IMIS | Lifewatch regional portal

You are here


[ report an error in this record ]basket (0): add | show Print this page

Effects of acoustic alarms, designed to reduce small cetacean bycatch in gillnet fisheries, on the behaviour of North Sea fish species in a large tank
Kastelein, R.A.; Van der Heul, S.; Van der Veen, J.; Verboom, W.C.; Jennings, N.; de Haan, D.; Reijnders, P.J.H. (2007). Effects of acoustic alarms, designed to reduce small cetacean bycatch in gillnet fisheries, on the behaviour of North Sea fish species in a large tank. Mar. Environ. Res. 64(2): 160-180.
In: Marine Environmental Research. Applied Science Publishers: Barking. ISSN 0141-1136; e-ISSN 1879-0291, more
Peer reviewed article  

Available in  Authors 

    Arrays > Acoustic arrays
    Equipment > Acoustic equipment > Sound generators > Pingers
    Locomotion > Swimming
    Marine biology
    Physics > Acoustics
    Sound > Noise (sound) > Underwater noise
    Water bodies > Inland waters > Ponds > Fish ponds
    Cetacea [WoRMS]; Clupea harengus Linnaeus, 1758 [WoRMS]; Clupeidae Cuvier, 1816 [WoRMS]; Dicentrarchus labrax (Linnaeus, 1758) [WoRMS]; Gadiformes [WoRMS]; Gadus morhua Linnaeus, 1758 [WoRMS]; Serranidae Swainson, 1839 [WoRMS]
Author keywords
    acoustics; cetaceans; cod; ecology; herring; noise pollution;odontocetes; pingers; pout; sea bass; thicklip mullet; underwater sound

Authors  Top 
  • Kastelein, R.A.
  • Van der Heul, S., more
  • Van der Veen, J.
  • Verboom, W.C.
  • Jennings, N.
  • de Haan, D., more
  • Reijnders, P.J.H., more

    World-wide many cetaceans drown incidentally in fishing nets. To reduce the unwanted bycatch in gillnets, pingers (acoustic alarms) have been developed that are attached to the nets. In the European Union, pingers will be made compulsory in some areas in 2005 and in others in 2007. However, pingers may effect non-target marine fauna such as fish. Therefore in this study, the effects of seven commercially-available pingers on the behaviour of five North Sea fish species in a large tank were quantified. The species tested were: sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax), pout (Trisopterus luscus), thicklip mullet (Chelon labrosus), herring (Clupea harengus), and cod (Gadus morhua). The fish were housed as single-species schools of 9-13 individuals in a tank. The behaviour of fish in quiet periods was compared with their behaviour during periods with active pingers. The results varied both between pingers and between fish species. Sea bass decreased their speed in response to one pinger and swam closer to the surface in response to another. Thicklip mullet swam closer to the bottom in response to two pingers and increased their swimming speed in response to one pinger. Herring swam faster in response to one pinger, and pout and cod (close relatives) showed no behavioural responses to any of the pingers. Of the seven pingers tested, four elicited responses in at least one fish species, and three elicited no responses. Whether similar responses would be elicited in these fish species in the wild, and if so, whether such responses would influence the catch rate of fisheries, cannot be derived from the results of this study. However, the results indicate the need for field studies with pingers and fish. Based on the small number of fish species tested, the present study suggests that the higher the frequency of a pinger, the less likely it is to affect the behaviour of marine fish.

All data in the Integrated Marine Information System (IMIS) is subject to the VLIZ privacy policy Top | Authors