=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper77
|storemode=property
|title=Conditions of Hooks After Fishing Operation Used on Bottom Longlines in Çanakkale Region (Northern Aegean Sea)
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper77.pdf
|volume=Vol-1498
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/haicta/OztekinO15
}}
==Conditions of Hooks After Fishing Operation Used on Bottom Longlines in Çanakkale Region (Northern Aegean Sea)==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper77.pdf
Conditions of Hooks After Fishing Operation Used on
Bottom Longlines in Çanakkale Region (Northern
Aegean Sea)
Alkan Öztekin1, Uğur Özekinci2
1
Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Faculty of Marine Sciences and Technology, 17100,
Çanakkale, Turkey, e-mail: alkanoztekin@comu.edu.tr
2
Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Faculty of Marine Sciences and Technology, 17100,
Çanakkale, Turkey, e-mail: uozekinci@comu.edu.tr
Abstract. This study was conducted for determining the conditions of hooks
after fishing operations in May 2011 – June 2012 on the coasts of Dardanelles
Strait and Gallipoli Peninsula. Twenty longline operations with three
replication were carried out between 5 and 500 m sea depth. Each longline
consisted of 200 hooks. 60000 m of fish line was outspread with a total of
12000 hooks and a total of 1360 individuals were sampled. In the present
study; after fishing operation, conditions of hooks were recorded according to
status of hook (caught or broken off) and bait (with bait, without bait or bitten).
Five different conditions of hooks were identified which are caught (8,62%),
broken off (8,19%), with bait (28,71%), without bait (48,02%) and bitten
(6,45%).
Keywords: Dardanelles, bottom longline, hook, catch
1 Introduction
Northern Aegean Sea has a wide continental shelf, muddy and sandy bottom
structure, and rich nutritious elements (Maravelias and Papaconstantinou, 2006).
Compared with the Southern Aegean Sea; it has much more phytoplankton and
zooplankton (Theocharis et al., 1999). Northern Aegean Sea is extremely important
fishing area due to the most intensive fish migration along the coast of Turkey.
Longlines are preferred because of its low fuel consumption and eco-friendly
structure beside of using in fishing (Endal, 1979; Bjordal, 1988; Lokkeborg and
Bjordal, 1992).
Longlines are the fishing gear commonly used in bottom fish species fishing.
Better results were observed in bottom fish species fishing with longlines because of
covering the large areas and slow and limited movements of bottom fish species
(Alpbaz and Özer, 1996). Also, longlines can be easily removed by marking in case
of any disappearance while fishing operation or later. Because of this; it gives less
damage to marine ecosystems compared with fishing nets, trawlers and purse seiners.
691
However, it is known that longlines have the minimum level of ghost fishing in
passive fishing gears. The present study aimed to identify the after fishing conditions
of different sizes hooks used on bottom longlines in Northern Aegean Sea and
provide resource information to fisheries management authorities.
2 Material and Method
The present study was conducted in May 2011 – June 2012 on the coasts of
Dardanelles Strait and Gallipoli Peninsula between 5 and 500 m sea depth in the
commercial fishing area (Figure 1). Longlines used in trials were prepared based on
same dimensions with the longlines of commercial fishermen (Figure 2).
Fig. 1. Study Area
The mainline length of bottom longline is 1000 mm, diameter is 1.20 mm and
made of monofilament fishing line. The snood is 1 m long and 0.80 mm in diameter.
Each snood is connected the mainline with an interval of 4 meters. According the
status of stream, stones were attached to mainline between every twenty or thirty
snood to gain weight. VMC 9747 PS branded, number 8, 10, 12, 14 thick type, flat
hooks were used in longlines. Longlines were left in the sea straight or zigzag shape.
Longlines were usually left in the sea in early morning times or night times if the
weather is suitable, and removed back after waiting nearly 12 hours.
692
Fig. 2. General schema of longlines used in study.
3 Results
In trials, 60000 m of fish line was outspread with a total of 12000 hooks and 60
longline baskets was used in total. After removing back from sea, hooks were
evaluated according to condition, (caught, broken off, with bait, without bait or
bitten).
Fig. 3. Conditions of hooks after fishing operations
After fishing operations, 76,73% of hooks were found with bait or without bait
and 8,19% of hooks were broken off because of stones or bitten by big fish. 8,62% of
hooks were caught fish successfully. 4,48% of this successfully caught amount were
by-catch and discard species. In 6,45% of hooks which is the lowest value of records,
baits on the hooks were bitten.
693
4 Discussion
Longlines should be developed to more efficiency for being alternative to other
fishing gears using in the coastal fishing area because of its minimum damage level
to marine ecosystem compared other fishing gears, low costs and selectivity
properties can be easily set for the target species and sizes. Catching target species
and sizes by chancing size and shape of hooks is one of the factors which affects the
selectivity (Öztekin et al., 2012). Therefore, hook selection for the target species is
extremely important. In addition, specific fishing gears and methods that are less
harmful to ecosystem should be supported and developed for protection of the
endangered marine species protected under international conventions (Öztekin et al.,
2014).
Acknowledgments. This study was supported by TAGEM/11-ARGE/16 project and
contains a part of PhD thesis of corresponding author.
References
1. Alpbaz, A. and Özen, A. (1996) Olta balıkçılığı tüm yönleriyle, İzmir.
2. Bjordal, A. (1988) Recent developments in longline fishing – catching
performance and conservation aspects. Proceedings World Symposium on
Fishing Gear and Fishing Vessel Design, p.19-24. Canada: St. John’s Nf. Ld.
3. Endal, A. (1979) Energy consumptionin various. Norwegian fisheries. Coun.
Mcet. ICES CM, B:3.
4. Lokkeborg, S. and Bjordal, A. (1992) Species and size selectivity in longline
fishing. Fish Res, 13, p.311-322.
5. Maravelias, C.D., Tsitsika, E.V. and Papaconstantinou, C. (2006) Seasonal
dynamics, environmental preferences and habitat selection of John Dory (Zeus
faber). Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 72 (2007), p.703-710.
6. Öztekin, A., Cengiz, Ö. and Özekinci, U. (2012) Kuzey Ege Denizi’nde (Türkiye)
kullanılan paragat takımlarının teknik özellikleri ve yapısal farklılıkları. Tabiat ve
İnsan, 46, p.11-16.
7. Öztekin, A., Özekinci, U., Ayaz , A., Cengiz, Ö., Altınağaç, U. and Aslan, A.
(2014) The mouth opening - length relationship and the selectivity of bottom
longline used for greater Forkbeard (Phycis blennoides B. 1768) fishing in Saros
Bay (Northern Aegean Sea), Ege J. Fish. Aqua. Sci., 31(1), p.41-45.
8. Theocharis, A., Balopoulos, E., Kioroglou, S., Kontoyiannis, H. and Iona, A.
(1999) A synthesis of the circulation and hydrography of the South Aegean Sea
and the Straits of the Cretan Arc (March 1994-January 1995). Progress In
Oceanography, 44, p.469-509.
694