Examples of using Krill-dependent in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Krill-dependent predators standard methods, STAPP, CEMP Review.
Tracking the overwinter habitat use of krill-dependent predators from Subarea 48.1 Dr Watters.
These areas fished in the winter also correspond with the summer foraging grounds of some krill-dependent predators.
In the case of‘krill-dependent species' used in CEMP they include land-based species such as seals and penguins.
Dr Kasatkina compared krill fishing activity with available data on krill-dependent predator requirements.
For example, the observations of krill-dependent predators during these surveys may provide linkages between CEMP monitoring sites and distant foraging areas.
There are important uncertainties in understanding the overlap of fishing activities with krill-dependent predator requirements.
Several CEMP indicators are both relevant to the potential for competition between krill-dependent predators and the fishery and are sensitive to changes in the marine ecosystem e.g. series that indicate predator abundance and condition.
The Workshop recognised that there are many questions related to the impact of the fishery on both krill and upon krill-dependent predators.
The Working Group agreed that maps depicting spatial andtemporal overlap between the krill fishery and krill-dependent predators can usefully indicate where and when the risks of local impacts to dependent species are greatest.
The Working Group welcomed this analysis of piscivorous species,noting that WG-EMM has historically considered primarily krill-dependent predators.
In general, alternatives that allocate a greater proportion of the catch limit to coastal SSMUs are considered to increase risks to krill-dependent predators, while those that allocate a greater proportion to the pelagic SSMUs will likely increase risks to the krill fishery.
She noted that without reference points it would be difficult to clarify the extent to which the fishery is having an impact on the status of krill resources and krill-dependent predators.
Collectively, results of the study indicated a well-designed MPA in the Scotia Sea may protect krill-dependent predators, and give rise to both benefits and costs for the fishery.
Maps of overlap can also help toprioritise the location and timing of future research to understand details about interactions between the fishery and krill-dependent predators.
Some krill-dependent species, such as crabeater seal( Lobodon carcinophagus), while considered likely to respond to changes in krill availability, have not been used in monitoring because they live in the pack-ice and so are not amenable to repeated/annual monitoring.
The Working Group recalled WG-EMM-18/33 which discussed potential interactions andcompetition between the krill fishery and krill-dependent predators during fishing operations.
It was agreed that structured fishing should not intentionally be designed to have local long-term impacts on krill-dependent predators(this would be inconsistent with the objectives of Article II), but establishing reference areas within a structured fishing approach could provide sources of krill and/or predators that might ensure inadvertent impacts at local scales do not impact the system as a whole.
WG-EMM reiterated its acknowledgement(SC-CAMLR-XXXI, Annex 6, paragraphs 2.136 to 2.139)that additional monitoring data on krill-dependent predators exist, but that they are not currently submitted to CEMP.
The design of the monitoring system will need to be evaluated to ensure that observed differences between the contrasting areas help provide evidence to enable scientific advice as to whether the fishery is having an impact upon krill-dependent predators.
They further suggested that the relative role of top-down and bottom-up processes to declining recruitment andfirst-year survival in other krill-dependent predators may be an important, but overlooked, source of mortality that may be increasing.
The Working Group also noted that such an analysis would be required in order to substantiate the hypothesis presented in WG-EMM-17/27 on the role of krill flux andthe absence of an effect of the fishery on krill-dependent predators.
WG-EMM-15/P06 presented results from the first use of vertical take-off and landing(VTOL) aircraft for estimating abundance,colony area and density of krill-dependent predators in Cape Shirreff, Livingston Island, South Shetland Islands, during January and February of 2011 and 2013.
Dr Kasatkina noted that the proposed analysis of spatial variability and patchiness of krill distribution would provide important information for understanding relationships between predators and krill,as well as competition between fishing and krill-dependent predators.
The Working Group noted that, while the simple feedback approach described here might reveal whether fishing and/or environmental change have had a plausible impact on krill-dependent predators, this approach would likely have little or no power to attribute observed changes to either effects.
If, when considering time series of local harvest rates like those previously described for the WCB(paragraph 2.120) and the Bransfield Strait SSMUs(paragraph 2.121), the proportion of years in which the local harvest rate is greater than the benchmark exceeds the specified risk in an agreed decision rule(e.g. paragraph 2.131),then the Scientific Committee might advise the Commission that concentrated fishing may have an unacceptable impact on krill-dependent predators.
The Working Group recalled that the recommendation addressed two separate questions: the potential interactions andcompetition of the krill fishery with krill-dependent predators during fishing operations(SC-CAMLR-XXXV, Annex 7, paragraphs 6.14 and 8.25, see also SC-CAMLR-XXXV, paragraphs 3.84 and 3.108), and the wider ecosystem monitoring through transect and survey work, and acknowledged that these two activities would need different approaches to data collection.
A central aim of the proposed KRZ is to enhance research opportunities within the RSRMPA, andWG-EMM-16/49 aimed to demonstrate this potential by reviewing previous scientific work relevant to krill and krill-dependent predators in the proposed KRZ.
Feedback management strategy- overlap between the krill fishery and land-breeding predators 3.21 The Scientific Committee agreed that the concept of ongoing‘ecosystem checks'(Annex 6,paragraph 2.117) based on indicators of possible competition between the krill fishery and krill-dependent predators was a useful basis for management advice during the staged development of feedback management.
The authors concluded that the harvest-rate indicators should be estimated against krill biomass available in subarea/SSMUs during a year or fishing season andkrill catch limits based on single surveys can underestimate the total biomass of krill available to krill-dependent predators and the fishery.