Version classiqueVersion mobile

What Works in Conservation 2021

 | 
William Junior Sutherland
, 
Lynn V. Dicks
, 
Silviu O. Petrovan
, 
et al.

14. Marine and freshwater mammal conservation

14.1 Threat: Aquaculture and agriculture

Texte intégral

Trade-off between benefit and harms

Use acoustic devices at aquaculture systems

1Six studies evaluated the effects on marine and freshwater mammals of using acoustic devices at aquaculture systems. Four studies were in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA, UK), one was in the Reloncaví fjord (Chile) and one in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy).

2COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

3POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

4BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

5OTHER (6 STUDIES)

6Human-wildlife conflict (6 studies): Four of six studies (including five before-and-after and/or site comparison studies and one controlled study) in the North Atlantic Ocean, the Reloncaví fjord and the Mediterranean Sea found that using acoustic devices at salmon farms reduced predation on caged salmon by grey seals, harbour seals and South American sea lions, or reduced the number of harbour seals approaching a fish cage. The two other studies found that using acoustic devices did not reduce harbour seal predation at salmon farms, or reduce the presence, approach distances, groups sizes or time spent around fin-fish farms by common bottlenose dolphins.

7Assessment: trade-off between benefit and harms (effectiveness 45 %; certainty 45 %; harms 45 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2775

Unknown effectiveness

Replace or repair damaged anti-predator nets around aquaculture systems

8One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of replacing anti-predator nets around aquaculture systems. The study was in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA).

9COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

10POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

11BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

12OTHER (1 STUDY)

13Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One site comparison study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that replacing anti-predator nets more frequently at salmon farms resulted in fewer salmon losses to harbour seal predation.

14Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 28 %; harms 10 %).

http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2774

Likely to be ineffective or harmful

Translocate mammals away from aquaculture systems to reduce human-wildlife conflict

15Two studies evaluated the effects of translocating mammals away from aquaculture systems to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Both studies were in the Tasman Sea and one was also in the Southern Ocean (Tasmania).

16COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

17POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

18BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

19OTHER (2 STUDIES)

20Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): Two studies (including one site comparison study) in the Tasman Sea (one also in the Southern Ocean) found that more than half or nearly all of Australian and New Zealand fur seals translocated away from salmon farms returned.

21Assessment: likely to be ineffective or harmful (effectiveness 10 %; certainty 40 %; harms 40 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​2776

No evidence found (no assessment)

22We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Introduce and enforce legislation to prevent intentional killing of mammals at aquaculture systems

  • Introduce and enforce regulations to prevent the use of harmful deterrents on mammals at aquaculture systems

  • Minimize food waste at aquaculture systems

  • Modify anti-predator nets around aquaculture systems

  • Modify aquaculture gear.

Table des illustrations

URL http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/25300/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 67k

Acheter

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search