Chapter 11. Capture Fisheries
Writing team: Fabio Hazin, Enrique Marschoff (Co-Lead member) Beatrice Padovani Ferreira (Co-Lead member), Jake Rice (Co-Lead member) Andrew Rosenberg (Co-Lead member)
1. Present status and trends of commercially exploited fish and shellfish stocks
Production of fish from capture fisheries (Figure 1) and aquaculture for huma consumption and industrial purposes has grown at the rate of 3.2 per cent for the pas half century from about 20 to nearly 160 million mt by 2012 (FAO 2014).
MARINE WATERS
Million tonnes
Figure 1. Evolution of world’s capture of marine species. From SOFIA (FAO 2014).
Globally, marine capture fisheries produced 82.6 million mt in 2011 and 79.7 million m in 2012. The relatively small year-to-year variations largely reflect changes in the catc of Peruvian anchoveta, which can vary from about 4 to 8 million tons per annum.
In 2011 and 2012, 18 countries accounted for more than 76 per cent of global marin harvests in marine capture fisheries (Table 1). Eleven of these countries are in Asia.
© 2016 United Nations  

Table 1. Marine capture fisheries production per country. From SOFIA (FAO, 2014).
Marine capture fisheries: major producer countries
rit rad perrT tad peg rat) ral raid Piet ee or ai) eoeaed Lceracrerhiier fa 1 China Asia 12 212 188 13 536 409 13 869 604 13.6 2 2 Indonesia Asia 4275115 5 332 862 5 420 247 27.0 1 3 United States Americas 4912 627 5 131 087 5 107 559 40 0. of Americ 4 Peru Americas 6053 120 8211716 4807 923 -20.6 41 5 Russian Asial 3 090 798 4005 737 4068 850 31.6 1. Federation Europ 6 Japan Asia 4626 904 3741222 3611 384 -21.9 3. 7 India Asia 2954 796 3 250099 3 402 405 15.1 4 8 Chile Americas 3612 048 3 063 467 2572 881 28.8 -16. 9 Viet Nam Asia 1647 133 2 308 200 2.418 700 468 4 10 Myanmar Asia 1053 720 2 169820 2 332 790 121.4 7 11 Norway Europe 2 548 353 2 281 856 2 149 802 -15.6 5 12 Philippines Asia 2 033 325 2171327 2 127 046 46 2. 13 Republic Asia 1.649 061 1737 870 1660 165 07 4 of Kore 14 Thailand Asia 2651 223 1610418 1612073 39.2 0. 15 Malaysia Asia 1283 256 1373 105 1472 239 147 7. 16 Mexico Americas 1257 699 1452970 1 467 790 16.7 1. 17 Iceland Europe 1 986 314 1138274 1 449 452 -27.0 27. 18 Morocco Africa 916 988 949 881 1158 474 26.3 22. Total 18 major countries 58764668 63466320 60709384 3.3 4 World total 79674875 82609926 79705910 0.0 3. Share 18 major countries (percentage) 738 76.8 76.2
In 2011-2012, the top ten species (by tonnage) in marine global landings were Peruvia anchoveta, Alaska pollock, skipjack tuna, various sardine species, Atlantic herring, chu mackerel, scads, yellowfin tuna, Japanese anchovy and largehead hairtail. In 2012, 2 species had landings over a half a million tons and this represented 38 per cent of th total global marine capture production. Many of these top species are small pelagi fishes (e.g. sardines, chub mackerels) and shellfish (squids and shrimp) whos abundance is highly sensitive to changing climatic conditions, resulting in significan interannual variability in production.
Tuna harvests in 2012 were a record high, exceeding more than seven million tons Sharks, rays and chimaera catches have been stable during the last decade at abou 760,000 tons annually. Shrimp production from marine capture fisheries reached  record high in 2012 at 3.4 million tons; much of this catch was from the Northwest an Western Central Pacific, although catches also increased in the Indian Ocean and th Western Atlantic. Cephalopod catches exceeded 4 million tons in 2012.
© 2016 United Nations  

1.1 Regional Status
Significant growth in marine capture fisheries has occurred in the eastern Indian Ocean the eastern central Atlantic and the northwest, western central and eastern centra Pacific over the last decade, but landings in many other regions have declined. Thus even though overall landings have been quite stable, the global pattern is continuing t adjust to changing conditions and regional development of fishing capacity (Table 2).
Table 2. Fishing areas and captures (from SOFIA, FAO, 2014 Marine capture: major fishing areas
STE li i tals lala beabeahiaeiied Fra Fea ar Fo e oe) SE
21 Atlantic, Northwest 2293 460 2.002 323 1977710 =-13.8 -1 27 Atlantic, Northeast 10 271 103 8 048 436 8 103 189 21.1 0 31 Atlantic, Western Central 1770746 1472538 1 463 347 174 0. 34 Atlantic, Eastern Central 3549945 4303 664 4056 529 14.3 5 37 Mediterranean and Black Sea 1478694 1 436 743 1282090 -13.3 -10. 41 Atlantic, Southwest 1987 296 1763 319 1878 166 5.5 6 47 Atlantic, Southeast 1736 867 1263 140 1562 943 -10.0 23. 51 Indian Ocean, Western 4433 699 4206 888 4518 075 19 7 5s7 Indian Ocean, Eastern 5 333 553 7 128 047 7 395 588 387 3 61 Pacific, Northwest 19875552 21429083 21461956 8.0 0 67 Pacific, Northeast 2915275 2950 858 2915594 0.0 1. 71 Pacific, Western Central 10831454 11614143 12 078 487 115 4 7 Pacific, Eastern Central 1769 177 1923 433 1940 202 97 0 81 Pacific, Southwest 731027 581760 601 393 17.7 3 87 Pacific, Southeast 10554479 12287713 8291 844 21.4 325
18, 48, Arctic and Antarctic areas 142 548 197 838 178 797 25.4 9.6
58, 88
World total 79674875 82609926 79705910
An estimated 3.7 million fishing vessels operate in marine waters globally; 68 per cent o these operate from Asia and 16 per cent from Africa. Seventy per cent are motorized but in Africa only 36 per cent are motorized. Of the 58.3 million people estimated to b employed in fisheries and aquaculture (4.4 per cent of total estimated economicall active people), 84 per cent are in Asia and 10 per cent in Africa. Women are estimate to account for more than 15 per cent of people employed in the fisheries sector (FA 2014).
© 2016 United Nations  

