Course:CONS200/2023WT2/Ghost nets haunting turtles in the ocean

From UBC Wiki

Introduction

Ghost nets pose a lethal threat to sea turtles by entangling them, leading to injuries, starvation, or drowning.[1]

Ghost gear refers to fishing equipment like nets, ropes, and abandoned traps or pots that have been lost or discarded, those gears and nets cannot degrade or retain functionally for a long period of time and continue to fish unintentionally for extended periods, sometimes for years[2][3]. These Ghost gears results in the unintended capture and harm of various marine animals such as fish, turtles, lobsters, crabs, and mammals like seals, whales, and dolphins[2]. Coastal nations are increasingly aware of this problem, setting multiple governmental and non-government organizations to gather funds for initiatives aimed at locating and retrieving these hazardous traps for marine life[2] those methods include biodegradable netting and gear marking[4][3].

The Global Ghost Gear Initiative (GGGI), formed in 2015, aims to combat ghost fishing through awareness, education, and incentive programs[5]. Organizations like the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) provide recommendations to governments, gear designers, fishers, and the public to address the issue effectively[5]. In preventing abandonment of ghost nets, both policymaking and technological innovation are required.

History

Global industrialization in the 1950s spurred the fishing industry to keep up with demand by abandoning natural, biodegradable fibres such as hemp and cotton in favour of cheaper and more durable synthetic materials[6]. Subsequent documentation of ghost fishing, specifically through crab traps and gill nets, began in the 1960s with research accelerating into the 1970s. While the United States, Canada, and Australia were the main publishers of ghost fishing studies during that time, the issue was brought to global attention in the 1980s when the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (UN) declared derelict fishing gear a worldwide threat to oceans[7]. This correlates to the period in time when turtle species began to enter endangered species lists in many countries as well as the IUCN’s Red List of Threatened Species[8]. Today, ghost gear is indirectly addressed by Goal 14 of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals as it aims to reduce marine debris from land-based activities and end destructive fishing practices[9].

Background

Scope and severity

According to the 2020 WWF Stop Ghost Gear Report, between 500,000 to 1 million tons of fishing gears are either lost or intentionally discarded annually into the oceans, overall contributing 10% to the world's total marine debris. It is the single most lethal type of debris to 66% of marine species and is capable of driving species to the brink of extinction, such as with the vaquita porpoise in the Gulf of Mexico. Ghost nets are known to threaten all species of turtles[10].

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch

In 2018, ghost nets comprised at least 46% of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, the open ocean's largest accumulation of plastic in the North Pacific Ocean[11]. Researchers have recently begun to track its adverse impact on turtle species and juvenile development, with one Australian study finding plastic in 29% of the olive ridley and over 80% of the flatback, green, and loggerhead juvenile turtles that washed up or were unintentionally caught on the country's Pacific coast. Polyethylene and polypropylene were the most commonly ingested polymers in turtles off both the Pacific and Indian coasts, highly prevalent in most plastic products but especially in ghost nets. Additionally, juvenile turtles are vulnerable populations due to their resting and foraging behaviours; they are known to seek shelter under mats of sargassum (macroalgae) and buoyant debris, posing a potential risk if they attempt to eat food trapped in ghost nets[12].

Influential factors

The variables contributing to the increasing occurrence of ghost gear in global oceans can be summarized into 4 main categories: weather conditions, gear entanglement, gear condition, and intentional dumping[13].

Weather conditions encompass environmental conditions above and below the ocean surface that can impact the regular functioning of fishing gear. They include strong currents, tides, ice cover, storms, winds, and other extreme weather events. Such factors can also influence if gear is lost to deeper water from which it is rarely retrieved due to the cost and labour required[14]. Drying nets on the shore increases their possibility of being washed away in adverse weather[15].

Fishing gear can become entangled with man-made artefacts such as vessels and other gear, as well as the natural topography of the ocean floor. This is especially prevalent in reef ecosystems, where the irregular coral structure presents greater probability of snagging and creating ghost gear from entangled fishing equipment[16]. Entanglement can also result from damaging fishing practices such a bottom trawling[15].

Commercial fisheries rarely take the time or money to repair or clean damaged gear, deteriorating their quality over time and making them more susceptible to breaking when in use[15].

