exploitation of living resources in Antarctica example of competition between the exploiters to be first in obtaining the maximum profit from living resources.

1. 1
Fig. 1. Squares of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources CCAMLR (1980).
RRReeessseeeaaarrrccchhh vvveeesssssseeelll rrrvvv „„„PPPrrrooofffeeessssssooorrr SSSiiieeedddllleeeccckkkiii”””
Economic competition for high profits from Antarctic
living resources in their protection area and Mercury
contaminants of fish from outside.

2. 2
Table of Contents
Abstract. ...............................................................................................................................................3
Fishing opportunities from Antarctic waters........................................................................................4
Dependency of abundance of krillivorous fish from density and size of krill clusters........................8
Risks of poisoning from mercury accumulated in fish in countries with a high their intake and the
supply of Antarctic fish........................................................................................................................9
Antarctic krill and fish, the price of the products, costs, comparison................................................11
Transfer the limits of catch of krill to dependency from the biomass of fish. ...................................12
Cost of fish stock assessment, the optimal number of hauls..............................................................13
Financing subsidies for biomass research and catching of fish from the profit of krill catches........16
The need for intervention in the exploitation of living resources in Antarctica. ...............................17
The impact of Antarctic marine living resources to reduce the risks and effects of mercury
poisoning............................................................................................................................................20
Conclusion. ........................................................................................................................................21
List of figures.....................................................................................................................................22
Work Cited .........................................................................................................................................23

3. 3
Economic competition for high profits from Antarctic living resources in
protection area and Mercury contaminants of fish from outside.
Essay by R. Traczyk.
Abstract.
The threat to human health by mercury contained in the food from the sea, especially in fish, and
crabs exists from 1950 in connection with the wastes of mercury. The production of acetaldehyde formed it
in the hydration of acetylene to ethenol catalyzed by mercury salts (ethenol tautomerizes to acetaldehyde
(1)). From 1953 for Japan there was no a threat, but an epidemic of mercury poisoning effects of the intake
of fish and crabs in which was accumulated to levels even higher 10,000 times than in the water, in the form
of methyl mercury. This epidemic known as Niigata-Minamata officially took over 2,265 cases of disease,
including 1,784 deaths and about 10,000 people for the suffered damage by it received compensation paid by
entrepreneur of plastic materials plants, which for 18 years, waste with mercury poured into the sea (2; 3).
The threat from the mercury poisoning is increase in the countries and in local populations where the
fish consumption is high. The largest consumption is in Japan, 20.7g / d, China, 15.7g / d, Norway, 15.8 g /
d, Korea, 15.1 g / d, France, 8.9 g / d, and in England, 6.1 g / d (4). In the U.S. and Poland is 5.64 g / d, in
Germany 4.6 g / d (4). The threat of mercury depends on the species and location of the fish caught. People
should not eat 13 various fish that are on the red list, because they accumulate mercury and PCBs on above
0.3-ppm level, including tuna, mackerel, marlin, eels, sharks, flounder and swordfish (5; 6; 7; 8). Other fish
containing mercury, in range 0.09-0.29 ppm, children and pregnant women can consume in very small
amounts, no more than consecutively 4.3, 8.5, 15 dkg / month, depending on the concentration in the above
range, and which, also depends on body weight. Foetuses beyond a very low body weight have in the blood
the mercury concentration of about 1.5 times greater than in maternal blood (9; 3).
The above-mentioned countries, whose population eats many fish, at the same time catch the most:
fish, crabs and other marine organisms (Japan also whales, which intake lowers the concentration of mercury
in tissues (10)) from the region of Antarctica, whose living resources are not on the list of NPA agency. Fish
consumption generally increases the life expectancy and improves blood supply to the heart (11).
Unfortunately, fishers cannot catch Antarctic fishes a lot, because their resources have been
destroyed, and despite of many years of protection have not been renewed, to which the high exploitation of
krill does not help.
The results of biological studies of fish and krill carried on rv "Professor. Siedlecki" in Scotia Sea
region in 1988/89 and 1978/79 have indicated that catch of krillophagous fish (Ps. georgianus) depend on
the density of krill. Where fish caught of this species were more, 48kg / h, krill density was high, 550g/m3
.
Where fish were caught less, 5kg / h, krill was only 90g/m3
(12). Similarly, during the period 2002-2011 at
low krill fishery of about 100,000 t / year, 24,000 t of fishes were caught per year. When krill fishery was
about 200,000 t/y the accompanying decrease in fish biomass has enabled to catch of them only 12,000 t/y.
From 1909 to 2012 the exploitation of living resources in Antarctica was subject of competition
between the exploiters to be first in obtaining the maximum profit from these resources. This led to
subsequent destruction of valuable species, ranging from those giving the highest benefit: large whales
through small whales, industrial demersal fish, and further to pelagic species. Before 1970, when krill was
not caught, 103,757,933 tons of whales were taken, and when in 1970 still caught 600,000 tons of large
whales and 120,000 tons of fish, then in 2012 we could catch only 22,000 tons of fish. In 1977/78 13,015
tonnes of fish Ps. georgianus were caught, but in 2010/11 only 1 tonne, in 2011/12, 0 tons. Similarly, Ch.
aceratus drop from 2000 tons to 0. Fishing Ch. gunnari fell from 8000 tonnes to 11 tonnes – they accounted
for 50% of the catch, now 1%.
The primary food for above fish is krill (13). Because of the high profits, 1975 $ per one ton of krill
obtained in the port (what was provided by retail price, $ 4 per 50 mg of krill oils) from 1974, a 120,000 to
320,000 tons of krill per a year were fished out, eliminating through this krill food for fishes, whales, seals
and birds living in Antarctica, and also eliminating the environment for development of fish larvae. Not only
icefish larvae were cached with krill, also adult icefish were caught with krill during German expedition in
1975/76 season (14) in oppose to later findings after 400 thousand catches of krill per year that empties
stomaches prevail in icefish catch of several surveys (15) up to now.
Pause or strong restrict the catch of krill in direct to have large biomass of Antarctic fish giving large
its amount to consumption of healthy fish will alleviate the risks of mercury poisoning.
Since 1992, Antarctic fishes were not caught by Poland and thus it has a greater risk of mercury
poisoning than countries catching Antarctic fish, such as Norway or Germany.

4. 4
Fishing opportunities from Antarctic waters.
In the Antarctic, sewage disposal and pollution from research stations, tourist visits and
other activities are carried out according to the instructions of the Team of Experts of the Scientific
Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) for the matters of Waste Disposal having to keep her
virginity as recommended by the Antarctic Treaty of 1985 (16).
So far the Antarctic waters are the most sterile in the World’s Ocean and although there are
reports on plastic water pollution and air locally by lead and mercury, including those related to
increased emissions in the Southern Hemisphere (17; 18), the content of mercury in water,
sediment, phytoplankton, macroalgae, krill and several bottom invertebrates does not show an
increased accumulation of mercury in the Antarctic Ocean food ladder (19).
Therefore, the consumption of fish and other Antarctic fruits is not dangerous by mercury
poisoning, but conversely, by displacing or competing with food coming from polluted oceans.
However, the Antarctic fish stocks are now low, their catch are much reduced, so everything must
be done as soon as possible in order to come onto the market and in a large quantity.
In the Atlantic sector of Antarctic, living resources, mainly from shelf of South Georgia
Island., Fig. 1, exploits several Members of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic
Marine Resources.
Members to have high profit fished them every year too much until missing them was start.
To not result in the disappearance of those resources they were required fishing only a certain
amount, allowing the rest to rebirth in spite of natural mortality (due to, being eaten by whales,
seals, penguins and birds). Fishing limits are calculated by Scientific Committee CCAMLR in
Hobart, fixing high if researches indicate a good state of biomass. Fish biomass is the subject of
study of Working Group of Fish Stock Assessment WG FSA. The target species of fish at South
Georgia is the mackerel icefish, which represents about 43% of the catch.
Fig. 2. The mackerel icefish, Champsocephalus gunnari, Channichthyidae.
Before the 1988, the species were caught in tens thousands tons from S. Georgia and in
connection with the decline of its stocks, fishing was closed in 1990. Later fishing this species has
been limited to a few thousand tons. In the season 2010/11 the limit was 2305 tons - available for
pelagic and bottom trawls, next season in 2011/12 the limit was 3,072 tons, but available only for
pelagic hauls. Catching other commercial fish species, found in low numbers in by-catch, were
banned as a target and have very low catch limits (20; 21). For example Ps. georgianus formerly
constituting 14% of bottom fishing, in 1977/78, 13015 t. was caught, in 1987/88 only 401 t was, in
2004/05, 25 t., and now in 2009/10, 2 t. even with a zero effect in the by-catch, Fig. 4, Fig. 8.
Fig. 3. South Georgia icefish, Pseudochaenichthys georgianus (Channichthyidae).