2. Present status of small-scale artisanal or subsistence fishing
The FAO defines small-scale, artisanal fisheries as those that are household based, us relatively small amounts of capital and remain close to shore. Their catch is primarily fo local consumption. Around the world there is substantial variation as to which fisherie are considered small-scale and artisanal. The United Nations Conference on Sustainabl Development (Rio+20) emphasized the role of small-scale fisheries in poverty alleviatio and sustainable development. In some developing countries, including small islan States, small-scale fisheries provide more than 60 per cent of protein intake. Its additio to the diets of low-income populations (including pregnant and breastfeeding mother and young children) offers an important means for improving food security an nutrition. Small-scale fisheries make significant contributions to food security by makin fish available to poor populations, and are critical to maintain the livelihoods o vulnerable populations in developing countries. Their role in production and _ it contribution to food security and nutrition is often underestimated or ignored subsistence fishing is rarely included in national catch statistics (HLPE, 2014). Anyhow the key issues in artisanal fisheries are their access both to stocks and to markets (HLPE 2014).
Significant numbers of women work in small-scale fisheries and many indigenou peoples and their communities rely on these fisheries. The “Voluntary Guidelines on th Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context o National Food Security” (FAO 2012) are important in consideration of access issues FAO also notes the linkage to international human rights law, including the right to food Most of the people involved in small-scale fisheries live in developing countries, ear low incomes, depend on informal work, are exposed to the absence of work regulation and lack access to social protection schemes. Although the International Labou Organization adopted the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No.188), progress toward ratification of the Convention has been slow.
FAO continues to encourage the establishment of fishers’ organizations an cooperatives as a means of empowerment for small-scale fishers in the managemen process to establish responsible fisheries policy. They have also highlighted the need t reduce post-harvest losses in small-scale fisheries as a means of improving production Two special sections discuss these issues in SOFIA. Besides the “Voluntary Guidelines o the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context o National Food Security’, FAO also adopted the “Voluntary Guidelines for Securin Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Povert Eradication” in June 2014.
© 2016 United Nations  

3. Impacts of capture fisheries on marine ecosystems
The effects of exploitation of marine wildlife were first perceived as a direct impac primarily on the exploited populations themselves. These concerns were recognized i the 19°" and early 20" centuries (e.g., Michelet, 1875; Garstang, 1900; Charcot, 1911 and began to receive policy attention in the Stockholm Fisheries Conference of 189 (Rozwadowski, 2002). In 1925, an attempt to globally manage “marine industries” an their impact on the ecosystems was presented before the League of Nations (Suarez 1927), but little action was taken. Only following WWII, with rapid increases in fishin technology, was substantial overfishing in both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (Gullan and Carroz, 1968) acknowledged. Establishment in 1946 of FAO, with a section fo fisheries, provided an initial forum for global discussions of the need for regulation o fisheries.
Capture fisheries affect marine ecosystems through a number of different mechanisms These have been summarized many times, for example by Jennings and Kaiser (1998 who categorized effects as:
(i) The effects of fishing on predator-prey relationships, which can lead to shift in community structure that do not revert to the original condition upon the cessatio of fishing pressure (known as alternative stable states);
(ii) Fishing can alter the population size and body-size composition of species leading to fauna composed of primarily small individual organisms (this can include th whole spectrum of organisms, from worms to whales);
(iii) Fishing can lead to genetic selection for different body and reproductiv traits and can extirpate distinct local stocks;
(iv) Fishing can affect populations of non-target species (e.g., cetaceans, birds reptiles and elasmobranch fishes) as a result of by-catches or ghost fishing;
(v) Fishing can reduce habitat complexity and perturb seabed (benthic communities.
Here these impacts are discussed first for the species and food webs being exploite directly, and then for the other ecosystem effects on by-catches and habitats of fishing Part VI of this Assessment provides additional detail regarding impacts on biodiversit and habitats.
3.1 Target species and communities
The removal of a substantial number of individuals of the target species affects th population structure of the target species, other species taken by the gear, and the foo web. The magnitude of these effects is highly variable and depends on the specie considered and the type and intensity of fishing. In general, policies and managemen measures were instituted first to manage the impact of fisheries on the target species,
© 2016 United Nations  

with ecosystem considerations being added to target species management primarily i the past two to three decades.
If the exploited fish stock can compensate through increased productivity because th remaining individuals grow faster and produce more larvae, with the increase i productivity extracted by the fishery, then fishing can be sustained. However, if the rat of exploitation is faster than the stock can compensate for by increasing growth an reproduction, then the removals will not be sustained and the stock will decline. At th level of the target species, sustainable exploitation rates will result in the tota population biomass being reduced roughly by half, compared to unexploited conditions.
The ability of a given population of fish to compensate for increased mortality due t fishing depends in large part on the biological characteristics of the population such a growth and maturation rates, natural mortality rates and lifespan, spawning pattern and reproduction dynamics. In general, slow growing long-lived species ca compensate for and therefore sustain lower exploitation rates (the proportion of th stock removed by fishing each year) than fast growing shorter lived species (Jennings e al. 1998). In addition, increased exploitation rates inherently truncate the ag composition of the population unless only certain ages are targeted. This truncatio results in both greater variability in population abundance through time (Hsieh et al 2006) and greater vulnerability to changing environmental conditions, including climat impacts. Very long-lived species with low rates of reproduction may not be able to trul compensate for increased mortality, and therefore any significant fishing pressure ma not be sustainable on such species. Of course there are many complicating factors, bu this general pattern is important for understanding sustainable exploitation of marin species.
The concept of “maximum sustainable yield” (MSY), adopted as the goal of man national and international regulatory bodies, is based on this inherent trade-of between increasing harvests and the decreasing ability of a population to compensat for removals. Using stock size and exploitation rates that would produce MSY, or othe management reference points, FAO has concluded that around 29 per cent of assesse stocks are presently overfished (biomass below the level that can produce MSY on  continuing basis; Figure 2 below). That percentage may be declining in the more recen years, but has shown little overall trend since the early 1990s. FAO estimates that i overfished stocks were rebuilt, they would yield an additional 16.5 million mt of fis worth 32 billion United States dollars in the long term (Ye et al., 2013). However significant social and economic costs may be incurred during the transition, as man fisheries would need to reduce exploitation in the short term to allow this rebuilding.
© 2016 United Nations  