Intentional dumping can be prompted for a number of reasons. Inadequate or no access to recycling or disposal programs can make dumping nets overboard or leaving them in the water easier for fishers. Poor regulation of illegal fishing activity can lead to fishers abandoning nets when confronted by authority[15].

Environmental impacts on turtles

Turtle species

Turtles are particularly vulnerable to the destructive effects of ghost nets, comprising over 80% of observed marine species found entangled [17]. In Northern Australia, where each kilometre of shoreline sees 3 tons of ghost nets wash ashore annually, researchers found that 4 turtles can be caught per 100m of fine-mesh gill net. They also estimated that 4866 to 14,600 turtles were killed by an observed sample of 8690 ghost nets [18]. Turtle entanglement in ghost nets is a widespread issue beyond Northern Australia, reaching as far as Mexico, the Mediterranean, and Indian Ocean[19] [20]. Ghost nets also promote the spread of invasive species as organisms can attach to the nets and traverse across oceans, potentially introducing new diseases, parasites, or ecosystem contenders[15].

Turtle habitats

Ghost nets can be dangerous to turtles attempting to shelter or nest on shore[21]

Ghost nets disrupt all three main habitats of any sea turtle species. In the open ocean, turtles may mistake them for algal mats and attempt to shelter or forage in them during migrations, leading to entanglement and potentially death. They can also be dangerous in nesting grounds, either entangling female turtles attempting to nest or hatchlings navigating to the ocean. The foraging grounds of sea turtles are also affected by ghost nets, ecosystems such as coral reefs and seagrass beds are likely to be covered by the nets due to their proximity to coastal human activity [21]. In addition to ecosystem smothering, ghost nets can destroy sensitive coral and vegetation by scouring the seafloor, accumulate sediment, and restrict species access to habitats[10].

Current remedial actions

Ghost netting is a relatively new issue, because of this many current remedial actions are in their proposal phase. Though ghost netting and gear have been widely recognized to be an issue, there seems to be a significant gap between recognition and action on the global stage. Many researchers and organizations are calling for preventative measures whilst gear companies seem to be more focused on remedial actions and technological innovations[5][3]. Though policy, incentive programs and innovations all need to be made, raising awareness seems to be the main issue at hand for many groups involved in tackling the problem of ghost fishing[4].

Biodegradable netting

Currently, many fishing nets that are causing ghost fishing around the world are made of synthetic materials like nylon[3].This is predominantly because such fibers are very strong and flexible, both traits of which are needed for a task like net fishing[3]. As well, nylon and other synthetic materials are cheap to produce as opposed to natural fibers[3]. However, when these nylon nets get lost at sea they do not break down, causing ghost fishing[3].

Given the nature of this problem, naturally, it seems one of the paths forward is with biodegradable netting. Currently, in Korea, biodegradable netting is being tested, though it is far from perfect in its application and has been criticized for its impracticality and economic viability[3][4]. Researchers suggest that biodegradable nets may be useful in mitigating the damage that lost nets cause, preventing the initial discarding of fishing netting is more promising route[4].

The Global Ghost Gear Initiative

Besides the development of this new technology, in 2015 an initiative called the Global Ghost Gear Initiative (GGGI) has been formed by over 100 government and non-government conservation groups to help stop ghost fishing[5]. As stated by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), a conservation group involved in the GGGI, prevention is their top priority[5]. A few preventative measures they are engaged in range from building awareness among fishing gear designers to educating fishers on how best to dispose of their old gear[5]. As well as awareness and education, the GGGI is also working to institute incentive programs to encourage the return of old fishing gear[5]. For example, in both India and Nepal, fairly successful programs have been instituted and have seen a rise in old fishing gear being returned to recycling depots[5]. Though the GGGI is working hard to influence global governmental policies, much of what is currently in place to stop this pollution is lacking and ineffective[5].

The WWF's current recommendations

Because current policy is ineffective, the WWF and the GGGI predominantly work in changing attitudes, values, norms and beliefs around the subject. As of now, they make the following recommendations. They encourage governments to join the GGGI and adopt their recommended best practices[5]. For gear designers, they recommend traceable and recyclable gear[5]. For fishers, they recommend implementing best practices they have laid out for recycling and disposing of gear[5]. They also advise to report lost gear, and make attempts to retrieve it if it is safe to do so[5]. Finally, for consumers and the public, the WWF recommends that they engage with their local governments and fishing industries to take action on the subject, and to join the call for an international treaty addressing the issue of ghost gear[5].

