With the longline fishing fleet still a relative newcomer to the Hawaiian islands — arriving here only in the late 1980s — the full scope of its environmental impact is still unfolding. Most recently, scientists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have determined that longline fishing has a damaging impact on albatrosses breeding in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands.
The Fish and Wildlife Service issued its report on albatross interactions with the longline fleet in late November. “At least two of the three albatross species that breed and forage in the North Pacific are experiencing considerable mortality due to interactions with various longline fisheries operating in their pelagic range,” the report states.
“The mortality occurs when the birds attempt to take baits from the hooks as they are deployed, soaking, or hauled in or are entangled in gear as they attempt to feed on discarded bait coming from the vessels. The fisheries in most immediate proximity to the breeding colonies and large concentrations of albatrosses, and for which we have most information, are the Hawai`i-based fisheries for bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) and broad-billed swordfish (Xiphius gladius).”
Information used in compiling the report comes from observers placed by the National Marine Fisheries Service on Hawai`i-based longline vessels. “Rates of albatross mortality on foreign vessels longlining on the high seas are completely unknown,” the report goes on to state. “It seems likely that estimates for the take for Hawai`i-based boats could at least be doubled to estimate total world impact on these birds.”
Widowed Birds
Birds from two species of albatross — the Laysan (Diomedia immutabilis) and the black-footed (D. nigripes) — were observed to have been killed in interactions with the longline fleet. There are no reports of interactions between the longliners and the third species, the short-tailed albatross (D. albatrus), but, according to the FWS report, “this is not surprising even if it is occurring because of the size of the total world population (500 birds) and the extremely low level of observer coverage.” (Observers are placed now on barely 5 percent of the fleet at sea at any given time.) Still, short-tailed albatrosses have been seen from longline vessels, the report continues, “and the risk of loss of one of these birds should be considered real and of great significance to the population.”
The FWS report explains the way in which the taking of even a few birds can have a devastating impact on their population. “Albatrosses are characterized by high adult survivorship, great longevity (probably well over 50 years), deferred maturity (9 years), and low reproductive output (adults unable to raise more than one chick per year and no chance to re-lay in the same year if the first egg is lost). The stability of populations such as these is more sensitive to changes in adult survivorship than to annual changes in reproductive success. Furthermore, the birds form permanent pair bonds so if one bird is widowed not only its chick but the next breeding season is also lost to that bird because of the time it takes to form a new pair.”
In the southern Pacific, juvenile albatrosses appear to be more susceptible to being hooked than adults. Should this observation hold true for the Hawaiian longline fleet, it could mean that even if the mortality rates of albatrosses were stopped immediately, populations of the birds could continue to decline for years.
Elsewhere, similar rates of interaction between albatrosses and fishing vessels have had “devastating” impact. “Hooking rates of Laysan and blackfooted albatrosses are comparable to or exceed those that have directly caused some devastating population declines in several albatross species in the southern hemisphere,” the report states.
Takes per Trip
Observers from NMFS were placed aboard vessels fishing for tuna and for swordfish. Trips targeting tuna had significantly lower rates of interaction than did those targeting swordfish. On just one “particularly bad” swordfish trip, for example, an observer counted 85 Laysan albatrosses and 50 black-footed albatrosses killed.
The Fish and Wildlife Service took the data provided by the National Marine Fisheries Service to calculate the birds killed per trip, then multiplied this by the number of trips taken by the longline fleet for the years 1990 through 1994. In that time, more than 32,500 Laysan albatross are estimated to have been killed by the fleet, while 23,382 black-footed albatross were killed. Boats targeting tuna alone accounted for just 232 of the Laysan albatross killed, and none of the black-footed albatross deaths.
The Fish and Wildlife Service manages the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands as a National Wildlife Refuge. Midway Atoll is managed as a separate National Wildlife Refuge. These two refuges provide habitat to 98 percent of the world’s population of black-footed albatross and more than 99 percent of the Laysan albatross population. The short-tailed albatross ranges throughout the north Pacific and the Bering Sea, but breeds on Japanese islands.
Declines
The rise of the longline fishing fleet in Hawai`i coincides with a drop in populations of black-footed albatross in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. “Populations of black-footed albatrosses have declined at each of our 3 permanently manned stations that have albatrosses,” the FWS report states. “This is most dramatic at French Frigate Shoals where numbers of breeding birds have fallen from 6210 pairs in 1987 to 3073 pairs in 1994.” The population of the Laysan albatross is roughly 10 times that of the black-footed albatross: consistent with this much larger population size, the report states, “we have not detected large declines in Laysan albatrosses to date.”
The population losses may not be due solely to the longline fleet. Earlier studies of the impact of high seas driftnet vessels fishing for squid in the North Pacific found that in just one year — 1990 — approximately 17,000 Laysan albatrosses and 4,400 blackfooted albatrosses were killed by that fishery. (High seas driftnet fishing is now banned worldwide, but pirate vessels continue to engage in this practice. This is discussed elsewhere in this edition of Environment Hawai`i.)