5. 5
Fig. 4. Total catch of fish, krill and Ps. georgianus (SGI) in Antarctica.
Towards decline in biomass and thus reduce the catches of Antarctic fish, fishing moved
effort on krill, which is the primary food of fish Fig. 5. The gap from reduction of fishing were
filled by fishing very large amounts of krill, about 220 thousand tonnes per year, Fig. 4 – which
inhibited the growth of krillophagous fish, what next gave the drop of their catch, and Poland
withdrawal from fishing. Withholding fishing in the period of economic and political transformation
in Poland, the loss of ocean research ship and small limits giving small profit of fishing has led
Poland to abandon catching of Antarctic fish.
But Antarctic fishermen also Polish do not lose their profit by the lack of valuable
krillophagous fish they previously over caught, because they gained profits from krill fished in large
quantities, up to 100 times more by weight compared to the weight of fish they had, Fig. 4.
In addition, bottom fishing of deeper toothfish, significantly increased Fig. 5, because as in
contrast to krillophagous fish, it does not depend on krill across their diet, Fig. 9 (13). Toothfish
feeds on squid, fish (mainly Muraenolepididae) and crustaceans (22; 23; 13). Currently it is caught
much more than krillophagous fish. Whilst former toothfish was only in 1.1% of bottom fishing, in
1977/78, 635 t was caught, now is the main species of fish in the amount of more than 60% of the
catch, in average of about 12000 tons. Therefore also it is conversely for krillophagous fish that
previously was the basis of catches (up to 90%) but currently constituted less than 1 percent in it,
Fig. 5, Fig. 8.
Fig. 5. Total catch of fish, krill, Ps. georgianus (SGI) and toothfish (ELEG) in Antarctica (24).

6. 6
Fig. 6. Krill, Euphausia superba, Dana.
Fig. 7. Patagonian toothfish, Dissostichus eleginoides, (Nototheniidae).
Fig. 8. Fishing in South Georgia 1977/78 and catches in Antarctic ocean 2020/11. On the right percentage (25).
Biomass assessments of Ps. georgianus are highly variable, but in any way indicate a
reduction, such as in 1985/86 was 41021 tons, while the 2004/05: 2948 tonnes. But a year earlier
and a year later estimated biomass was at over 9000 tons. Thus catch absolute value more easily
show the assessment of fish stocks since many different methods used in evaluation of biomass.
Biomass of toothfish (that its size could be imagined as for all fish exploited from the size of
the catch), as for species partially piscivorous also is reduced in relation to reduction of biomass of
all fish species giving a slow decrease in the amount of fishing them, Fig. 5, which parallel reflects
a decline of their availability as food for toothfish. This suppress especially young of toothfish
living shallower on shelf and preying on fish in a greater extent.
Also important are deep sea fishing of Moridae about 150 tonnes per year and grenadiers
(Macrouridae) about 1,300 tonnes per year, in the squares of 48, 58 and 88 (24).
Also crabs were caught Paralomis spinosissima 299 tonnes (1992/93) and P. formosa (56
tons), but in 2009 much less, consecutively the first and the second species, only 53 and 9 tons.
It should be noted that krill are fished in all months all the time throughout the year
(sometimes without October and November), on average 25000 tons per month, all from Scotia Sea.

7. 7
Fig. 9. Percent of krill in food of finfish from research of 2008/09 AMLR Survey off S. Orkney I. (13).

8. 8
Dependency of abundance of krillivorous fish from density and size of krill clusters.
Strong dependence of fishes on krill is confirmed by the results of biological research of fish
and krill carried on rv "Professor Siedlecki "in the area of Scotia Sea in 1988/89 and 1978/79,
which showed that catching of krill-phagous fish Ps. georgianus were higher in areas
where there were greater densities of krill, Fig. 10.
Most fish were caught at the Georgia, 48 kg/h, also krill - their food was many
there: 223-550g/m3
in 40 m shoals. Further south, at the South Orkney I., and
further in the area of Palmer Archipelago fish were caught less and there was
also less their food, such as krill.
Distances between S. Georgia and S. Orkney ~560 km
Fig. 10. The largest density and biomass of krill (cubes) was at the South Georgia = 1502 tons. There caught most fish
as well. Differentiation of quantities of fish Ps. georgianus  and its food, krill  in the Antarctic during the expedition
on rv. “Prof. Siedlecki” in 1978-1979 (12).
The overall results of fishery also illustrate the strong dependence of krillophagous fish such
as Ps. georgianus from krill densities. Even in a period of high krill fishery, when krill was more,
that is, when it was not heavily fished, it happened to catch of Ps. georgianus a little more in that
year, Fig. 5. But, in recent years, its catch fell to 1 and to 0 tons, Fig. 5, Fig. 8. Fishing did not
inhibit the development of this species due to the prohibitions and restrictions of its catch. This
decrease and maintain a low and no catch of Ps. georgianus is so clearly associated with a lack of
krill for it, which each month is constantly and a lot harvested.
In addition to reducing the amount of food for krillophagous fish, krill removal constitutes a
second form of a strong extermination of the development of fish: with krill, the fish larvae that live
in clusters of krill (Fig. 11) are immediately removed, and also be removed the shelters and an
environment for the development of fish larvae that krill by their clusters creates for them.
Fig. 11. Occurrence of larvae of fish in the krill fishery (marked by arrows) carried out in midwater between
South Orkney and Elephant Island during an expedition on rv. "Professor Siedlecki" in season 1988/89 (26).
Arrows – krill catches containing larvae of the following species of fish: Ch. aceratus (40,66); Ch. gunnarii (41);
Chionodraco rastrospinosus (41,66,78); Chaenodraco wilsoni (69,73,74); Dissostichus eleginoides (73);
South Georgia
kg/h
South Orkney
23
A. Palmer
5 kg/h.
kg/h.
King George
14
3 kg/h.
kg/h
3 kg/h14 kg/h
78
82
74
73 71
40
41
69 67
66 65
5655
Krill, 150 g/m3
Krill,
200
g/m3
Krill, 350 g/m3
Elephant I.
Krill, 90 g/m3
48
kg/
h
Krillmax550g/m3
Krill, 73 g/m3