The path forward

Addressing the alarming issue of ghost nets haunting turtles in the ocean demands a multifaceted approach that transcends conventional methods. These abandoned or lost fishing nets, known as ghost nets, pose a severe threat to marine life, particularly to turtles, by entangling them, leading to injuries, starvation, or even death. The path forward requires an amalgamation of technical innovations, policy reforms, and global cooperation to mitigate this pressing environmental concern effectively.

Tracking technology enables the recovery of ghost nets by pinpointing their locations in the ocean, facilitating their removal and reducing harm to marine life[22].

Technical innovations

Integrating technical innovations to combat the ghost net menace offers a beacon of hope for marine ecosystems, particularly for turtles entangled by these derelict fishing tools[23]. Amongst these innovations, the development of biodegradable fishing nets marks a crucial step forward. These nets are designed to dissolve harmlessly in seawater, effectively reducing the amount of marine debris. This innovation greatly lowers the risk of entanglement for marine life. Research confirms the effectiveness of these nets, showing a 77% reduction in the accidental capture of species not targeted by fishermen[24]. Furthermore, studies have shown that these biodegradable nets can break down within a few months in marine conditions, significantly lessening their environmental footprint[25].

As we continue to develop materials that mitigate harm to marine life, parallel technological advancements have also enhanced our capacity to address the ghost net problem more directly. The advent of advanced tracking technologies, including GPS and RFID tags, has revolutionized the ability to locate and retrieve lost fishing gear[26]. The employment of drones and ROVs in detecting and recovering ghost nets not only bolsters the efficiency of these operations but also minimizes the likelihood of nets turning into deadly traps for marine animals[27]. Initiatives like the Global Ghost Gear Initiative (GGGI) have showcased the impactful role of recovery efforts, underlined by the successful removal of over 62 tons of gillnetting, thereby highlighting the tangible benefits of such technical interventions[28][29].

Alongside efforts to recover lost fishing gear, innovative strategies such as modifying gear to minimize its loss or abandonment have been implemented. These strategies include making nets heavier or adding mechanisms that allow non-target species to escape[30]. Such modifications not only make fishing practices more sustainable but also aid in the conservation of biodiversity. Research by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has demonstrated that these changes can reduce gear loss by up to 30%, highlighting their potential for significant environmental improvements[31]. Additionally, the use of advanced technology like sonar and satellite imaging to detect ghost nets represents a pivotal step in protecting marine ecosystems[32]. The European Space Agency's initiatives, which employ satellite data to monitor marine litter, including ghost nets, underscore the effectiveness of technology in tracking and tackling marine pollution[33].

Policy reform can significantly reduce the problem of ghost nets by implementing stricter regulations on fishing gear management and promoting sustainable fishing practices[34].

Policy reforms

The critical role of policy reforms in addressing the environmental hazard posed by ghost nets cannot be overstated. Through a combination of stricter regulations, innovative incentives, and international collaboration, significant strides can be made in reducing the menace of these abandoned or lost fishing gear, particularly to marine turtles and biodiversity at large[35].

Enforcing stricter regulations on the use and disposal of fishing gear is crucial. Implementing laws that require fishing gear to be marked and tracked will enable authorities to easily identify and hold responsible parties accountable for gear that turns into ghost nets. Additionally, these regulations will aid in the retrieval of lost gear, thus reducing its detrimental effects on marine life[36][37]. Costa Rica has been a pioneer in this area, creating a comprehensive registry for lost fishing gear and interactions with marine species[38]. Though still in its infancy, this framework is aimed at addressing one of the major sources of ocean pollution[39]. It underscores the nation's dedication to sustainable fishing practices and marine conservation. Costa Rica's initiative offers a commendable model for other countries facing similar issues, showcasing the positive impact of proactive policy measures[40].