Global trends in the state of world marine fish stocks, 1974-2011
Percentage of stocks assesse 10 9 8 70
Overfished
6 50 Fully fishe 4 3 20
Underfished
1  74 78 82 86 90 94 98 02 06 11
ME At biologically unsustainable levels HE: «(Within biologically sustainable levels
Figure 2. State of world marine fish stocks (from SOFIA, FAO 2014)
Anyhow, for many ecological reasons, the MSY is an over-simplified reference point fo fisheries (Larkin, 1997; Pauly, 1994). For example, declines in productivity can result a fewer fish live to grow to a large size, because larger, older fish produc disproportionately more eggs of higher quality than younger, smaller individuals (Hixo et al. 2013). Long-term overfishing may even change the genetic pool of the specie concerned, because the larger and faster-growing specimens have a greater probabilit of being removed, thereby reducing overall productivity (Hard et al., 2008; Ricker 1981). Interactions between species may also mean that all stocks cannot be maintaine at or above the biomass that will produce MSY. Strategies for taking these interaction into account have been developed (Polovina 1984, Townsend et al. 2008, Fulton et al 2011; Farcas and Rossberg 2014, http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.0199), but are not yet i routine practice.
3.2 Ecosystem effects of fishing
The FAO Ecosystem approach to Fisheries (FAO 2003) has detailed guidelines describin an ecosystem approach to fisheries. The goal of such an approach is to conserve th structure, diversity and functioning of ecosystems while satisfying societal and huma needs for food and the social and economic benefits of fishing (FAO 2003). There ar ongoing efforts around the world to implement an ecosystem approach to fisheries tha encompasses the aspects considered below, among others.
© 2016 United Nations  

3.3 Ecosystem effects of fishing — food webs
Marine food webs are complex and exploiting commercially important species can hav a wide range of effects that propagate through the food web. These include a cascadin effect along trophic levels, affecting the whole food web (Casini et al., 2008; Sieben e al., 2011). The removal of top predators may result in changes in the abundance an composition of lower trophic levels. These changes might even reach other an apparently unrelated fisheries, as has been documented, for example, for sharks an scallops (Myers et al., 2007) and sea otters, kelp, and sea urchins (Szpak et al., 2013) Because of these complexities in both population and community responses t exploitation, it is now widely argued that target harvesting rates should be less tha MSY. No consensus exists on how much less, but as information about harvest amount and stock biology is more uncertain, it is agreed that exploitation should be reduce correspondingly (FAO, 1995).
The controversial concept of “balanced harvesting” refers to a strategy that consider the sustainability of the harvest at the level of the entire food web (see, for example Bundy, A., et al. 2005; Garcia et al., 2011; FAO 2014). Rather than harvesting a relativel small number of species at their single-species MSYs, balanced harvesting suggest there are benefits to be gained by exploiting all parts of the marine ecosystem in direc proportion to their respective productivities. It is argued that balanced harvesting give the highest possible yield for any level of perturbation of the food web, On the othe hand, the economics of the fishery may be adversely affected by requiring the harves of larger amounts of low-value but highly productive stocks.
3.4 Other ecosystem effects of fishing by-catches
Fisheries do not catch the target species alone. All species caught or damaged that ar not the target are known as by-catch; these include, inter alia, marine mammals seabirds, fish, kelp, sharks, mollusks, etc. Part of the by-catch might be used, consume or processed (incidental catch) but a significant amount is simply discarded (discards) a sea. Global discard levels are estimated to have declined since the early 1990s, but a 7.3 million tons are still high (Kelleher, 2005).
Fisheries differ greatly in their discard rates, with shrimp trawls producing by far th greatest discard ratios relative to landed catches of target species (Table 3).
© 2016 United Nations  

Table 3. Discards of fish in major fisheries by gear type. From Kelleher, 2005.
Weighted
2 Range of
Fishery Landings Discards'  *Verage discard discard rates
(%) (% Shrimp trawl 1 126 267 1 865 064 62.3 0-9 Demersal finfish trawl 16 050 978 1704 107 9.6 0.5-8 Tuna and HMS longline 1 403 591 560 481 28.5 0-4 Midwater (pelagic) trawl 4 133 203 147 126 3.4 0-5 Tuna purse seine 2 673 378 144 152 5.1 0.4-1 Multigear and multispecies 6 023 146 85 436 1.4 na Mobile trap/pot 240 551 72 472 23.2 0-6 Dredge 165 660 65 373 28.3 9-6 Small pelagics purse seine 3 882 885 48 852 1.2 0-2 Demersal longline 581 560 47 257 7.5 0.5-5 Gillnet (surface/bottom/trammel)? 3 350 299 29 004 0.5 0-6 Handline 155211 3149 2.0 0- Tuna pole and line 818 505 3121 0.4 0- Hand collection 1 134 432 1671 0.1 0- Squid jig 960 432 1601 0.1 0-1
‘The sum of the discards presented in this table is less than the global estimate, as a number of discard databas records could not be assigned to particular fisheries.
Very few time series have been found that document trends in by-catch levels fo marine fisheries in general, or even for particular fisheries or species groups over longe periods. Although both Alverson et al. (1994) and Kelleher (2005) provide globa estimates of discards in fisheries that differ by a factor of three, the latter source (wit the lower estimate) stresses that the methodological differences between the tw estimates were so large that two estimates should not be compared (a warnin confirmed in the Kelleher report by the authors of the earlier report).
When even rough trend information is available, it is for particular species of concern i particular fisheries, and is usually intended to document the effectiveness of mitigatio measures that have been implemented already. As an illustration, in the supplementa information to Anderson et al. (2011), which reports a global examination of longlin fisheries, of the 67 fisheries for which data could be found, two estimates of seabird by catches were available for only 17 of them. Of those, the more recent seabird by-catc estimates were at least 50 per cent lower than the earlier estimates in 15 of th fisheries, and reduced to 5 per cent or less of the earlier estimates in 10 of the fisheries Several reasons were given, depending on the fishery; they included reduction in effor and the use of a variety of technical and occasionally temporal and/or spatial mitigatio measures. These can be taken as illustrative of the potential effectiveness of mitigatio efforts, but should not be extrapolated to other longline fisheries.
The more typical case is reflected in FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (2009 and the report of a FAO Expert Consultation (FAO, 2010), which call for efforts t monitor by-catches and discards more consistently, in order to provide the data neede to document trends. Even the large initiative by the United States to document by catches in fisheries (National Marine Fisheries Service, 2011) considers the reporte estimates to be a starting point for gaining insight into trends in by-catch and discards.
© 2016 United Nations  