9. 9
Pleurogramma antarcticum (40,74); Gryodraco antarcticus (40,73,74,82); Neopagetopsis sp. (55); Neopagetopsis
ionach (56,71,73); Trematomus eulepidotus (65); Notolepis coatsi (67,71); Pagetopsis sp. (69,78,82); Notothenia sp.
(69); Notothenia larseni (73;74); Pagetopsis macropterus (73); Electrona carlsbergi (78).
Krill in large densities protects the larvae of many species of fish (Fig. 11) and modifies the
raw physical - chemical properties of Antarctic waters to favourable for their development.
Densely aggregations of krill form a "moving, living ocean” which causes bio-turbulence of
water in the size of the effects comparable to mixing of water during the tide or wind (27). The
movements of water arising in the movements of billions legs of krill during their vertical and
geographical migrations, carry with them the water and cause mixing of minerals, nutrients, gases
(28). Thanks to this, they oxygenate the water; activate the suspended and dissolved compounds.
Also krill metabolism multiplied billions of times modifies water in its clusters (raising their
temperatures). And in them for these reasons, fish larvae are going to live and to get a shelter.
Krill fishing eliminate all fish protection, undertaken by CCAMLR in reduces the level of
allowable catches. Fish biomass was not renewed. Ps. georgianus biomass declined by ~ 75% less
than virgin resources (29; 30). Undoubtedly, this has to do with the desire of krill fishery to obtain
maximum profits, not seeing the poor condition of higher level consumers, which depends on the
density of krill.
Unfortunately, the maintenance of high krill fishery was not and is not a conservative for
Antarctic fish and for entire Antarctic ecosystem. They remove from food chain, the primary
important link, which is krill, which feeding on huge phytoplankton biomass and ice algae and as a
main food not only for fish (Fig. 5), but also for seals, whales, penguins and other Antarctic bird
converts energy from producers on form available for higher level consumers.
Risks of poisoning from mercury accumulated in fish in countries with a high their
intake and the supply of Antarctic fish.
In the exploitation of living Antarctic stocks, Norway, Japan, Korea and France have the
largest participation. These countries have a high consumption of fish (and very high demand), and
because of that decide to catch even the small amounts they may have from Antarctic, because
around the world there are lack of marine fish due to stocks overfishing (31) and their pollution by
toxins. To this day among all the oceans, Antarctic Ocean is the most pure.
Antarctic fish are not on the red list of the Environmental Protection Agency EPA of species
reserved to the consumption and disappearing species. While 12 different fish from seas of Europe
in Asia, Americas, Africa and the Arctic are threatened with extinction (31) and are highly
contaminated. Because of these impurities, in countries where is high consumption rate, there is a
much higher risk of poisoning by mercury compounds, which accumulate in the fish. Its content (as
well as PCBs) in fish in some places on level more than 0.3 ppm excludes from human
consumption, including tunas, walleyes, mackerels, marlins, eels, bluefishes, croakers, sharks,
swordfishes and flounders (5; 6; 7; 8). These fish and others in other locations contain less mercury,
0.09-0.29 ppm, and can be consumed, but in very small amounts, for example, by children, not
more than successively 4.3, 8.5 and 15 dg / month depending on the concentration of toxins.
Because the nervous system of children is still in a period of strong development here they are also
more at risk for damage to the nervous system. It is worth emphasizing, that fetuses accumulate the
mercury in the blood to a concentration of 1.5 higher than in the maternal blood (9) and also as toxin
chemically modify the DNA, the symptoms of poisoning are also present in the progeny - it has
been detected in the third generation (32; 33).
Norway, off the coast runs large economy with salmon, but in that State, to pregnant women
and young children reserves the consumption of fish. In addition, Norwegian salmon reared in cages
comes from the Barents Sea, whose major problem is its radioactive pollution originating from
Russian nuclear fleet (34; 35; 36) and the Norwegian processing plant of radioactive waste and at
last from landfills dump to the sea since the 1950s (37; 38; 39).
In fish caught in the Barents Sea in the otoliths microstructure a large changes were
frequently found, which are likely to result from these pollutants (40).

10. 10
Fig. 12. Otoliths of haddock M. aegelfinus from Barents Sea: above with involutes with low level of proteins; below is normal.
France has fishing facilities in its overseas territories in the CCAMLR Convention area:
Kerguelen Islands, Crozet, Adelie Land, in the Indian sector, Fig. 1. The fishing fleet of these
territories pay lower taxes and has less stringent regulations. Exploitation of living resources by this
fleet gives income $ 18 million. French cuisine absorbs from this fleet the catch of any fish, crabs
and shellfish, which, from their very polluted as well as in other coastal states of Europe waters
have supply of a low quality and quantity.
In the La Hague reprocessing plant of nuclear fuel in France produces significant
contamination of radioactive elements. In ordinary operation of nuclear power plants, replacement
of cooling water in the reactor also increases the level of radioactivity in water. Wastes from nuclear
power plants have an impact on the marine life on the vast areas: radioactive elements from the
processing of the fuel are in the seaweed up on the coast of Greenland and along the coast of
Norway.
Britain has a record of air pollution compounds with concentrations above the scale (41).
The Sellafield site in the UK is nuclear fuel reprocessing plant being two of the most significant
sources of radioactive elements.
England in the Atlantic sector of Antarctica, at South Georgia Island, Fig. 1, has a settlement
- a small port, Grytviken and near the CCAMLR Convention area on the Falkland Islands, has a
fishing base in Port Stanley. So as well as France has lower costs of transport and labour. On the
shelf of the South Georgia and, Kerguelen are caught mostly toothfish. Fishing gave her $ 6 million
profit.
Japan is in much worse situation than the European countries. In Japan apart from a high
rate of fish consumption, chemical plant in Minamata and Niigata, for 18 years engaged in the
emission of mercury compounds into the sea, resulting in severe consequences occurred in 2265,

11. 11
including 1,784 deaths and 10,000 people received compensation for the effects of the epidemic(2;
3). The mercury concentration in the products of sea fish and crabs were up to 10 000 times higher
than in water, in the form of methyl mercury. In addition, in March 2011 earthquake in Japan along
with a huge tsunami caused a nuclear power plant failure and contamination of radioactive
compounds(3). Near Fukushima in 2 years after the crash caught the fish, in which was 254
thousand Becquerel of cesium per kg, or even 2500 times more radioactivity than the standard
acceptability for human consumption, which indicates that it is still dangerous local seafood
consumption(41).
Korea, being with Japan in front of the Japanese sea shares its
pollution. The content of marine plants, have radioactive elements reached
130 thousand Becquerel per kg, in fish such as: trout 18 thousand flounders
4.5 thousand Becquerel per kg(42). Moreover, country suffers periodic
famines leading to recorded cannibalism. The number of victims of these
disasters ranged 240-3.5 million(41). Strong toxic air pollution recorded in
Seoul and Busanie, as reasons for the increase of suicides and cases of asthma(43). Mercury in the
air falling to the sea can exceed several times the pollution of water courses (44).
Poland not caught of Antarctic fish since 1992, therefore has a greater threat of mercury
poisoning than Norway. Polish fleet in Antarctic catch seep only krill, mostly in the sector Atlantic
in the vicinity of South Georgia, Fig. 1.
In Poland, fishmeal is produced from fish caught in European waters that are contaminated.
Almost all breeding animals, from fish, and cattle, poultry, ending the flock are fed by fishmeal (45).
In this case, not only the fish of the sea, but also breeding fish and even dairy products and meat can
be a source of dangerous substances in the human diet.
About Baltic Sea pollution writes(46) and fights with them for decades; include ones which
is still threatening from sunk of leaking poison of gas stockpiles left after World War II. Baltic
marine environment was also heavily contaminated with mercury(46) that lasts and lasts(44). In the
1960, in the Baltic States a lot of plastics industry plants was operated, which were draining into the
Baltic Sea catchment mercury liquid waste resulting from the production of articles. In addition, the
amount of mercury released into the environment by mining, metallurgy and heavy plant is
approximately four times greater than the amount released in natural processes (45). In addition to
mercury pollution in the Baltic, there were discovered a high contamination of fish by DDT, PCBs,
PCDFs, which all together were the source of poisoning of Swedes(47). Swedish fishermen who
fish in the Baltic Sea had higher levels of toxins in the blood than fishermen in the North Sea(47).
Such differences also relate to morbidity and underweight births(47). With the impact of toxins on
the offspring, the present generation is likely to suffer the effects of poisoning parents, for whom the
fight against pollution had no support as it is now, in the current new technology with advanced
methods of sewage treatment. It should be the source of the common opinion of the older
generation, that the younger is less robust.
In Poland, the effect of diseases and illnesses happen everyday life and, unfortunately, is the
reality of every Pole, 16% of them are registered by the Social Security, as a crippled and sick
people. Former queue foods moved to the pharmacy and the clinic, prior to surgeries. Because of
these queues, the paid number of medical visits in 2012 increased by 30% compared to the previous
year(48). The average medical advice was 18 in German in 2008, and there were 45 patients a day
per one doctor(49). The huge demand for drugs has extended their sale on grocery stores and kiosks.
Medications have become a valuable, highly desirable and articles of everyday purchases, often
already in production are integrated with food. For this reason, it is a huge demand for different
types of drugs and ways to combat various ailments and diseases.
Antarctic krill and fish, the price of the products, costs, comparison.
Krill is used in medicine, as a new safe(50) dietary supplement, a source of fatty acids of
Omega 3, more than fish oil improves brain function, strengthens the heart, and improves the
condition of hair, skin and liver.
In the Antarctic, krill is more desirable and profitable than fish. Krill Oil is obtained by

