Examples of using Continuous fishing in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Black- conventional trawl,grey- continuous fishing system.
Trawl, continuous fishing system, pumping to clear codend 71 10-10.
Approximately 40% of the catch has been taken by two vessels using the continuous fishing system.
Three vessels used the continuous fishing system and accounted for approximately 50% of the total catch.
The Working Group noted that 16 vessels notified the useof conventional trawling and two vessels notified the use of the continuous fishing method Table 1.
Continuous fishing systems can operate in smaller aggregations in comparison to conventional trawlers.
Approximately 55% of the catch reported so far this season has been taken by two vessels using the continuous fishing system Saga Sea and Thorshøvdi.
Vessels may use a continuous fishing system which transports krill from the codend of the net to the vessel while the vessel is trawling.
Dr Kasatkina also indicated that CPUE values based on traditional fishing methods were significantly higher compared to the continuous fishing method.
In the continuous fishing system, there will be 12 haul-units in a day, and in the case when the vessel is towing two nets simultaneously, there will be 24.
WG-EMM-17/48 described how accuracy of catch reporting at two-hourly intervals can be improved on continuous fishing system vessels, by.
Vessels using the continuous fishing system have, on recent occasions, exceeded catches of 900 tonnes of krill per day with an average in the region of 300 tonnes per day.
The Working Group requested that the Scientific Committee review whether the catch andeffort data submitted from the continuous fishing system is consistent with CMs 21-03 and 23-06.
The vessel may use the continuous fishing system when fishing large swarms and switch to conventional trawling when fishing smaller swarms.
One haul ID Number would be allocated to a haul for conventional haul, andone 2-hour reporting period(haul unit) for continuous fishing system.
The Working Group noted that any vessel that uses the continuous fishing system should consider the issues highlighted here in order to implement accurate catch reporting methods.
The Working Group also noted that issues remain with the ability to scale estimates of fish by-catch to total catch with the data reported from vessels using a continuous fishing system.
The authors summarised issues related to the choice of the current two-hour reporting interval for the continuous fishing system which had led to apparent anomalies in the reported catches.
In general, fishing using conventional trawls was characterised by higher CPUE andhigher interannual variability in each SSMU compared with data from the continuous fishing system.
The Working Group requested that vessels using the continuous fishing system carry out the calibration process regularly and frequently throughout thefishing season to better understand the variability expected with this proposed way of catch reporting.
The Working Group noted that the daily processing capacity for notified vessels ranged from 120 to 700 tonnes green weight per day(Table 1), and that two Norwegian- andone Chinese-flagged vessels had notified use of the continuous fishing system Table 2.
These papers had estimated the likely scale of the impact of the krill fishery on fish stocks in Area 48 using data from a single vessel fishing with the continuous fishing method and the Working Group encouraged further considerations and observations to address this issue for all vessels.
An analysis of CPUE dynamics from fishery fleets using traditional trawling with many years' experience, showed a significant increase in CPUE in the period from 2006 to 2011 andthese conventional trawls had CPUE significantly higher than vessels using continuous fishing methods.
The Working Group noted a marked increase in the daily catch-rate capacity in recent years by vessels using the continuous fishing system(up to 800 tonnes per day per vessel), as well as vessels using conventional trawls(including vessels that use pumps to clear the codend)(up to 400 tonnes per day per vessel) Figure 3.
The Working Group addressed a request from ad hoc TASO(SC-CAMLRXXVII/BG/6, paragraph 3.7) to provide clarity on the application the CCAMLR trawl warp-strike protocol on krill vessels,including those operating a continuous fishing method paragraphs 7.12 to 7.16.
Reporting interval for the continuous fishing system 2.18 WG-EMM-16/05 evaluated the reporting of‘haul-by-haul' catch and effort data(C1 data) for the continuous fishing system and proposed a change in the current two-hour reporting period to produce more robust and appropriate catch statistics.
However, it noted that the analysis in WG-EMM-15/16 had been calculatedon a haul-by-haul basis, whereas sampling was actually specified on a daily basis due to the use of the continuous fishing system and considered that the analysis and simulations should be conducted using this sampling approach.
The Working Group recalled the discussion on the issues with the reporting of krill catches in two-hour periods in the continuous fishing system(SC-CAMLR-XXXV, Annex 6, paragraphs 2.18 to 2.22) and that these discrepancies probably meant that an accurate estimation of CPUE from the continuous fishing system may not be possible with the data provided to CCAMLR at present.
The Working Group requested that the Scientific Committee note that it is currently not possible to provide an impact assessment for the krill fishery on finfish populations until previous concerns relating to reporting on continuous fishing system trawl vessels are addressed SC-CAMLR-XXXVII, Annex 7, paragraph 6.2.
In order to clarify the difference between a haul on a conventional trawler andthe twohour period used to record catch on vessels using the continuous fishing system, the Working Group suggested that the two-hour catch reporting period be referred to as a haul-unit to clearly distinguish these periods from the conventional understanding of a haul.