It documents the very great differences among fisheries within and among the Unite States fisheries management regions, but has neither tables nor figures depicting trend for any fishery.
By-catch rates may result in overfishing of species with less ability to cope with fishin pressures. The biological impact of by-catches varies greatly with the species bein taken, and depends on the same life-history characteristics that were presented abov for the target species of fisheries. By-catch mortality is a particular concern for smal cetaceans, sea turtles and some species of seabirds and sharks and rays. These issue are discussed in the corresponding chapters in Part VI on marine mammals (Chapter 37) seabirds (38), marine reptiles (39) and elasmobranchs (40). In general, long-lived an slow-growing species are the most affected (Hall et al., 2000). Thus, the benchmarks se for a given fishery also consider by-catch species.
The geographic distribution of discard rates is shown in Figure 3 (from Kelleher, 2005).
The numbers in bold are the FAO Statistical Areas and the tonnages are of by-catch. By catches are clearly a global issue, and can be addressed from local to global scales. Th review by Kelleher (2005) reports a very large number of cases where measures hav been implemented by States, by international organizations, or proactively by th fishing industry (especially when the industry is seeking independent certification fo sustainability), and by-catch and discard rates have decreased and in a few cases bee even eliminated.
A recent global review of practices by regional fisheries management organizations an arrangements (RFMO/As) for deep sea fisheries found that all RFMO/As have adopte some policies and measures to address by-catch issues in fisheries in their regulator areas. However, almost nowhere was full monitoring in place to documen effectiveness of these policies (UNEP/CBD/FAO, 2011). Nevertheless, extensiv evidence exists that by-catches can be mitigated by changes in fishing gear, times, an places, and the incremental cost is often, but not always, small.
© 2016 United Nations 1 

Discard Rate over 35%
15% - 20 10% - 13%
8% -9.5 5% -7.8% p : . as or
18 00 tonnes 0
Scale at the Equator
o 2500 k —— 80"
a0" Ey a" 100" 120" Tao" Teo" 180 W160" 40" Ta Too" 0" or a a Wo E20 a0
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 3. Distribution of discards by FAO statistical areas (numbers in bold are FAO statistical areas catches in tons). * Note: the high discard rate in FAO Area 81 is a data artefact. Source: Kelleher, 2005.
At the global level, calls for action on by-catch and discards have been raised at th United Nations General Assembly, including in UNGA resolutions on sustainabl fisheries and at the Committee on Fisheries. In response, FAO developed Internationa Guidelines on Bycatch Management and Reduction of Discards; these were accepted i 2011 (FAO, 2011).
3.5 Ecosystem effects of fishing — benthic and demersal habitats
Fishing gear impacts on the seafloor and other habitats depend on the gear design an use, as well as on the particular environmental features. For example, in benthi habitats, substrate type and the natural disturbance regime are particularly importan (Collie et al., 2000). Mobile bottom-contacting gear (including bottom trawls) also ca resuspend sediments, mobilizing contaminants and particles with unknown ecologica effects on both benthic and demersal habitats (Kaiser et al., 2001).
© 2016 United Nations 11

A very large literature exists on habitat impacts of fishing gear; experts disagree on bot the magnitude of the issue and the effectiveness of management measures and policie to address the impacts. In the late 2000s, several expert reviews were conducted b FAO and the Convention on Biological Diversity in cooperation with UNEP. Thes reports (FAO, 2007; 2009) provide a recent summary of the types of impacts tha various types of fishing gear can have on the seafloor. Most conclusions ar straightforward:
e All types of gear that contact the bottom may alter habitat features, with impact larger as the gear becomes heavier.
e Mobile bottom-contacting gear generally has a larger area of impact on the seabe than static gear, and consequently the impacts may be correspondingly larger.
e The nature of the impact depends on the features of the habitat. Structurall complex and fragile habitats are most vulnerable to impacts, with biogenic features such as corals and glass sponges, easily damaged and sometimes requiring centurie to recover. On the other hand, impacts of trawls on soft substrates, like mud an sand, may not be detectable after even a few days.
e The nature of the impacts also depends on the natural disturbance regime, wit high-energy (strong current and/or wave action) habitats often showing littl incremental impacts of fishing gear, whereas areas of very low natural disturbanc may be more severely affected by fishing gears.
e Impacts of fishing gears can occur at all scales of fishery operations; some of th most destructive practices, such as drive netting, dynamite and poisons, althoug uncommon, are used only in very small-scale fisheries (Kaiser 2001).
All gear might be lost or discarded at sea, in particular pieces of netting. These give ris to what is known as “ghost fishing”, that is fishing gear continuing to capture and Kil marine animals even after it is lost by fishermen. Assessment of their impacts at either  global or local level is difficult, but the limited number of studies available on it incidence and prevalence indicate that ghost fishing can be a significant problem (Lais et al., 1999, Bilkovic et al. 2012).
Quantitative trend information on habitat impacts is generally not available. Man reports provide maps of how the geographical extent and intensity of bottom contacting fishing gear have changed over time (e.g. Figure 4 from Gilkinson et al., 2006 Greenstreet et al., 2006). These maps show large changes in the patterns of th pressure, and accompanying graphs show the percentage of area fished over a series o years. However, these are individual studies, and broad-scale monitoring of benthi communities is not available. Insights from individual studies need to be considere along with information on the substrate types in the areas being fished to know ho increases in effort may be increasing benthic impacts. Furthermore, the recover potential of the benthic biota has been studied in some specific geographies an circumstances but broadly applicable patterns are not yet clear (e.g., Steele et al. 2002 Claudet et al. 2008).
© 2016 United Nations 1 

Area Scoure (%)
Ho 0 07 76t 141 52to 1 9 to 2.
2810 3 3.04 to
3.8 t 49410 6 645to 8.7 .73.10 11.7 7710 16.3 33 to 25.06
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
Figure 4. Distribution of trawling effort in Atlantic Canadian waters in 1987 and 2000, based on data o bottom-trawl activity adjusted to total effort for <150 t. From Gilkinson et al., 2006.
Even without quantitative data on trends in benthic communities, however, marin areas closed to fishing have increased. Views differ on what level of protection i actually given to areas that are labelled as closed to fishing, but the trend in increasin area protection is not challenged (c.f. CBD, 2012; Spalding et al., 2013). Moreover, th size of the areas being closed to fishing that are not already affected by historical fishin is unknown, as is the recovery rate for such areas, and high-seas fisheries continue t expand into new areas, although probably at a slower rate as RFMO/As increase thei actions to implement United Nations General Assembly Resolution 61/105 (FAO, 2014) Hence the pressure on seafloor habitats and benthic communities from bottom contacting fishing gear may be decreasing slightly, but has been very high for decade on all continental shelves and in many offshore areas at depths of less than severa hundred meters (FAO, 2007).
4. Effects of pollution on seafood safety
Fish and particularly predatory fish are prone to be contaminated with toxic chemicals i the marine environment (e.g., organochlorines, mercury, cadmium, lead); these ar found mostly in their liver and lipids. Because many sources of marine contaminatio are land-based (Chapter 20), freshwater fish may contain higher concentrations o contaminants than marine species (Yamada et al., 2014). Furthermore, contamination o the organisms found there is highly variable at the regional and local levels.
© 2016 United Nations 1 