12. 12
extraction with acetone. Krill protein, its tissues and chitinous compounds are removed in filtering
of the extract and the acetone and water is evaporated(51). The resulting olive prepackaged in 60
capsules of 500 mg costs $ 40, or Euros 31.5. From krill protein the food is also produced in the
process similar to digestion whales and whale that ate krill. The process is simple, short, and
inexpensive and can be carried on the ship on freshly caught krill in the intervals between
successive catch, eliminating the costs of storage and transportation(51), and the cost of processing
more difficult frozen krill. Overall, the cost of krill fishing is $ 1,858 per 1 ton, the price received
per tonne of krill in port is $ 3,833, so the profit of fisherman is a $ 1,975 from a ton of krill(52).
Fish. Profit from the fishing in the Antarctic in the past and today is low and none because
of the constraints and high costs of fishing. Despite of this, they have a great demand on market,
because they are not already on the red list of endangered species and polluted. As the products that
are not threatening by intoxication, driving of, and or compete with fish and seafood, which are
already on the red list, they will reduce the risk of poisoning with mercury and other toxins.
Compared to the krill, consumption of the Antarctic fish is more desirable than a specific
food: protein paste from krill, which visually does not release digestive juices and cravings. Krill
paste for Europeans often causes indigestion. Fish oil also contains fatty acids: omega-3 and
additionally their meat is a natural healthy food, prolonging life, which was seen in studies in
Scandinavian fishing families(47). Fish even has lower prices on the market provide a wider range
of products than krill:
1) oil from small Antarctic fish from
bycatch is also a valuable product. The price for
200 capsules of odourless fish oil is $ 16-30.
Price for 30 capsules of fish oil mixed with the
oil krill is $ 32-39;
2) fish paste is produced for human consumption in the price of $ 0.96 for 100 g;
3) fish meat is very healthy because it originated from the cleanest ocean and contains
Omega3 fatty acids although in smaller amounts as krill, but in a healthier figure, in proportions
with the meat. In the warehouse price for fillets of Antarctic, fish, for example kergulen is $ 15 per
kg.
Overall, the cost of tons of pelagic fish catch is about $ 1062, tons of groundfish about $
1420, but a fisherman in the port received only $ 583 per tonne for the pelagic and $ 1218 per tonne
of bottom fish(4; 52). Therefore, we should get additional payment $ 479 per tonne to derive pelagic
fishing and $ 202 for bottom.
Transfer the limits of catch of krill to dependency from the biomass of fish.
This time of high risk of poisoning by consumption of the protein from the sea, more than
krill Antarctic fish is needed, that can be used without waste: large one on meat consumption and
the small one on the meal and oil. Unfortunately, the possibilities of obtaining these fish reduce the
high catch of krill, which only a small part of it is useful for a man. The huge part of the mass of
krill is irrevocably discarded and wasted in the process of separating of chitin compounds in the
production of krill oil and paste. Otherwise being left in nature, this part would be transformed in
the Antarctic food chain and processed into form of protein of fish or crabs easily accessible to
humans and other consumers of fish. For a couple of jars of krill oil we destroy the basis for the
functioning of all animals Antarctic: starting from small larval forms of fish and ending on large
whales.
To catch more fish on the shelf of South Georgia and thus reduce the risk of mercury
poisoning by eating fish, the countries before benefiting from the catch of krill first should provided
a proof that the stocks of krill eating fish is in a good state. Knowledge of these fish biomass would
be fundamental in determining the size of the catch of krill. This means when the biomass of krill
depended fish, such as Ps. georgianus is very small, the catch of krill should be much reduced.
So, the examination of the large size of fish biomass would laid in the interests of the
exploiters of krill and would guarantee the protection of fish - would prevent eliminate the richness
of fish what currently takes place in Antarctica and what probably it is in a similar relationship with

13. 13
high exploitation of tropical shrimp that led to the disappearance the richness of ichthyofauna in
other oceans(31).
Countries - explorers who only been catching krill because they do not fishing did not know
their status, did not see a direct link the increased use of krill with long period of absence in the
rebirth of the state of fish biomass. At a time when Poland fished Antarctic fish in the Sea Fisheries
Institute in Gdynia were 5 people that constitute Antarctic Fish Laboratory determining the
condition of its stocks in the Antarctic and looking for catch limits for fisheries. For several years,
the lab does not exist, and as the only krill was catches by Poland, nobody had any idea that the
profit derived from the high, double catching of krill is short, because it causing the loss of fish
stocks and damage to biosphere of the entire ecosystem. There is even a reverse sentence based
only on knowledge as there is large biomass of krill, then it could be caught a lot, much more than it
is now. But it is wrong sentence, because it should be a lot of krill in that greater amount which is
sufficient not only for the survival of the species, but also for existing of the Antarctic ecosystem.
This opinion shows the needs to put the study of fish biomass to krill explorers.
Cost of fish stock assessment, the optimal number of hauls.
Adopting by the krill vessel additional effort for testing of fish stocks requires minimizing
its costs –more accurately planning an expedition to develop any possible reduction of costs without
loss in accuracy. One such possibility is economical optimize the number of hauls.
During all expeditions, to best assess the state of fish stocks on the shelf of South Georgia in
relation to its size and depth, the entire shelf of the island was divided horizontally into statistical
squares and vertically to depth layers and assigned to area of their bottom the proportional number
of control hauls. The surface of the bottom shelf for each square and depth layer was calculated (53)
and updated with bathymetric measurements.
Fig. 13. Controls hauls in the squares of CCAMLR statistical area, No 48.3 on the shelf of South Georgia.
Such a sample divided into zones (3 depth zones in the statistical squares between the
geographical meridian hours and parallel half-hours) gave more accurate estimates of the average
population, than the simple random sampling (54).
In some squares, the bottom is only in
one depth layer, in the other, in two, and
in yet other ones, in three depth layers,
what result with taking into account
differences in configuration of the
bottom, in the surface and the volume of
water between squares require different
numbers of samples. Antarctic fish,
Fig. 14. Vertical presence of Ps. georgianus at South Georgia.
1988/89 1989/90

14. 14
Pseudochaenichthys georgianus occur at different depths, but prefer a depth of 150 - 250 m, Fig. 14
(larger performance Tab. 2) and north eastern shelf of the island, Fig. 15. Other species have
different preferences, but in general more fish are at the depth of 150 - 250 m (55).
Fig. 15. Horizontal differentiation of the occurrence of Ps. georgianus South Georgia shelf.
On one sample, from a half-hour haul, the vessel takes the fish from the bottom surface of
about 0.07 km2
. South Georgia shelf can be covered by 592813 such samples, and although it is not
possible to do this, the result of such many sampling is adequately approximated by the result of a
smaller number of samples proportional to the size of the zone. For example, in the last 3 Polish-
English controlled studies of fish biomass on the shelf of South Georgia were performed an average
n = 65.7 samples, that in each season were separated on the shelf area of the island, proportionally
to the size of the zone, N (simple in a way that larger zone needs more testing).
Tab. 1. Characteristics of the Polish-British fish and krill expedition in the Antarctic, on the Polish research ship: rv.
"Professor Siedlecki" 1988, 1989, and on the British trawlers: mt. "Hill Cove" 1990, mt. "Falkland Protector", 1992.
Year of catch and vessel 1988, Siedl. January 1989 „Professor Siedlecki” J.1990, Hill Cove J.1992 Falk. Protect
Sample type (if bottom=fish) bottom bottom Bottom Pelagic, fish Pelagic, krill bottom Bottom
Island shelf region S. Georgia Elephant S. Georgia S. Georgia Eleph-S. Ork. South Georgia South Georgia
Area of estimating [km2
] 32116 26742 29933
Number of hauls 4 55 10 13 68 74
Hauls time, all [minutes] 660 1690 300 2250 1780 1944
Trawling length [km] 1.25 3.19 0.66 4.84 4.22 4.5
Type of trawl net, P-32/36 P-32/36 P-32/36 WP 16/41×4 WP 16/41×4 V-120 feed V-120 feed
Entry width of the trawl net [m] 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 20 20
The height of the trawl net [m] 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 12 12
Average time of one haul [minutes] 30 140 30 30 173 30 26
Trawling speed [knots] 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.75 3.75
Trawling speed [km/h] 6.48 6.48 6.48 6.48 6.29 6.94 6.94
Size catch [tons] 5.820 1.120 6.766 1.353 4.645 64.660 13.726
Total cost of catch [$] 8264 1590 9608 1437 8630 91817 19491
Additional cost of catch [$] 1653 318 1922 287 1726 18363 3898
Rotary cost of fishing [$] 6612 1272 7686 1150 6904 73454 15593
Cost per sample [$] 318 140 115 531 1080 211
Ex-vessel prise [$] 7089 1364 8241 789 17804 78756 16718
Biomass [tons] 48643 51533 63159
How much does an average hauls, nj attributed to the depth zone Nj depending on its bottom