The adoption of biodegradable fishing gear marks another pivotal step in policy innovation[25]. Research in the Gulf of Mexico has demonstrated the effectiveness of biodegradable crab traps, significantly reducing ghost gear's lifespan, and the consequent entanglement risks to marine life[41]. These findings suggest that mandating biodegradable materials could dramatically decrease the environmental impact of fishing practices. As well, international initiatives like the Global Ghost Gear Initiative (GGGI) illustrate the power of collaborative efforts[42]. By uniting government bodies, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations, the GGGI has achieved remarkable success in removing vast quantities of ghost nets from the sea[43]. Their work in Australia's Gulf of Carpentaria, where over 13,000 nets were collected, has notably lessened the hazard to marine species[44]. Partnerships like these are essential for building worldwide engagement and exchanging valuable strategies in the management and retrieval of fishing gear.

Financial incentives play a pivotal role in driving change within the fishing industry towards sustainability[45]. By offering subsidies for biodegradable nets and tax benefits for investing in sustainable technologies, governments pave the way for the industry to adopt eco-friendly methods without facing financial burdens[46]. Conversely, penalties for non-compliance, such as fines or the revocation of fishing licenses, serve as deterrents against harmful practices[47]. These measures highlight the severity of issues like ghost nets and showcase the dedication of regulatory bodies to address them, underlining the synergy between policy reforms and environmental stewardship in promoting sustainable fishing practices[48].

The Olive Ridley Project is dedicated to protecting sea turtles and their habitats through the removal of ghost nets and conducting research and conservation activities[49].

Global cooperation and community engagement

The problem of ghost nets is a global issue, crossing national boundaries and jurisdictions, making international cooperation essential. Addressing this challenge involves not just removing existing ghost nets but also preventing their future occurrence. Collaborative efforts and partnerships between countries are crucial and can greatly reduce the impact of this issue.

International cooperation provides a structure to tackle the fundamental issues behind marine pollution, including ghost nets. Potential measures within the Global Ocean Treaty seek to establish mandatory regulations to safeguard marine life[50]. This necessitates a collective effort from nations to enforce tighter fishing regulations, improve maritime monitoring, and share advancements in net tracking and retrieval technologies. International collaborations are vital in pooling resources for research, technology innovation, and the adoption of effective practices worldwide, guaranteeing that solutions are both impactful and sustainable.

Community engagement plays a crucial role in taking immediate action to protect marine environments. It leverages the invaluable local knowledge and strong commitment of those who live closest to these areas. Programs such as the Carpentaria Ghost Nets Programme and the Olive Ridley Project highlight the remarkable success of these efforts[51]. Over the year, these initiatives have been instrumental in removing over 100 ghost nets and rescuing 140 turtles caught in them, demonstrating the tangible impact of community-led conservation[52][53]. By involving local communities, not only do these programs effectively remove ghost nets, but they also play a vital role in preventing future occurrences. This is achieved through educational efforts, raising awareness, and encouraging changes in local practices[54]. The involvement of communities in monitoring, clean-up, and conservation activities ensures the long-term sustainability of these initiatives, transforming locals into dedicated guardians of their natural surroundings[55]. The participation of local communities in scientific research and data collection is also crucial. Their contributions enhance our understanding of ghost net origins, drift patterns, and effects on marine life, thereby refining conservation strategies and policy interventions[56]. Integrating global policy frameworks with grassroots involvement presents a holistic approach to tackling the ghost net issue, drawing on the advantages of both global coordination and local action.

As we move forward, it is evident that the solution to the ghost net problem requires a synergy of technology, policy, and community engagement. This holistic approach addresses the immediate threats posed by ghost nets and fosters a sustainable relationship between humanity and the marine environment. The journey ahead is challenging, yet with continued innovation, collaboration, and dedication, it is possible to protect our oceans and their inhabitants for future generations. The fight against ghost nets is not just about saving marine life; it's about preserving our planet's biodiversity and ensuring the health of our oceans in the face of human-induced challenges.