Processing methods might significantly reduce the lead and cadmium contents of fis (Ganjavi et al., 2010) and presumably those of other contaminants, whos concentrations generally increase with size (age) of fish (Storelli et al., 2010).
Some species of fish might be toxic (venomous) on their own, such as species of th genus Siganus and Plotosus in Singapore, which are being culled to reduce thei presence on beaches (Kwik, 2012) and Takifugu rubripes (fugu), whose properties ar relatively well known, such that it is processed accordingly (Yongxiang et al., 2011) However, in extreme situations, human consumption of the remains of fugu processin resulted in severe episodes (Saiful Islam et al., 2011).
Fish, mussels, shrimp and other invertebrates might become toxic through thei consumption of harmful algae, whose blooms increased due to climate change pollution, the spreading of dead (hypoxic/anoxic) zones, and other causes.
Harmful algal blooms are often colloquially known as red tides. These blooms are mos common in coastal marine ecosystems but also the open ocean might be affected an are caused by blooms of microscopic algae (including cyanobacteria). Toxins produce by these organisms are accumulated by filtrators that become toxic for species at highe trophic levels, including man. Climate change and eutrophication are considered as par of a complex of environmental stressors resulting in harmful blooms (Anderson et al. 2012). The problem has prompted research to develop models to predict the behaviou of these blooms (Zhao and Ghedira, 2014). Since the 1970s, the phenomenon ha spread from the northern hemisphere temperate waters to the southern hemispher and has now been well documented at least in Argentina, Australia, Brunei Darussalam China, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Republic of Korea and Sout Africa, but the expansion might also be due to increased awareness of the phenomeno (Anderson et al., 2012) The impact of toxic algal blooms is mostly economic, bu episodes of severe illness, even with high mortality rates, might occur, which promp regulations closing the affected fisheries.
One of the best-known risks in this category is ciguatera, a well-known toxin ingested b human consumption of predatory fish in some regions of the world. The toxin come from a dinoflagellate and is passed along and concentrated up the food chain (Hamilto et al., 2010). Processed foods are usually safer from the standpoint of contamination Thus, processing results in added value to the raw food (Satyanarayana et al., 2012) However, inadequate harvest and postharvest handling and processing of the catche might result in contamination with pathogenic organisms (Boziaris et al., 2013).
The general trend expected is an increase in the frequency of harmful algal blooms, i the bioaccumulation of chemical contaminants and in the prevalence of common food borne pathogenic microorganisms (Marques et al., 2014), although the occurrence o catastrophic events seems to be diminishing.
© 2016 United Nations 1 

5. Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing
The FAO International Plan of Action for IUU fishing (FAO 2001) defines IUU fishing as:
- Illegal fishing refers to activities conducted by national or foreign vessels in water under the jurisdiction of a State, without the permission of that State, or i contravention of its laws and regulations; conducted by vessels flying the flag of State that are parties to a relevant regional fisheries management organization but operate i contravention of the conservation and management measures adopted by tha organization and by which the States are bound, or relevant provisions of the applicabl international law; or in violation of national laws or international obligations, includin those undertaken by cooperating States to a relevant regional fisheries managemen organization;
- Unreported fishing refers to fishing activities which have not been reported, or hav been misreported, to the relevant national authority, in contravention of national law and regulations; or undertaken in the area of competence of a relevant regiona fisheries management organization which have not been reported or have bee misreported, in contravention of the reporting procedures of that organization;
- Unregulated fishing refers to fishing activities in the area of application of a relevan regional fisheries management organization that are conducted by vessels withou nationality, or by those flying the flag of a State not party to that organization, or by  fishing entity, in a manner that is not consistent with or contravenes the conservatio and management measures of that organization; or in areas or for fish stocks in relatio to which there are no applicable conservation or management measures and wher such fishing activities are conducted in a manner inconsistent with State responsibilitie for the conservation of living marine resources under international law.
Notwithstanding the definitions above, certain forms of unregulated fishing may no always be in violation of applicable international law, and may not require th application of measures envisaged under the International Plan of Action (IPOA). FA considers IUU fishing to be a major global threat to sustainable management of fisherie and to stable socio-economic conditions for many small-scale fishing communities. Thi illegal fishing not only undermines responsible fisheries management, but also typicall raises concerns about working conditions and safety. Illegal fishing also raises concern about connections to other criminal actions, such as drugs and human trafficking. IU fishing activity has escalated over the last two decades and is estimated to take 11-2 million mt of fish per annum with a value of 10-23 billion United States dollars. In othe words, IUU fishing is responsible for about the same amount of global harvest as woul be gained by ending overfishing and rebuilding fish stocks. It is an issue of equa concern on a global scale.
International efforts by RFMO/As, States and the European Union are aimed a eliminating IUU fishing. FAO notes that progress has been slow and suggested (FA 2014) that better information-sharing regarding fishing vessels engaged in illegal
© 2016 United Nations 1 

activities, traceability of vessels and fishery products, and other additional measure might improve the situation.
6. Significant economic and/or social aspects of capture fisheries
Capture fisheries are a key source of nutrition and employment for millions of peopl around the world. FAO (2014) estimates that 800 million people are still malnourishe and small-scale fisheries in particular are an important component of efforts to alleviat both hunger and poverty.
Growth in production of fish for food (3.2 per cent per annum) has exceeded huma population growth (1.6 per annum) over the last half century. Recently the growth o aquaculture, which is among the fastest-growing food-producing sectors globally, ha formed a major part of meeting rising demand and now accounts for half of the fis produced for human consumption. By 2030 this figure will rise to two-thirds of fis production.
Per capita consumption of fish has risen from 9.9 kg per annum to 19.2 kg in 2012. I developing countries this rise is from 5.2 kg to 17.8 kg. In 2010, fish accounted for 16. per cent of the global population’s consumption of animal protein and 4.3 billion peopl obtained 15 per cent of their animal protein from fishery products.
Employment in the fisheries sector has also grown faster than the world population an faster than in agriculture. However, of the 58.3 million people employed in the fisher sector, 83 per cent were employed in capture fisheries in 1990. But employment i capture fisheries has decreased to 68 per cent of total fishery sector employment i 2012 according to FAO (2014) statistics.
7. The future status of fish and shellfish stocks over the next decade
World population growth, together with urbanization, increasing development, incom and living standards, all point to an increasing demand for seafood. Capture fisherie provide high-quality food that is high in protein, essential amino acids, and long-chai poly-unsaturated fatty acids, with many benefits for human health. The rate of increas in demand for fish was more than 2.5 per cent since 1950 and is likely to continu (HPLE, 2014).
Climate change is expected to have substantial and unexpected effects on the marin environment as detailed throughout this Assessment. Some of these impacts may no negatively impact fisheries and indeed may result in increased availability for captur fisheries in some areas. Nevertheless, there will certainly be an increase in uncertaint with regard to effects on stock productivities and distributions, habitat stability ecosystem interactions, and the configuration of ecosystems around the globe. Whether
© 2016 United Nations 1 