15. 15
surface, Tab. 2, can be calculated from the coefficients of proportionality assumption from the
beginning of the simplest model, which minimizes the deviation of the empirical data in an Excel
spreadsheet Solver procedure that could further increase the accuracy of further factors. The
solution to distribution of the total number of samples with proportionality to the size of the zone,
are: n1= n∙ =65.7∙9411/(9411+ 21682+11070)=15; n2=34; n3=17, Tab. 2.
Tab. 2. The surfaces of the bottom shelf at South Georgia in the depth zones, obtained efficiency catches and separation of the
number of control samples to them.
Depth
zones
Depth
area
Prop-
ortion
Catch efficiency (kg/h) Cost
kj
Optio-
nal
Cost of
catchI.1989 Siedlecki I.1990
Hill Cove
I.1992 Falk
Protector
S.Dev
[m] [km2
] nj x 2×x s [$] nj [$]
50–150 9411 15 139 278 86 162 97 357 11 3959
150–250 21682 34 293 586 878 506 195 417 48 19908
250–500 11070 17 126 252 139 437 150 477 18 8378
50–500 42163 66 218 436 602 412 104 76 32244
However, the results of fishing Ps. georgianus show that on the shelf of South Georgia
Island were places where the species has not occurred, while on the other were a lot of it - which
also depend on the depth of the bottom, Fig. 15. Fish were cached more in the middle depth sea
layer, Tab. 2. This means that the number of samples for depth zones may be dependent on the
results obtained from the samples - from the variation of results in the fishing performance, from
their standard deviation. Also as the economic reasons are important: the cost of deeper haul is
higher, because higher fuel consumption and net failures are more frequent, can be taken into
account in the model. To optimum use of the available resources, the number of samples, nj should
be proportionally to the size of the sampled area - to the size of the j-th depth layer and the greater,
when the greater the standard deviation of the sample sj is, and larger to a decrease in the cost of
sampling (kj): Nj∙sj∙1/ , or nj=n . Use these criterions could minimizes the deviation of
the model from empirical data. The variability for fish distributions inform the appropriate record of
catches, Tab. 2, the cost of fishing could be find in the International Data Base Cost of Fishing (52;
56). The total cost of bottom fishing fish is high, at an average of $ 1,420 per tonne of caught. The
cost of pelagic fish is lower by about 25%, at an average of $ 1,062 per tonne. In simple exercise
with this comparison it can be assumed that the cost of bottom fishing at South Georgia I. run deep
in the 250-500m layer is k3, run shallower in the second layer is by 12.5% less: 0,875∙k3, and run in
the first layer 50-150m is more off by 25%: 0.75∙k3. Average cost for one research travel in period
from 1989 to 1992 was (9608+91817+19491)/3 =40305$. Its comprise the variable costs $ 32244
and 25% of its size - fixed costs: $ 8061. For $ 32244 about 66 inspection hauls were made in those
years, so the average demersal catch cost $ 477, shallower one 417 and more shallower $ 357. With
above economic data and area data of sampled depth layer, and data on their standard deviation in
catch results, Tab. 2, the most optimal number of bottom hauls for depth zone 250-500 m is 18 (n3 =
(40305-8061)(11070∙150.4/ )/(11070∙150.4∙ + 21682∙195.2∙ + 9411∙96.7∙ )=18),
and optimal number of hauls conducted shallower at 150-250 m, is n2 = 48 and most shallowest at
50-150m, n1 = 11. Total 76 hauls.
Taking into account also the costs and efficiency of fishing it is possible for the same funds
to carry out 10 inspection hauls more than referring them only to the bottom surface of the sampled
area. In particular at South Georgia from 1989 to 1992, it was necessary to increase the number of
samples in the depth zone of 2 and slightly reduce the number of samples in the first one. A similar
total number of control hauls, but proportional, n = 74, were carried out in 1992 on the ship mt.
"Falkland Protector", at a lower cost, but the amount of fish were achieved 2 times less, because the
number of samples were distributed unmatched to their performance, Tab. 1.

16. 16
Fig. 16. High changeability of costs of proportional samples.
Fig
. 17. A different manner in the distribution of control hauls to
depth zones on the shelf of S Georgia.
In the industrial fishing beyond stratification on depth zones, statistical squares and sample
cost, optimization of catches can include the type of nets (which has already been varied in cost),
the ship, the season, species, family, or category of industrial fish.
In the analysis of costs and benefits conservation of the species is already into account of the
fishing constraints depending on the biomass of the species. In recent years, the use of bottom
fishing was limited. Antarctic fish can be fished only with the pelagic net, which its use cost about $
1062 per tonne, that is 2 time less than the cost of bottom ones. But the larger profit is left to bottom
catch, because from pelagic catch fisherman in the port receives $ 583 per tonne, and from bottom
fishing, more than 2 times: $ 1218 per tonne (52).
Financing subsidies for biomass research and catching of fish from the profit of krill
catches.
Because catching of krill directly caused and causes the damage of Antarctic biosphere
including the depletion of stock of krill eating fish (along which human is losing fishing
opportunities of valuable fish from the cleanest ocean) so subsidies to checkups biomass and to
catch fish feeding on krill should be levelled by the high profits obtained from the catch of krill.
Fish stocks should be revived as soon as possible what requires international protection set
by CCAMLR, and the need for their catch in order to reduce the risk of mercury poisoning by
eating fish. This is the obligation to krill explorers who by the appropriate exploitation of krill can
improve the state of fish stocks. Subsidies for studying fish biomass for determining safe catch limit
of krill constitute a small percentage of the profits obtained from the catch of krill, especially if the
research will be conducted in a non-invasive manner using sonar to detect krill clusters. This would
require only the implementation of the existing manuals describing method for estimating fish
biomass by echointegration (57; 58; 59), that was already calibrate with above described traditional
method. However, fishing need subsidies, at a level up 2.3% from the profits of krill, Fig. 19.
Now as the stocks of fish such as Ps. georgianus from many years yet could not recover for
their rapid recovery (within 4 years), catches of krill if not stopped, it should be set at a level at
which resources of Ps. georgianus were show upward trend. This situation was in season 2004/05 -
were caught of krill was around 120 thousand tons, Fig. 5, Fig. 20. This amount should not be
exceeded in recent years.
Resignation from profit obtained from harvesting krill in the course to rebirth of living
resources in Antarctica would be the victory of the culture and civilization over competition law:
"taking the profit as the first in exploitation of living resources" that before and now acting on
common property being under the international protection.

17. 17
Fig. 18. Marked decline in fishing (thereby biomass) while increasing krill fishery.
Fig. 19. Big catches of krill in the Antarctic are giving very high incomes, enough high in order to finance fishing of
Antarctic fish, constituting a little per cent of profits obtained from sales of the krill.
Fig. 20. Income from catching of krill lowered by funding subsidies of Antarctic fishing (do not exceed 1%).
The need for intervention in the exploitation of living resources in Antarctica.
Economic works have long indicated that the fishery remain freely in choose the type of
operation, is leading to single-species fisheries targeting to the most profitable fishing that finally
causing the destruction of living marine resources (60; 61). The right of profits works even today.
High profits from krill, around $ 2 thousand per tonne make the catch of krill each year to grow and

18. 18
are currently maintained at a high level. Parallel to catching fish we need subsidize to cover cost of
fishing and exploitation of living resources in Antarctica has become, for economic reasons, single-
species focused only on the profitable catch of krill (as Poland whom only krill are caught).
Despite a number of international regulations, there is still competition between Antarctic
exploiters. For each of them works the stimulus, the dictatorship of "first take" the biggest profits,
now from krill. This led to a decline of living resources in Antarctica: when in 1970 the more than
600,000 tons of large whales and 120,000 tons of fish were obtained from the sea for food, in the
year 2012 from existing resources can be caught only 22,000 tons of fish, Fig. 21.
Fig. 21. Whales, fish and krill catches in Antarctica (62; 63).
Fig. 22. Whales catch in Antarctica (62; 63).

