view pdf - Seas At Risk

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The results of this programme have not been categorised into separate items but the followingchart illustrates that weight of marine litter has remained relatively constant during the periodbetween 2000-2007 (figure 2.17).Figure 2.17 Amount of litter collected in the Fishing for litter project 2000-2007 in kgDuring the clean up of anchor areas, the North Sea Directorate of the Dutch Government in 2006conducted a survey of the items collected from the seabed. A total of 9 steel items, 19 anchors,3 cylinders, 3 steel threads, 1 chain and 9 unidentified items were observed. In 2007 a total of26 items were removed from the same area.In Sweden it is estimated that there is 10000m3 of marine litter on the seabed in Swedish watersalthough no further information was given to support this estimate. Germany currently has no basisfor reliably estimating the amounts of litter disposed of at sea. The Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrtund Hydrographie (Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency) conducts a yearly pollutionanalysis that is based on reports by government ships and surveillance flights on pollutionincidents in internal and coastal waters. Incidents within the German EEZ are broken down into thefollowing categories: oil, chemicals, garbage, sewage water, others and not identifiable. Twelvegarbage incidents were reported in 2006 for German North Sea waters, two of which occurred ininternal waters.In addition to the research carried out by Thompson et al., KIMO Sweden has also assessed theabundance of microscopic plastic particles in the μm to mm size range in Swedish west coastwaters. Water samples were taken from nineteen locations and analysed to determine theconcentration of micro plastic particles. A considerably higher amount of micro plastic particleswas found when an 80µm mesh, compared to a 450µm mesh, was used to concentrate the watersamples. Up to 100000 times higher concentrations, 150-2400 per m 3 , of small plastic fibers wereretained on a 80µm mesh with the highest concentration found locally in the harbour outside apolyethylene production plant at 102 000 per m 3 .In the United Kingdom KIMO UK has been coordinating the Fishing for Litter (FFL) Scotlandproject, operating in the same manner as in the Netherlands, with fishing boats collecting littercaught in their nets as part of the normal fishing activity and taking it ashore in large bags. Theproject started in 2005 with two harbours and has now increased its coverage to 9 major landingharbours in the North Sea Region with 54 mainly large bottom trawlers registered to the scheme.Over the 3-year period 64 tonnes of marine litter were collected with the amounts significantlyincreasing as the project progressed. The quarterly tonnages are outlined in Figure 2.18 below.However as vessels were added to the scheme over time it is not possible to assess any trends inthe amount of litter taken ashore but the results do illustrate that seabed marine litter is commonthroughout the Region if in differing concentrations.18
FFL Scotland Tonnages302520Tonnes1510501st 05/06 2nd 05/06 3rd 05/06 4th 05/06 1st 06/07 2nd 06/07 3rd 06/07 4th 06/07 1st 07/08 2nd 07/08 3rd 07/08 4th 07/08YearsFigure 2.18 Tonnages of marine litter collected by FFL Scotland. In the Greater North SeaThere is no quantitative data for the Belgian sea area and qualitatively the amount varies greatlywith prevailing winds and is also subject to influx from the English Channel (including cargo lossesand wreckages) and beyond. The floating fraction is highly variable and depends on weatherconditions and events such as storms (with cargo loss, losses off fisheries gear etc.) in the EnglishChannel. In the subsurface fraction, although the exact amounts are not known, there is oftengarbage (such as plastic bags).2.1.2.3 The Celtic <strong>Seas</strong>As part of the Fishing for Litter Scotland initiative KIMO UK also coordinates the project in6 harbours in the Celtic Sea area. Over the three years from 2005 31 tonnes of marine litter wascollected from the seabed by 48 vessels, mainly smaller inshore boats, again as not all theharbours were operating from the start the tonnages increased as the project progressed (seefigure 2.19 below). Again it is not possible to assess any trends.19
Page 3: Marine litter in theNorth-East Atla
Page 8 and 9: ContentsAssessment of the Marine Li
Page 10 and 11: Figure 2.20 Proportion of different
Page 12 and 13: This report along with others from
Page 16 and 17: Figure 2.2 Most common (total numbe
Page 18 and 19: Table 2.1 Total amount of rubbish c
Page 20 and 21: levels. Despite this drop, overall
Page 22 and 23: average density for the UK (2,054/k
Page 24 and 25: litter in the North-East Atlantic.
Page 26 and 27: Figure 2.15 Fulmars feeding at sea
Page 30 and 31: Celtic Seas16141210Tonnes864201st 0
Page 34 and 35: The Dutch Seabird Group collected 2
Page 38 and 39: Figure 2.28 below represents types
Page 40 and 41: Table 2.5 Source-specific indicator
Page 42 and 43: % Recreational & Beachvisitors% Fis
Page 44: 2.3.1.4 Bay of Biscay and Iberian C
Page 47 and 48: Figure 2.40 A fridge deliberately d
Page 49 and 50: Figure 3.2 An entangled Minke Whale
Page 51 and 52: Figure 3.5 Eco performance of Fulma
Page 53 and 54: It is possible that marine litter w
Page 55 and 56: • The stalked barnacle (Dosimia f
Page 57 and 58: • Tourism and recreational activi
Page 59 and 60: 3.3.1 Cost of Management of Marine
Page 61 and 62: 4 Existing Legal Regimes in the are
Page 63 and 64: The three objectives of the CBD are
Page 65 and 66: 4.2 National and Local Legislation4
Page 67 and 68: 4.2.7.2 The Merchant Shipping (Prev
Page 69 and 70: 4.2.7.7 The Anti Social Behaviour A
Page 71 and 72: The implementation of the following
Page 73 and 74: 4.3.5 UKMarine litter is covered by
Page 75 and 76: • Annual report on ship generated
Page 77 and 78: 5.1 Port reception facilities (PRFs
Page 79 and 80:
Table 5.1 Port Reception Facilities
Page 81 and 82:
6 Existing Monitoring Programmes re
Page 83 and 84:
was very 'average' for the situatio
Page 85 and 86:
Between locations and Regions in th
Page 87 and 88:
9 Gaps, Needs, Priorities and Recom
Page 89 and 90:
whole OSPAR Maritime Area is Fishin
Page 91 and 92:
GAUSSAssociation on Environmental P
Page 93 and 94:
BibliographyBrowne, M., et al. 2007
Page 95 and 96:
OSPAR CommissionQuestionnaireAssess
Page 97 and 98:
2. The scale of the problem2.1 Amou
Page 99 and 100:
Please specify the cost of manageme
Page 101 and 102:
3. Sources of marine litter in the
Page 103 and 104:
4. Existing legal regimes in the ar
Page 105 and 106:
What organizations have the legal r
Page 107 and 108:
Please stipulate what the availabil
Page 109 and 110:
How efficient is the collection of
Page 111 and 112:
7. Scientific studies and researchP
Page 113 and 114:
Additional information:103
Page 115 and 116:
Faroe Islands (Denmark):SURVEYS/MON
Page 117 and 118:
Other monitoring programmes related
Page 119 and 120:
Germany:SURVEYS/MONITORING/OTHERNam
Page 121 and 122:
Adopt a Beach and Beachtwatch Progr
Page 123 and 124:
Denmark:SURVEYS/MONITORING/OTHERNam
Page 125 and 126:
France:SURVEYS/MONITORING/OTHERName
Page 127 and 128:
GermanyCLEMENS, T. & E. HARTWIG (19
Page 129 and 130:
The results of the project show tha
show all

view pdf - Seas At Risk

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?