these effects on the resources will be “mild” or “severe” will require prudent fisherie management that is precautionary enough to be prepared to assist fishers, thei communities and, in general, stakeholders in adapting to the social and economi consequences of climate change (Grafton, 2009).
Small-scale, artisanal fisheries are likely to be more vulnerable to the impacts of climat change and increasing uncertainty than large-scale fisheries (Roessig et al. 2004). Whil small-scale fisheries may be able to economically harvest a changing mix of species varying distribution patterns and productivity of stocks may have severe consequence for subsistence fishing. Further, the value of small-scale fisheries as providers not onl of food, but also of livelihoods and for poverty alleviation will be compromised by direc competition with large-scale operations with access to global markets (Alder an Sumaila, 2004).
The data clearly indicate that the amount of fish that can be extracted from historicall exploited wild stocks is unlikely to increase substantially. Some increase is possibl through the rebuilding of depleted stocks, a central goal of fisheries management Current trends diverge between well-assessed regions showing stabilization of fis biomass and other regions continuing to decline (Worm and Branch, 2012).
In Europe, North America and Oceania, major commercially exploited fish stocks ar currently stable, with the prospect that reduced exploitation rates should achiev rebuilding of the biomass in the long term. In the rest of the world, fish biomass is, o average, declining due to lower management capacity. Many fisheries may still b productive, but prospects are poor (Worm et al., 2009).
The growing demand for fish products cannot be met from sustainable capture fisherie in the next decade. On the other hand, the potential for sustainable exploitation of non traditional stocks is not well known. Particularly in light of the growth of th aquaculture sector with a need for fishmeal for feed, the pressure to exploit non traditional resources will increase even if the impacts on marine ecosystems are not wel understood.
8. Identify gaps in capacity to engage in capture fisheries and to assess th environmental, social and economic aspects of capture fisheries and the statu and trends of living marine resources
Rebuilding overfished stocks is a major challenge for capture fisheries management Another key challenge is making better, more sustainable use of existing marin resources while conserving the ecosystem upon which they depend. From a globa perspective this will require filling a number of gaps, both scientific and in managemen capacity (Worm et al., 2009):
- The transfer of fishing effort from developed to developing countries is a process tha has been accelerating since the 1960s. Almost all of the fish caught by foreign fleets is
© 2016 United Nations 1 

consumed in industrialized countries and will have important implications for foo security (Alder and Sumaila, 2004) and biodiversity in the developing world. In man regions there is insufficient capacity to assess and manage marine resources in th context of this pressure;
- The increase in IUU fishing operations is a major challenge for management that wil require increased management capacity if it is to be controlled;
- Recovery of depleted stocks is still a poorly understood process, particularly fo demersal species. It is potentially constrained by the magnitude of the previous decline the loss of biodiversity, species’ life histories, species interactions, and other factors. I other words, the basic principle for recovery is straightforward — fishing pressure need to be reduced. But the specific application of plans to promote recovery of the stoc once fishing pressure is reduced requires significant scientific and managemen capacity;
- Addressing the challenges of spatial management of the ocean for fisheries conservation and many other purposes, and the overall competition for ocean space will depend upon greater scientific and management capacity in most regions.
The average performance of stock-assessed fisheries indicates that most are slowl approaching the fully fished status (sensu FAO). On the other hand, recent analyses o unassessed fish stocks indicate that they are mostly in poorer condition (Costello et al. 2012). The problem is severe because most of these stocks sustain small-scale fisherie critical for the food security in developing countries. Better information and th capacity to manage many of these stocks will be needed to improve the situation.
Debates among fisheries specialists have been more concerned about biologica sustainability and economic efficiencies than about reducing hunger and malnutritio and supporting livelihoods (HLPE, 2014). It is necessary to develop the tools fo managing small-scale fisheries efficiently, particularly in view of the competing long distance fleets. The fishing agreements allowing long-distance fleets to operate i developing countries had not yielded the expected results in terms of building th capacity to administer or sustainably fish their resources. IUU fishing becoming mor prominent has exacerbated the situation (Gagern and van den Bergh, 2013). It i necessary for developing countries to build the capacity to develop sustainabl industrial fisheries and to develop stock assessment capabilities for small-scale fisherie balancing food security and conservation objectives (Allison and Horemans, 2006).
© 2016 United Nations 1 

References
Alder, J., and Sumaila, U.R. (2004). Western Africa: A Fish Basket of Europe Past an Present. The Journal of Environment Development, June, 13 (2): 156-178.
Allison, E.H., Horemans, B. (2006). Putting the principles of the Sustainable Livelihood Approach into fisheries development policy and practice. Marine Policy, 30: 757 766.
Alverson, D.L., Freeberg, M.H., Murawski, S.A., and Pope, J.G. (1994). A globa assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 339: 235 p.
Anderson, O.R.J., Small, C.J., Croxall, J.P., Dunn, E.K., Sullivan, B.J., Yates, O., Black, A (2011). Global seabird bycatch in longline fisheries. Endangered Species Researc 14: 91-106.
Bilkovic, D.M., Havens, K.J., Stanhope, D.M., Angstadt, K.T. (2012). Use of full biodegradable panels to reduce derelict pot threats to marine fauna Conservation Biology 26(6): 957-966.
Boziaris, I.S., Stmatiou, A.P., and Nychas, G.J.E. (2013). Microbiological aspects and shel life of processed seafood products. Journal of the Science of Food an Agriculture, 93 (5): 1184-1190.
Bundy, A., Fanning, P., Zwanenburg, K.C. (2005). Balancing exploitation and conservatio of the eastern Scotian Shelf ecosystem: application of a 4D ecosyste exploitation index. /CES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 62 (3): 503 510.
Casini, M., Lovgren, J., Hjelm, J., Cardinale, M., Molinero, J.C., and Kornilovs, G. (2008) Multilevel trophic cascades in a heavily exploited open marine ecosystem. Proc R. Soc. B. 275, doi: 10.1098/rspb.2007.1752.
CBD (2012). Review of Progress in Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversit 2011-2020, Including the Establishment of National Targets and the Updating o National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans, UNEP/CBD/COP/11/12 paragraph 26 https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-11/official/cop-11-12 en.pdf
Charcot, J. (1911). The Voyage of the ‘Why Not?’ in the Antarctic. Philip Walsh (trans.) Hodder and Stoughton. New York and London.
Claudet, J., Osenberg, C.W., Benedetti-Cecchi, L., Domenici, P., Garcia-Charton, J.-A. Pérez-Ruzafa, A., Badalamenti, F., Bayle-Smpere, J., Brito, A., Bulleri, F. Culioli, J.-M., Dimech, M., Falcon, J.M., Guala, |., Milazzo, M., Sanchez-Meca, J. Somerfield, P.J., Stobart, B., Vandeperre, F., Valle, C., and Planet, S. (2008) Marine reserves: size and age do matter. Ecology Letters, 11, 481-489.
© 2016 United Nations 1 