19. 19
When number of whales in 1976 was dropped because of over catching of them, catches of
fish and krill followed in the Antarctic and during the period 1978 to 1992 have increased as much
for fish, as it was necessary in 1992 to reduce its catches and determine its level saving for fish.
Unfortunately, in the next 20 years the biomass of fish has not been renewed and fishing could not
increase. Not account on this the fishing remove the fish’s food from Scotia Sea in greater amount
of 180-360 thousand tons of krill per year, just for a few jars of krill oil.
The competition and pursuit of financial profit has been operating since the beginning of the
exploitation of living resources in Antarctica. At the start large predators, whales - maximal fishing
focused because they have a higher value - provide more economic profit per unit of expenditure on
fishing than smaller whales or fish or krill. Race to maximize profits from the catch focused them
exclusively on whaling in the greatest weight. This led to depletion of subsequent whale species,
Fig. 21, Fig. 22.
At the beginning, in the years 1910-1913 Humpback and Right Wales were overcaught, Fig.
22. They were easy to hunt. Humpbacks are slow swimmers allows whalers to get close and they
often collect in groups near to land and draw attention by their behaviour, easy to observe. The
name of Rights was given to species by the early whalers because they were the "right" whales to
kill. They have large amounts of oil, blubber and baleen or whalebone, they are slow swimming
(easy to catch) and float when killed. Next Blue and Fin whales were hunted as their big bodies
over 100 tonnes per Blue individual, and 50 tonnes per Fin gave the greatest profits. The blue whale
has about 320 whalebone, measuring 100 cm long and 55 cm wide. These are the horn plates in the
palate for filtering food that after killing the whale was detached and sold to produce woman's
wardrobe. When their stock dropped (blue whales were nearly extirpated then) the most difficult
Sei, and after Sperm whales were hunted in the greatest amount from 1970s.
Sei whales are among the more elusive of the larger whales, not coming very close to land at
any time and not forming large groups or "schools". Sperm whales are difficult to catch, because
they are the deepest, up to depth of 1.5 km, and longest of all whale divers (catching giant squid in
the dark ocean depths). At the end, even Minke numbers previously quite healthy due to whalers
concentrating on larger, more profitable species dramatically dropped as they hunted from 1970 by
all whalers and are now hunted for scientific reasons. Minks weight 7 tonnes, and are ones of the
smallest filter feeding whales.
Fig. 23. Fin whale, Balaenoptera physalus Fig. 24. Blue Whale - Sulphur Bottom Whale -
Sibbald's Rorqual, Balaenoptera musculus.
Fig. 25. Southern Right Whale, Balaena glacialis
Fig. 26. Humpback Whale, Megaptera novaeangliae.

20. 20
Fig. 27. Minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata.
Fig. 28. Sei Whale, Balaenoptera borealis.
Fig. 29. Sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus.
Fig. 30. Killer Whale, Orcinus orca.
After the disappearance of whales fishing turned to catching on species array of fish from
large commercial bottom ones to small pelagic and little later on krill in high rate, repeating above
circle of competition for high profit. In a result the fish stocks declined what is displayed in low
catch depended on stock. Catch of krill, pelagic small fish and seafood, although having initially
small profit, as being at the base of the food ladder has very large biomass. So the fishing industry
currently focused exclusively on krill that guaranteed steady and long-term income. But
additionally, when new processing technologies of krill and its use in medicine had substantially
increased the value of krill, its catching was doubled.
In the same time, there was an ongoing until today the inhibition of stocks rebuild of krill
eating fish and whales. In the catch, fisheries increased the proportion of toothfish, fish that are less
dependent on krill, which feed on squid, fish and crustaceans.
The fastest way to reduce the risk of mercury poisoning by eating fish, will be increase the
biomass of Antarctic fish and thus increasing the opportunities for catch them and deliver to
consumption, especially for children and mothers.
The impact of Antarctic marine living resources to reduce the risks and effects of
mercury poisoning.
The fishing industry instead planning a sustaining caught in a goal of conservation of fish
species or its group is directed by economic law taking as first the maximum profits from species
array of living resources that did not allow fishes to regenerate as it is until now. In Antarctica
charring high yields for single species continues, what is harmful to the ecosystem, especially in the
current purpose for krill. The current state of knowledge and access to information give the
potential for wider look at problems in order to better understand them and find a better solution
urgently required in the reduction now and in the future a large number of the weakest, crippled
16% of the World population, of which no one wants to be, and what probability at least should not
be increased now and in the future for descendants populations.
In planning and forecasting catch of living resources are used sophisticated modern
methods, which often do not show the view on strong inter-dependences of species, and impact of
fishing. The high catch level of seals and whales before exploitation of fish had a strong impact on
the ecosystem. Removal of 3,647 whales before 1909 and then 1.2 million of them, this means
removal by 1970 about 103 million tons of whales did not increase the biomass of krill and fish, as
they soon were removed also. The current limit does not even maintain the state of many white
blood fish, so it will not restore the former wealth of biomass and the correct balance. In order to
restore it to a million whales and to the possibility of catching 120 thousand tons of fish we would
have to let go of the catch of 120 thou, tons of krill and leave it in an environment that for what is
going to regenerate had the food in the correct density to find and intake.

21. 21
Antarctic Living Resources in the past also had a huge share in reducing the risk of
poisoning with mercury and other toxins, which is currently not recognized.
For example, many organizations escalated at least with animosity to Japan by describing
inhumane cetaceans in the Antarctic, without exact discern of the problem, without seeing valid
reasons and issues that must also be addressed.
Usually, we hear that Japan hunts whales because those people like their meat. Whale meat
was eaten there in times of hunger, lack of food, which often occur in island habitats, having limited
the land foods. Japan as islanders of small rocky islands had to have a great tradition in fishing for
whales and other marine animals.
Since 1953, fish and marine life of water from the region of Japan has been contaminated
with mercury coming from leaks in the chemical industry. Thousands of Japanese people, especially
families of fishermen nourishing the fish suffered disease from mercury poisoning, half of whom
died. During 17-18 years up to 1970 two Japanese chemical plant pollute sea water with mercury
that had undergone a wide bioaccumulation and biomagnification in the marine environment.
However, in those years fortunately to reduce the size of the epidemic, the meat of Antarctic whale
consisted of 30% protein composition of the daily diet of Japanese, and as many as 70% has been
widely used in nourish the children in schools that are known to be more sensitive to mercury
poisoning. The fact that Japan, whose population eats food from the sea, gained it in clear Antarctic
waters significantly reduced the number of victims of toxic mercury contained in fish. This
consideration should be highlighted as a positive of the Antarctic whaling.
It is worth to note that fisheries in the Antarctic reduced the number of victims of mercury
poisoning through fish consumption in all countries, including Poland, who’s the fishing fleets
fished in the South Ocean. In those years throughout the world in chemical plants, there were
applied a production lines, such as in the Japanese chemical plant from which wastewater with
mercury were discharged into the water and probably they work in Russia today.
All coastal countries that have high levels of fish consumption: Japan, Korea, Norway,
Iceland, England, France, Spain and Poland have good reason to catch fish in the clear Antarctic
waters: it reduce the risk of mercury poisoning because of fish consumption.
Taking the above into consideration to stop whaling in the Antarctic it was not the best way
to establish a simple prohibition, especially when whale meat consumption reduces the
concentration of mercury in the human tissues. Countries interested in Antarctic living resources
should jointly find a satisfactory solution. Finally, it is also the right to submit offers for the
discussion the way of trapping and protection.
It seems that the oil from krill, which is a small percentage of the mass of krill, despite its
price does not justify the destruction of the ecosystem of Antarctica, especially the elimination of
krill eating fish that contain the same medicinal ingredients as krill oil, and also reduce the risk of
mercury poisoning and additionally constitute the food in the country in which is cannibalism from
starvation. This should touch especially Poland, where the concentration camps at Auschwitz, are a
monument recalling that our parents did the same forced by hunger.
There is a question, whether to catch fish in small quantities to have a healthy diet for
children, or catching out of Antarctic fish but catching krill, the main Antarctic food, depriving fish
not only from food but also from a home – a favourable environment for the development of their
larvae. Each small creature has a shelter, hermit crab has a shell, others have cracks, holes, bushes
and here fish larvae have krill bushes.
Conclusion.
The high demand for fish in Poland fill the supply of fish having objections of NPA agencies
in respect to possession of mercury content disqualifying for unlimited consumption, especially for
mothers and children.
Competition between explorers to obtain a maximum profit from living resources in
Antarctica has in the past minus and two pluses. Minus: eliminate valuable species from
consumption, the pros: 1) reducing the risks and adverse effects from mercury poisoning, 2)
contribute to the reduction of hunger in countries experiencing famine.