And, as mentioned earlier, the NMFS data are exclusively for Hawai`i-based longline vessels. Foreign longline vessels fishing outside U.S. waters are known to interact with albatrosses also, at a rate the Fish and Wildlife Service estimates conservatively to be at least equal to that of the Hawai`i-based fleet. For example, a report on the incidental catch of marine birds in the now-illegal North Pacific driftnet fishery found that in 1990, that fishery resulted in the deaths of 416,000 birds of 13 different species or species groups. Sooty shearwaters, short-tailed shearwaters, and Laysan albatrosses were the most commonly hooked species.1 If a pirate driftnet fleet should be continuing to operate in the area, as seems likely, this carnage is also continuing, albeit at perhaps a reduced rate.
Extortion?
The National Marine Fisheries Service collects the data from its observers placed on board vessels to report interactions between the fishing fleet and sea turtles (whose protection at sea falls under the jurisdiction of NMFS). Interactions with seabirds are noted by the observers as well, but their protection falls to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
The Fish and Wildlife Service was initially alerted to a potential problem by observers, who, barred from official contact, “would sneak to us,” one FWS staff person told Environment Hawai`i. When the FWS requested the data on bird kills from NMFS, NMFS responded by saying they would provide the data, but at a cost of $15,000 — and three times that ($45,000) if the data were provided electronically.
The FWS responded by asking if it could simply send an employee to the NMFS office in Long Beach, California, who could photocopy the observer reports. That request, too, was denied. Eventually, the raw data were obtained through a Freedom-of-Information Act request made by a private group, the Pacific Seabird Foundation. This organization then delivered the data to the Fish and Wildlife Service, which used the data to compile its report.
Now the National Marine Fisheries Service has promised its full cooperation with the Fish and Wildlife Service in addressing the problem of albatross kills. The earlier reluctance to share information was a result of the Fish and Wildlife Service asking NMFS to “analyze” the data, NMFS regional director, Hilda Diaz-Soltero, reported at the recent meeting of the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council.
Avoidance Techniques
Beth Flint of the Fish and Wildlife Service wrote the report on the albatross interactions. Flint also recently returned from a conference on albatross held in Tasmania. According to Flint, declines in albatross populations in the Southern Pacific have resulted in the Australian longline fleet being given a deadline of three years to eliminate the problem.
Measures being taken there to reduce albatross hookings include allowing bait to thaw before it is put into the water (frozen bait is more buoyant and remains at the surface longer); weighting the lines so they sink more rapidly; throwing the baited hooks into the water beyond the vessel’s wake (hooks set in turbulent water float longer); scaring birds away from the boat by hanging poles with long streamers off the vessel’s stern; and, for nighttime fishing, setting hooks after dark and holding lighting aboard the vessel to the minimum needed for health and safety.
Lost in the Shuffle
The short-tailed albatross is globally imperiled. As mentioned earlier, just 500 birds are thought to exist worldwide. The species is listed internationally as endangered, but it does not appear on the United States list of endangered species. Consequently, there is no need for the National Marine Fisheries Service to consult (under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act) with the Fish and Wildlife Service to determine the impact of fishing on the species’ survival.
According to Flint, the absence of the short-tailed albatross on the federal endangered species list was “a terrible mistake.” Efforts were made recently to add the species to the federal list, but paperwork for that became caught up in the moratorium on new listings imposed as a result of the conservative turn in the U.S. Congress.
The only legal protection afforded all three species, then, is that of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. For many years, the FWS interpreted its jurisdiction following an opinion rendered by an officer in the Nixon administration. Under that opinion, migratory birds were protected only within three miles of U.S. coastline. In 1994, the Department of Justice issued an opinion stating that the sense of the law was to provide protection to birds within the full 200-mile limit of the territorial waters. The Fish and Wildlife Service now has to agree to this expanded scope of enforcement, and, according to FWS sources, it is still “under discussion.”
If the Fish and Wildlife Service does agree to enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act out to 200 miles, that may pose a problem for the longline fleet. Unlike the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act has no provision for “incidental takes” of protected birds. Any killing of a protected species is outlawed, whether it is done in a manner “incidental” to another enterprise (such as fishing), or deliberately. Under a strict reading of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, then, any fishing that results in the killing of even one albatross would have to be banned.
1. Douglas H. Johnson, Terry L. Schaffer, and Patrick J. Gould, “Incidental Catch of Marine Birds in the North Pacific High Seas Driftnet Fisheries in 1990,” International North Pacific Fisheries Commission Bulletin, 53 (1993), pp.473-483.
Volume 6, Number 7 January 1996
Leave a Reply