Collie, J.S., Hall, S.J., Kaiser, M.J., and Poiner, |.R. (2000). A quantitative analysis o fishing impacts on shelf-sea benthos. Journal of Animal Ecology 69: 785-798.
Costello, C., Ovando, D., Hilborn, R., Gaines, S.D., Deschenes, O., Lester, S.E. (2012) Status and Solutions for the World’s Unassessed Fisheries. Science 338: 517-520.
FAO (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome, FAO. 48 p.
FAO (2001). International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, Rome, FAO. 24p.
FAO (2003). The ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Technical Guidelines fo Responsible Fisheries No. 4, Suppl. 2. Rome, FAO. 112 p.
FAO (2007). Report of the Expert Consultation on International Guidelines for th Management of Deep-sea Fisheries in the High Seas, Bangkok, 11-14 Septembe 2007 FAO Fisheries Report No. 855 http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0003e/i0003e00.HTM
FAO (2009). FAO/UNEP Expert Meeting on Impacts of Destructive Fishing Practices Unsustainable Fishing, and Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing o Marine Biodiversity and Habitats. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 932 http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i11490e/i1490e00.pdf
FAO (2010). Report of the Expert Consultation on International Guidelines for Bycatc Management and Reduction of Discards. Rome, 30 November—3 Decembe 2009. Fisheries and Aquaculture Report. No. 934. Rome, FAO: 28p.
FAO (2011). International Guidelines on Bycatch Management and Reduction o Discards. FAO. 73 pp. www.fao.org/docrep/015/ba0022t/ba0022t00.pdf
FAO (2014). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture. FAO, Rome.
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (2009). Guidelines to reduce sea turtl mortality in fishing gears. FAO, Rome: 128 pages.
Farcas, A., and Rossberg, A.G. (2014). Maximum sustainable yield from interacting fis stocks in an uncertain world: two policy decisions and underlying trade-offs arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.0199.
Fulton, E.A., et al. (2011). Lessons in modelling and management of marine ecosystems the Atlantis experience. Fish and Fisheries 12.2: 171-188.
Gagern, A., and van den Bergh, J. (2013). A critical review of fishing agreements wit tropical developing countries. Marine Policy. 38: 375-386.
Ganjavi, M., Ezzatpanah, H., Givianrad, H.M., Shams, A. (2010). Effect of canned tun fish processing steps on lead and cadmium contents of Iranian tuna fish. Foo Chemistry, 118 (3): 525-528.
Garcia, S.M. (Ed.), Kolding, J., Rice, J., Rochet, M.J., Zhou, S., Arimoto, T., Beyer, J. Borges, L., Bundy, A., Dunn, D., Graham, N., Hall, M., Heino, M., Law, R. Makino, M., Rijnsdorp, A.D., Simard, F., Smith, A.D.M. and Symons, D. (2011).
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Selective Fishing and Balanced Harvest in Relation to Fisheries and Ecosyste Sustainability. Report of a scientific workshop organized by the IUCN-CE Fisheries Expert Group (FEG) and the European Bureau for Conservation an Development (EBCD) in Nagoya (Japan), 14-16 October 2010. Gland, Switzerlan and Brussels, Belgium: IUCN and EBCD. iv + 33pp.
Garstang, W. (1900). The Impoverishment of the Sea. A Critical Summary of th Experimental and Statistical Evidence bearing upon the Alleged Depletion of th Trawling Grounds. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the Unite Kingdom 6(1): 1-69.
Gilkinson, K., Dawe, E., Forward, B., Hickey, B., Kulka, D., and Walsh, S., (2006).  Review of Newfoundland and Labrador Region Research on the Effects of Mobil Fishing Gear on Benthic Habitat and Communities. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res Doc. 2006/055: 30p. http://www.dfo mpo.gc.ca/csas/Csas/DocREC/2006/RES2006_055_e.pdf
Grafton, R.Q. (2009). Adaptation to Climate Change in Marine Capture Fisheries Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports, 37: 33pp.
Greenstreet, S.P.R., Shanks, A.M., and Buckett, B.E. (2006). Trends in fishing activity i the North Sea by UK registered vessels landing in Scotland over the period 196 to 1998. Fisheries Research Services Collaborative Report 2.06.
Gulland, J.A. and Carroz, J.E. (1968) Management of fishery resources. Advances i Marine Biology 6: 1-71.
Hall, M.A., Alverson, D.L., and Metuzals, K.I. "By-catch: Problems and Solutions." Marin Pollution Bulletin 41.1 (2000): 204-219.
Hamilton, B., Whittle, N., Shaw, G., Eaglesham, G., Moore, M.R., Lewis, R.J. (2010) Human fatality associated with Pacific ciguatoxin contaminated fish. Toxicon, 5 (5): 668-673.
Hard, J.J., Gross, M.R., Heino, M., Hilborn, R., Kope, R.G., Law, R., and Reynold, J.D.
(2008). Evolutionary consequences of fishing and their implications for salmon Evolutionary Applications, vol. 1, no. 2: 388-408.
Hixon, M.A., Johnson, D.W., and Sogard, S.M. (2013). BOFFFFs: on the importance o conserving old-growth age structure in fishery populations. — /CES Journal o Marine Science, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fst200.
HLPE (2014). Sustainable fisheries and aquaculture for food security and nutrition.  report by the High level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of th Committee on World Food Security, Rome.
Hsieh, C., Reiss, C.S., Hunter, J.R., Beddington, J.R., May, R.M., and Sugihara, G. (2006) Fishing elevates variability in the abundance of exploited species. Nature 443 859-862.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Jennings, S., and Kaiser, M. (1998). The effects of fishing on marine ecosystems Advances in Marine Biology, 34: 201-352.
Jennings, S., Reynolds, J.D., and Mills, S.C. (1998). Life history correlates of responses t fisheries exploitation. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B: 265:333-339.
Kaiser, M.J., Collie, J.S., Hall, S.J., Jennings, S., and Poiner, I.R. (2001). Impacts of Fishin Gear on Marine Benthic Habitats. Reykjavik Conference on Responsible Fisherie in the Marine Ecosystem. Reykjavik, Iceland, 1-4 October 2001.