Conclusion

All in all, the pervasive issue of ghost nets in our oceans presents a formidable challenge, threatening marine biodiversity and endangering sea turtles. Addressing this crisis demands a robust, multifaceted strategy that integrates technical innovations, such as biodegradable nets and advanced tracking technologies, with comprehensive policy reforms and global cooperation. By harnessing the collective efforts of governments, NGOs, the fishing industry, and local communities, we can significantly mitigate the impact of ghost nets. The path forward is undoubtedly complex, requiring sustained commitment and collaboration across all levels of society. However, the initiatives and strategies outlined here offer a beacon of hope. Through continued dedication to technological advancement, policy improvement, and community engagement, we have the potential to safeguard our marine ecosystems for future generations, ensuring the vitality and diversity of life within our oceans. The fight against ghost nets is not just an environmental imperative but a moral one, highlighting our shared responsibility to protect our planet's precious marine life and preserve the health of our oceans.

References

  1. ↑ “What Are Ghost Nets? The Silent Killers of Our Oceans: ORP.” Olive Ridley Project, 2024, oliveridleyproject.org/what-are-ghost-nets.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Kozak, G., & Morris, R. (2022). the future of ghost gear looks less haunting with side scan sonar intervention. Ocean News & Technology, , 40-41.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 Kim, S., Kim, P., Jeong, S., Lee, K., & Oh, W. (2020). Physical Properties of Biodegradable Fishing Net in Accordance with Heat-Treatment Conditions for Reducing Ghost Fishing. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 20(2), 127–128. https://doi.org/10.4194/1303-2712-v20_2_05
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Gilman, E. (2015). Status of International Monitoring and management of abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear and ghost fishing. Marine Policy, 60, 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.016
  5. ↑ 5.00 5.01 5.02 5.03 5.04 5.05 5.06 5.07 5.08 5.09 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 Stopping ghost gear | projects | WWF. Stopping Ghost Gear. (n.d.). https://www.worldwildlife.org/projects/stopping-ghost-gear
  6. ↑ Al–Abdulrazzak, D. (2017, May 2). Ghost Fishing Gear is Killing Marine Life. Ocean Wise; Vancouver Aquarium. https://ocean.org/blog/ghost-fishing-gear-is-killing-marine-life/
  7. ↑ Lively, J. A., & Good, T. P. (2019). Ghost Fishing. In C. Sheppard (Ed.), World Seas: an Environmental Evaluation (Vol. 3, pp. 183–196). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-805052-1.00010-3
  8. ↑ International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. (2019). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. https://www.iucnredlist.org/search?query=Sea%20turtles&searchType=species
  9. ↑ United Nations. (2023). Goal 14 | Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Sdgs.un.org. https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal14#targets_and_indicators
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 World Wildlife Fund. (2020). Stop Ghost Gear: The Most Deadly Form of Marine Plastic Debris. In World Wildlife Fund. https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/stop-ghost-gear-the-most-deadly-form-of-marine-plastic-debris
  11. ↑ Lebreton, L. (2018). Evidence that the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is rapidly accumulating plastic. Scientific Reports, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22939-w
  12. ↑ Duncan, E. M., Broderick, A. C., Critchell, K., Galloway, T. S., Hamann, M., Limpus, C. J., Lindeque, P. K., Santillo, D., Tucker, A. D., Whiting, S., Young, E. J., & Godley, B. J. (2021). Plastic Pollution and Small Juvenile Marine Turtles: A Potential Evolutionary Trap. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.699521
  13. ↑ Lively, J. A., & Good, T. P. (2019). Ghost Fishing. In C. Sheppard (Ed.), World Seas: an Environmental Evaluation (Vol. 3, pp. 183–196). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-805052-1.00010-3
  14. ↑ Brown, J., & Macfadyen, G. (2007). Ghost fishing in European waters: Impacts and management responses. Marine Policy, 31(4), 488–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2006.10.007
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 Olive Ridley Project. (2015). What Are Ghost Nets? | Olive Ridley Project. Olive Ridley Project. https://oliveridleyproject.org/what-are-ghost-nets