22. 22
The present competition of explorers to obtain maximum profit from krill (in which also
Poland is involved) has three major drawbacks: 1) eliminates these valuable species of fish that feed
on krill 2) increases the risk of mercury poisoning, and 3) contributes to the increasing effects of
hunger in experiencing famine.
Krill fishers should know that the rebirth of stocks Antarctic krill eating fish is the quickest
and best way to reduce the risks and negative effects of mercury poisoning - in order to they will be
less interested in profit from catch of krill supplying only oil.
We`have a new better than krill sources of omega 3 acids: from stabilized extract of mussel
of Perna canaliculus (64), which is significantly more effective than the extract of krill.
Antarctica is ocean being under international conservation but despite of that a simple
economic mechanism is working: the lack of a profit from a species means lack its protection in
degree that could enable its rebirth.
The solution to conflict between short-term interest of krill fishery and protection tasks of
Antarctic Living Resources is to determine permits for krill fishing conditional on good state of krill
eating fish biomass, that allows maintain the stable fishing. When is the lack of fish than it is not to
allow catching of krill. Current krill catches should not exceed 120 thousand tons.
Subsidies for research on fish biomass and fishing subsidies should be paid from the profits
obtained from krill catching.
Taking into account the cost of research in planning increase the optimal use of their quota
for research.
List of figures.
Fig. 1. Squares of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources CCAMLR (1980). .........1
Fig. 2. The mackerel icefish, Champsocephalus gunnari, Channichthyidae......................................................................4
Fig. 3. South Georgia icefish, Pseudochaenichthys georgianus (Channichthyidae). .........................................................4
Fig. 4. Total catch of fish, krill and Ps. georgianus (SGI) in Antarctica.............................................................................5
Fig. 5. Total catch of fish, krill, Ps. georgianus (SGI) and toothfish (ELEG) in Antarctica (24)........................................5
Fig. 6. Krill, Euphausia superba, Dana. .............................................................................................................................6
Fig. 7. Patagonian toothfish, Dissostichus eleginoides, (Nototheniidae)............................................................................6
Fig. 8. Fishing in South Georgia 1977/78 and catches in Antarctic ocean 2020/11. On the right percentage (25). ............6
Fig. 9. Percent of krill in food of finfish from research of 2008/09 AMLR Survey off S. Orkney I. (13)..........................7
Fig. 10. The largest density and biomass of krill (cubes) was at the South Georgia = 1502 tons. There caught most fish
as well. Differentiation of quantities of fish Ps. georgianus  and its food, krill  in the Antarctic during the expedition
on rv. “Prof. Siedlecki” in 1978-1979 (12). ........................................................................................................................8
Fig. 11. Occurrence of larvae of fish in the krill fishery (marked by arrows) carried out in midwater between South
Orkney and Elephant Island during an expedition on rv. "Professor Siedlecki" in season 1988/89 (26). Arrows – krill
catches containing larvae of the following species of fish: Ch. aceratus (40,66); Ch. gunnarii (41); Chionodraco
rastrospinosus (41,66,78); Chaenodraco wilsoni (69,73,74); Dissostichus eleginoides (73); Pleurogramma antarcticum
(40,74); Gryodraco antarcticus (40,73,74,82); Neopagetopsis sp. (55); Neopagetopsis ionach (56,71,73); Trematomus
eulepidotus (65); Notolepis coatsi (67,71); Pagetopsis sp. (69,78,82); Notothenia sp. (69); Notothenia larseni (73;74);
Pagetopsis macropterus (73); Electrona carlsbergi (78)....................................................................................................8
Fig. 12. Otoliths of haddock M. aegelfinus from Barents Sea: above with involutes with low level of proteins; below is
normal...............................................................................................................................................................................10
Fig. 13. Controls hauls in the squares of CCAMLR statistical area, No 48.3 on the shelf of South Georgia...................13
Fig. 14. Vertical presence of Ps. georgianus at South Georgia........................................................................................13
Fig. 15. Horizontal differentiation of the occurrence of Ps. georgianus South Georgia shelf..........................................14
Fig. 16. High changeability of costs of proportional samples...........................................................................................16
Fig. 17. A different manner in the distribution of control hauls to depth zones on the shelf of S Georgia. ......................16
Fig. 18. Marked decline in fishing (thereby biomass) while increasing krill fishery. .......................................................17
Fig. 19. Big catches of krill in the Antarctic are giving very high incomes, enough high in order to finance fishing of
Antarctic fish, constituting a little per cent of profits obtained from sales of the krill. ....................................................17
Fig. 20. Income from catching of krill lowered by funding subsidies of Antarctic fishing (do not exceed 1%). .............17
Fig. 21. Whales, fish and krill catches in Antarctica (62; 63). ..........................................................................................18
Fig. 22. Whales catch in Antarctica (62; 63).....................................................................................................................18
Fig. 23. Fin whale, Balaenoptera physalus.......................................................................................................................19
Fig. 24. Blue Whale - Sulphur Bottom Whale - Sibbald's Rorqual, Balaenoptera musculus. ..........................................19
Fig. 25. Southern Right Whale, Balaena glacialis............................................................................................................19
Fig. 26. Humpback Whale, Megaptera novaeangliae. .....................................................................................................19
Fig. 27. Minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata..........................................................................................................20