Kelleher, K. (2005). Discards in the World’s Marine Fisheries. An Update. Rome, FAO FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 470 http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/y5936e/y5936e00.HTM
Kwik, J.T.B. (2012). Controlled Culling of Venomous Marine Fishes Along Sentosa Islan Beaches: A Case Study of Public Safety Management in the Marine Environmen of Singapore. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology. Supplement No. 25: 93-99.
Laist, D.W., Coe, J.M., and O’Hara, K.J. (1999). Marine Debris Pollution. In: Twiss, Jr., J.R.,
and Reeves, R.R. (eds.) Conservation and Management of Marine Mammals 342-366. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.
Larkin, P.A. (1997). An epitaph for the concept of maximum sustained yield Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 106(1): 1-11.
Marques, A., Rosa, R. (2014). Seafood Safety and Human Health Implications. In Goffredo, S., Dubinsky, Z. (eds.), The Mediterranean Sea: its history and presen challenges: 589-603. Springer Netherlands.
Michelet, J. (1875). La Mer. Paris, Michel Lévy Fréres: 428 pp.
Myers, R.A., Baum, J.K., Shepherd, T.D., Powers, S.P., and Peterson, C.H. (2007) Cascading Effects of the Loss of Apex Predatory Sharks from a Coastal Ocean Science 315: 1846-1850.
National Marine Fisheries Service (2011). U.S. National Bycatch Report, Karp, W.A. Desfosse, L.L., Brooke, S.G. (eds.) U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/SPO-117C, 508 p.
Pauly, D. (1994) On the sex of fish and the gender of scientists: A collection of essays i fisheries science, Chapman and Hall, London.
Polovina, J.J. (1984). Model of a coral reef ecosystem. Coral reefs 3.1: 1-11.
Ricker, W.E. (1981). Changes in the average size and age of Pacific salmon. Canadia Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 38: 1636-1656.
Roessig, J.M., Woodley, C.M., Cech, J.J., Hansen, LJ. (2004). Effects of global climat change on marine and estuarine fishes and fisheries. Reviews in Fish Biology an Fisheries 14: 251-275.
Rozwadowski, H.M. (2002). The Sea Knows No Boundaries: A Century of Marine Scienc under ICES. ICES, University of Washington Press, Copenhagen, Seattle, London.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Saiful Islam, M., Luby, S.P., Rahman, M., Parveen, S., Homaira, N., Begum, N.H., Dawla Khan, A.K.M., Sultana, R., Akhter, S., and Gurley, E.S. (2011). Social Ecologica Analysis of an Outbreak of Pufferfish Egg Poisoning in a Coastal Area o Bangladesh. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 85 (3): 498-503.
Satyanarayana S.D.V., Pavan Kumar, P., Amit, S., Dattatreya, A., Aditya, G. (2012) Potential Impacts of Food and it's Processing on Global Sustainable Health Journal of Food Processing & Technology 3: 143.
Sieben, K., Rippen, A.D., and Eriksson, B.K. (2011). Cascading effects from predato removal depend on resource availability in a benthic food web. Marine Biolog 158:391-400.
Spalding, M.D., Meliane, I., Milam, A., Fitzgerald, C., and Hale, L.Z. (2013). Protectin Marine Spaces: global targets and changing approaches, Ocean Yearbook 27 213-248.
Steele, M.A., Malone, J.C., Findlay, A.M., Carr, M. and Forrester, G. (2002). A simpl method for estimating larval supply in reef fishes and a preliminary test o population limitation by larval delivery in the kelp bass Paralabrax clathratus Marine Ecology Progress Series 235:195-203.
Storelli, M.M., Barone, G., Cuttone, G., Giungato, D. (2010). Occurrence of toxic metal (Hg, Cd and Pb) in fresh and canned tuna: public health implications. Food an Chemical Toxicology (48), 11: 3167-3170.
Suarez, J.L. (1927). Rapport au Conseil de la Société des Nations. Exploitation de Richesses de la Mer. Publications de la Société des Nations V. Question Juridiques. V.1. 120: 125.
Szpak, P., & Orchard, T.J., Salomon, A.k., and Groécke, D.R. (2013). Regional ecologica variability and impact of the maritime fur trade on nearshore ecosystems i southern Haida Gwaii (British Columbia, Canada): evidence from stable isotop analysis of rockfish (Sebastes spp.) bone collagen. Archaeol Anthropol Sci DO 10.1007/s12520-013-0122-y.
Townsend, H.M., Link, J.S., Osgood, K.E., Gedamke, T., Watters, G.M., Polovina, J.J. Levin, P.S., Cyr, N., and Aydin, K.Y. (eds) (2008). Report of the National Ecosyste Modeling Workshop (NEMoW). NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-87.
UNEP/CBD/FAO (2011). Report of Joint Expert Meeting on Addressing Biodiversit Concerns in Sustainable Fisheries http://www.chbd.int/doc/meetings/mar/jem bcsf-01/official/jem-bcsf-01-sbstta-16-inf-13-en.pdf
Worm, B., Hilborn, R., Baum, J.K., Branch, T.A., Collie, J.S., Costello, C., Fogarty, M.J. Fulton, E.A., Hutchings, J.A., Jennings, S., Jensen, O.P., Lotze, H.K., Mace, P.M. McClanahan, T.R., Minto, C., Palumbi, S.R., Parma, A.M., Ricard, D.,
Rosenberg, A.A., Watson, R., Zeller D. (2009). Rebuilding Global Fisheries. Scienc 325: 578-584.
© 2016 United Nations 2 

Yamada, A., Bemrah, N., Veyrand, B., Pollono, C., Merlo, M., Desvignes, V., Sirot, V. Oseredczuk, M., Marchand, P., Cariou, R., Antignac, J.P., Le Bizec, B., an Leblanc, J.C. (2014). Perfluoroalkyl Acid Contamination and Polyunsaturate Fatty Acid Composition of French Freshwater and Marine Fishes. Journal o Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 62 (30): 7593-7603.
Ye, Y., Cochrane, K., Bianchi, G., Willmann, R., Majkowski, J., Tandstad, M., Carocci, F (2013). Rebuilding global fisheries, the World Summit Goal, costs and benefits Fish and Fisheries, 14: 174-185.
Yongxiang, F., Rong, J., Ning, L., Weixing, Y. (2011). Study on a management system fo safely utilizing puffer fish resources. Chinese Journal of Food Hygiene: 2011- 03.
Zhao, J., Ghedira, H. (2014). Monitoring red tide with satellite imagery and numerica models: A case study in the Arabian Gulf. Marine Pollution Bulletin (79): 305-
313.
© 2016 United Nations
2