  16. ↑ Ayaz, A., Ünal, V., Acarli, D., & Altinagac, U. (2010). Fishing gear losses in the Gökova Special Environmental Protection Area (SEPA), eastern Mediterranean, Turkey. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 26(3), 416–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01386.x
  17. ↑ Wilcox, C., Hardesty, B. D., Sharples, R., Griffin, D. A., Lawson, T. J., & Gunn, R. (2013). Ghostnet impacts on globally threatened turtles, a spatial risk analysis for northern Australia. Conservation Letters, 6(4), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12001
  18. ↑ Wilcox, C., Heathcote, G., Goldberg, J., Gunn, R., Peel, D., & Hardesty, B. D. (2014). Understanding the sources and effects of abandoned, lost, and discarded fishing gear on marine turtles in northern Australia. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 198–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12355
  19. ↑ Healthy Seas. (2020, January 31). Sea turtles captured in ghost nets. Healthy Seas. https://www.healthyseas.org/2020/01/31/sea-turtles-captured-in-ghost-nets/
  20. ↑ Stelfox, M., Hudgins, J., Ali, K., & Anderson, R. (2014). High mortality of Olive Ridley Turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) in ghost nets in the central Indian Ocean. https://www.fao.org/3/bg268e/bg268e.pdf
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 Olive Ridley Project. (2015). What Are Ghost Nets? | Olive Ridley Project. Olive Ridley Project. https://oliveridleyproject.org/what-are-ghost-nets
  22. ↑ Bilawal Khaskheli, Muhammad, et al. “Technology advancement and international law in marine policy, challenges, solutions and future prospective.” Frontiers in Marine Science, vol. 10, 24 Oct. 2023, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2023.1258924.
  23. ↑ Aude. (2023, September 4). Wolrd Ocean Day : The CLS solution in Ghost Fishing Tracking device. CLS Fisheries. https://fisheries.groupcls.com/solution-in-ghost-fishing-tracking-device-to-prevent-oceanic-plastic-pollution-2/
  24. ↑ Kim, J., Park, S., Bang, J., Jin, H., & Kwak, H. W. (2023). Biodegradation in composting conditions of PBEAS monofilaments for the sustainable end‐use of fishing nets. Global Challenges, 7(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.202300020
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 Gilman, E. (2016). Biodegradable fishing gear: Part of the solution to ghost fishing and marine pollution. Animal Conservation, 19(4), 320–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12298
  26. ↑ Everything you need to know about ghost fishing. Everything You Need to Know about Ghost Fishing. (n.d.). https://www.deeptrekker.com/news/ghost-fishing
  27. ↑ Using rovs for ghost fishing gear retrieval. Unmanned Systems Technology. (2023, August 8). https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/feature/using-rovs-for-ghost-fishing-gear-retrieval/
  28. ↑ Escobar-Sánchez, G., Markfort, G., Berghald, M., Ritzenhofen, L., & Schernewski, G. (2022). Aerial and underwater drones for marine litter monitoring in shallow coastal waters: Factors influencing item detection and cost-efficiency. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 194(12). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10519-5
  29. ↑ Towards G7 action to combat ghost fishing gear. (2021). OECD Environment Policy Papers. https://doi.org/10.1787/a4c86e42-en
  30. ↑ Fishing Gear Modifications. Oceana USA. (n.d.). https://usa.oceana.org/fishing-gear-modifications/
  31. ↑ Fao.org. Stakeholders’ views on methods to identify the ownership and track the position of drifting fish aggregating devices used by tuna purse seine fisheries | Responsible Fishing Practices for Sustainable Fisheries | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). https://www.fao.org/responsible-fishing/resources/detail/en/c/1316984/
  32. ↑ Ling, Y., Biermann, L., Manuel, M., Ramirez, E., Coates, A., Gallagher, M., & Streett, D. (2021). Satellite Detection of Ghost Nets and Plastic Debris in Pacific Atolls. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-16384
  33. ↑ The discovery campaign on remote sensing of plastic marine litter. ESA. (n.d.). https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Preparing_for_the_Future/Discovery_and_Preparation/The_Discovery_Campaign_on_Remote_Sensing_of_Plastic_Marine_Litter
  34. ↑ “The Federal Register.” Federal Register :: Request Access, www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/08/09/2022-17073/agency-information-collection-activities-submission-to-the-office-of-management-and-budget-omb-for. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024.
