Tarpley, R.J., Marwitz, S., 1993. Plastic debris ingestion by cetaceans along the Texascoast: two case reports. Aquatic Mammals 19, 93–98.

Ocean Conservancy, 2010. Trash travels 2010 report, U.S. The Ocean Conservancy.The Ocean Conservancy, 2013. 2012 Ocean trash index. The Ocean Conservancy.The Society of Wilderness, 2013. Introduction to Taiwanese Ocean Cleanup Alliance

(in Chinese). http://ocean.sow.org.tw.

n of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris inul.2014.04.019

F.-J. Kuo, H.-W. Huang / Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 9

Thiel, M., Hinojosa, I., Vásquez, N., Macaya, E., 2003. Floating marine debris incoastal waters of the SE-Pacific (Chile). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 46, 224–231.

Thiel, M., Hinojosa, I.A., Miranda, L., Pantoja, J.F., Rivadeneira, M.M., Vásquez, N.,2013. Anthropogenic marine debris in the coastal environment: a multi-yearcomparison between coastal waters and local shores. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 71, 307–316.

Thornton, L., Jackson, N.L., 1998. Spatial and temporal variations in debrisaccumulation and composition on an estuarine shoreline, Cliffwood Beach,New Jersey, USA. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 36, 705–711.

Titmus, A.J., Hyrenbach, K.D., 2011. Habitat associations of floating debris andmarine birds in the North East Pacific Ocean at coarse and meso spatial scales.Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 2496–2506.

Tourism Bureau, 2013. Statistic Databs. In: Tourism Bureau, Minister of Trans-portation, Taipei, Taiwan.

Please cite this article in press as: Kuo, F.-J., Huang, H.-W. Strategy for mitigationnorthern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolb

UNEP, 2005. UNEP 2005 – Marine litter, an analytical overview, Nairobi, Kenya.UNEP, 2011. The Honolulu Strategy: a global framework for prevention and

management of marine debris.USEPA, 2012. Marine Debris Impacts. United States Environmental Proction Agency,

U.S.Viehman, S., Vander Pluym, J.L., Schellinger, J., 2011. Characterization of

marine debris in North Carolina salt marshes. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62,2771–2779.

Winston, J.E., 1982. Drift plastic – an expanding niche for a marine invertebrate?Mar. Pollut. Bull. 13, 348–351.

Zhou, P., Huang, C., Fang, H., Cai, W., Li, D., Li, X., Yu, H., 2011. The abundance,composition and sources of marine debris in coastal seawaters or beachesaround the northern South China Sea (China). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 1998–2007.

of marine debris: Analysis of sources and composition of marine debris inul.2014.04.019