  35. ↑ (2022). Legal Aspects of Abandoned, Lost or Otherwise Discarded Fishing Gear. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb8071en
  36. ↑ (2023). Fishing Gear Recycling Technologies and Practices. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc8317en
  37. ↑ (2023). Voluntary Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc4251en
  38. ↑ Fernandez, I. (2023, February 17). Costa Rica introduces new legislation to combat ghost nets in Oceans. The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate. https://ticotimes.net/2023/02/17/costa-rica-introduces-new-legislation-to-combat-ghost-nets-in-oceans
  39. ↑ Costa Rica Sustainable Fisheries. UNDP. (n.d.). https://www.undp.org/facs/costa-rica-sustainable-fisheries
  40. ↑ Baxter, J. (2023, October 25). The MCCR impact report - marine conservation costa rica. Marine Conservation Costa Rica - Make a difference in the ocean world. https://marineconservationcostarica.org/__trashed-3/
  41. ↑ Arthur, C., Friedman, S., Weaver, J., Van Nostrand, D., & Reinhardt, J. (2020). Estimating the benefits of derelict crab trap removal in the Gulf of Mexico. Estuaries and Coasts, 43(7), 1821–1835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-020-00812-2
  42. ↑ World Wildlife Fund. (n.d.). Stopping ghost gear. WWF. https://www.worldwildlife.org/projects/stopping-ghost-gear
  43. ↑ The global ghost gear initiative. Ocean Conservancy. (n.d.). https://oceanconservancy.org/trash-free-seas/plastics-in-the-ocean/the-global-ghost-gear-initiative/
  44. ↑ Ghost nets initiative. Australian Government. (n.d.). https://parksaustralia.gov.au/ghost-nets-initiative/
  45. ↑ Delivering sustainable fisheries through fiscal incentives. International Institute for Environment and Development. (n.d.). https://www.iied.org/delivering-sustainable-fisheries-through-fiscal-incentives
  46. ↑ World Wildlife Fund. (n.d.). Incentivizing sustainable fishing on the High Seas. WWF. https://www.worldwildlife.org/projects/incentivizing-sustainable-fishing-on-the-high-seas
  47. ↑ “50 CFR § 600.510 - Gear Avoidance and Disposal.” Legal Information Institute, Legal Information Institute, www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/50/600.510. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024.
  48. ↑ Grafton, R. Q., Arnason, R., Bjørndal, T., Campbell, D., Campbell, H. F., Clark, C. W., Connor, R., Dupont, D. P., Hannesson, R., Hilborn, R., Kirkley, J. E., Kompas, T., Lane, D. E., Munro, G. R., Pascoe, S., Squires, D., Steinshamn, S. I., Turris, B. R., & Weninger, Q. (2006). Incentive-based approaches to sustainable fisheries. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 63(3), 699–710. https://doi.org/10.1139/f05-247
  49. ↑ Fisheries, NOAA. “Olive Ridley Turtle.” NOAA, 27 Sept. 2022, www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/olive-ridley-turtle.
  50. ↑ Deasy, K. (2023). What we know about the new high seas treaty. Npj Ocean Sustainability, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44183-023-00013-x
  51. ↑ Newell, D., & Garraway, E. (2023). Biodiversity knowledge and conservation awareness in a Bufferzone community: An assessment of public engagement strategies and Tools. Caribbean Journal of Science, 53(2). https://doi.org/10.18475/cjos.v53i2.a27
  52. ↑ Phillips, C. (2017). Ghostly encounters: Dealing with ghost gear in the Gulf of Carpentaria. Geoforum, 78, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.11.010
  53. ↑ Holm, L., & Holm, S. (2019). The Olive Ridley Project. BSAVA Companion, 2019(2), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.22233/20412495.0219.8
  54. ↑ Ahmadia, Dr. G. (n.d.). How community and indigenous efforts contribute to protecting our oceans. WWF. https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/how-community-and-indigenous-efforts-contribute-to-protecting-our-oceans
  55. ↑ Coastal Community-led conservation. WWF. (n.d.). https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/oceans_practice/coastal_community_led_conservation/
  56. ↑ Out of the blue: The value of seagrasses to the environment and to people. (n.d.). Climate Change and Law Collection. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004322714_cclc_2020-0252-0978


Seekiefer (Pinus halepensis) 9months-fromtop.jpg
 This conservation resource was created by Course:CONS200. It is shared under a CC-BY 4.0 International License.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:CONS200/2023WT2/Ghost_nets_haunting_turtles_in_the_ocean&oldid=832665"