23. 23
Fig. 28. Sei Whale, Balaenoptera borealis.......................................................................................................................20
Fig. 29. Sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus...............................................................................................................20
Fig. 30. Killer Whale, Orcinus orca..................................................................................................................................20
Work Cited
1. Żylewski, M. Materiały dodatkowe – związki karbonylowe. Tautomeria. Kraków : UJ, Col.Med., Kat.Ch.Org, 2012.
http://farmacja.cm-uj.krakow.pl/~mkz/CO.pdf.
2. NIMD, J. Gov. Archives of National Institute for Minamata Disease. Minamata Disease Archives. [Online] National
Institute for Minamata Disease, Ministry of the Environment, Japan, 2000.
http://www.nimd.go.jp/archives/english/tenji/e_corner/etop.html.
3. NIMD, Min. E. NIMD Annual Report 2010. Japan : Nat.Inst.for Minamata Disease Min. of the Environment, 2010.
4. Laurenti, G. (comp.). 1961-2007 FISH AND FISHERY PRODUCTS: WORLD APPARENT CONSUMPTION
STATISTICS BASED ON FOOD BALANCE SHEETS. Rome : FAO yearbook. Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics.
2009, 2011.
5. Anon, 2011. List of Seafood Health Alerts. EDF. [Online] 2011 Environmental Defense Fund, 2011.
http://apps.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=17694.
6. Anon. 2012. Mercury Containation in Fish. Natural Resources Defence Council. [Online] NRDC, New York, 2012.
http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/guide.asp.
7. FDA. Mercury Levels in Commercial Fish and Shellfish (1990-2010). USA : FDA, 2011.
8. FDA. National Marine Fisheries Service Survey of Trace Elements in the Fishery Resources. New York : FDA, 2010.
9. Sakamoto, M. Exposure assessment of methylmercury and other heavy metals in pregnant women and fetuses. Japan :
NIMD Dep. of Int. Aff. and Env. Sci., 2011.
10. Yasutake, A. Studies on methylmercury exposure in whale-eating district. Japan : NIMD Dep. of Basic Med. Sci.,
2010.
11. Oomen, et al. Fish Consumption and Coronary Heart Disease Mortality in Finland, Italy, and the Netherlands. USA :
American Journal of Epidemiology, 2000.
12. Witek, Z., J. Kalinowski, A. Grelowski. Formation of Antarctic Krill Concentrations in Relation to Hydrodynamic
Processes and Social Behaviour. [aut. książki] D. Sahrhage. Antarctic Ocean and Resources Variability. Berlin :
Springer-Verlag, 1988.
13. Jones, C., M. Damerau, K. Deitrich, R. Driscoll, K.-H. Kock, K. Kuhn, J. Moore, T. Morgan, T. Near, J. Pennington,
and S. Schöling. Demersal Finfi sh Survey of the South Orkney Islands., In: Van Cise, A.M. AMLR 2008/2009 FIELD
SEASON REPORT. N.Y. : NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-445, 2009.
14. Sahrhage, D., W. Schreber, R. Steinberg, G. Hempel. Antarktis-Expedition 1975-1976 der Bundesrepublik
Deutschland. Berlin 42 : Arch. Fisch. Wiss. 29th Beih.1. 1-96. , 1978.
15. Traczyk, R. Migrations of Antarctic fish Pseudochaenichthys georgianus Norman, 1939 in the Scotia Sea. Hobart :
CCAMLR. WG-FSA-12/68 Rev. 1, 2012.
16. Bleasel, I.E., B. Bolin, G. A. Knox, W. N. Bonner. Usuwanie odpadów w Antarktyce Raport zespołu ekspertów
Komitetu Naukowego Badań Antarktycznych (SCAR) w sprawie usuwania odpadów. W-wa : POL.POLAR RES.,
1990. strony 173-205. Tom 11.
17. Emnet, P. Heavy metals: A heavy burden on the icy continent. NY : canterbury, 2013.
http://www.anta.canterbury.ac.nz/documents/2008-09%20Reviews%20GCAS/Emnet.pdf.
18. Dommergue, A., F. Sprovieri, N. Pirrone, R. Ebinghaus, S. Brooks, J. Courteaud, C.P. Ferrari. Overview of mercury
measurements in the Antarctic troposphere. NY : Atmos. Chem. Phys., 2010. strony 3309–3319. Tom 10,
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/3309/2010/acp-10-3309-2010.pdf.
19. Bargagli, R., C. Agnorelli, F. Borghini, F. Monaci, F. Enhanced Deposition and Bioaccumulation of Mercury in
Antarctic Terrestrial Ecosystems Facing a Coastal Polynya. NY : Environ. Sci. Technol., 2005.
20. CCAMLR, Hobart. CONSERVATION MEASURE 42-01 (2011). Limits on the fishery for Champsocephalus gunnari
in Statistical Subarea 48.3 in the 2011/12 season. [Online] 2011.
http://www.ccamlr.org/sites/drupal.ccamlr.org/files//42-01.pdf.
21. CCAMLR, Hobart. CCAMLR Statistical Bulletin, Vol. 24 (2002–2011). CCAMLR - Commission for Conservation of
Antarctic Marine Living Resources 2012,. [Online] CCAMLR, All rights reserved. Hobart., 2011.
http://www.ccamlr.org/en/document/publications/ccamlr-statistical-bulletin-vol-24-2002%E2%80%932011.
22. Brown, J., P. Brickle, M. Belchier, M. Collins. The Patagonian toothfish: biology, ecology and fishery. Hobart :
CCAMLR. WG-FSA-10/P05, 2010. http://www.ccamlr.org/en/wg-fsa-10/p05.
23. Roberts, J., J.C. Xavier, D.J.Agnew. The diet of toothfish species Dissostichus eleginoides and Dissostichus mawsoni
with overlapping distributions. UK : J Fish Biol., 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21722116.
24. CCAMLR, Hobart. CCAMLR Statistical Bulletin, Vol. 24 (2002–2011). CCAMLR - Commission for Conservation of
Antarctic Marine Living Resources 2012,. [Online] CCAMLR, All rights reserved. Hobart. , 2011.
http://www.ccamlr.org/en/document/publications/ccamlr-statistical-bulletin-vol-24-2002%E2%80%932011.
25. CCAMLR. REPORT OF THE FISH STOCK ASSESSMENT WORKING GROUP (Hobart, Australia, 12–20 October,
1988). Hobart : WG-FSA, 1988.
26. Traczyk, R. The occurrence of krill Euphausia superba in the floating ice edge zone and some its biological data.

24. 24
http://georgianka.strefa.pl/krill_oc.html. [Online] INTERIA.PL S.A., 1993.
27. Harmon, K. Shrimpy Sea Life May Mix Oceans as Much as Tides and Winds Do. bio-ocean-mixing. [Online]
Scientific American, 29 VII 2009. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bio-ocean-mixing.
28. Pyper, W. Krill mix up the ocean. Tasmania : Australian Antarctic Magazine, 2008.
29. Sosinski, J., J. Szlakowski. Biological characteristics and biomass estimates of the fish stocks on the South Georgia
shelf in the 1986/87–1988/89 seasons. W-wa : Acta Icthyologica et Piscatoria., 1992. strony 77–105. Tom 22.
30. Sarah Clarke, William D.K. Reid, Martin A. Collins* And Mark Belchier. Biology and distribution of South Georgia
icefish (Pseudochaenichthys georgianus) around South Georgia and Shag Rocks. 20. UK : Antarctic Science Ltd.,
2008. strony 343–353. Tom 4.
31. Greenpeace. Czy wiesz co jesz czerwona lista, greenpeace. Gatunki morskie. W-wa : www.greenpeace.pl, 2012.
http://www.greenpeace.org/poland/Global/poland/report/2008/9/czy-wiesz-co-jesz-czerwona-li.pdf.
32. Baldwin, G. Environmental pollutant has sex-skewing effect;. USA : BioMed Central (www.biomedcentral.com),
2008. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-07/bc-eph071508.php.
33. Sorensen, E. Jet Fuel, Plastics Exposures Cause Disease in Later Generations; Reproductive Diseases, Obesity.
USA : ScienceDaily, Washington State University., 2013. http://www.sciencedaily.com
/releases/2013/01/130124183630.htm.
34. Broad, W.J. Russians Describe Extensive Dumping Of Nuclear Waste. New York : The New York Time. Science,
1993. http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/27/science/russians-describe-extensive-dumping-of-nuclear-
waste.html?pagewanted=all.
35. Madslien, J. Nuclear waste poses Arctic threat. Murmansk : BBC News, UK, 2006.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6058302.stm.
36. Greenpeace. "Chronology of Developments Concerning the Dumping of Radioactive Wastes at Sea by the
USSR/Russian Navy and Merchant Marine and the Loss of Nuclear-Powered Vessels ar Sea, 1975-1993". NY :
Greenpeace, 1993.
37. TED. Arctic Sea Dumping, Russian Toxic Dumping in the Arctic Sea. NY : american.edu. TED Case Studies, 1997.
http://www1.american.edu/ted/arctic.htm.
38. Nilsen, T. Planning for new expeditions to Arctic nuclear dustbin. Kirkenes, Norway : Barents Observer, 2012.09.
http://barentsobserver.com/en/nature/planning-new-expeditions-arctic-nuclear-dustbin-26-09.
39. —. Time to lift dumped submarine. Norway : Barents Observer, 2012.08. http://barentsobserver.com/en/nature/time-
lift-dumped-submarine-28-08.
40. R., Traczyk. Report on length and age of haddock (Melanogrammus aegelfinus) caught by the fishing ship Polonus in
the Barents Sea, in summer 2009. Gdynia : MIR (powielone), 2009.
41. LosyZiemi.pl. Zagrożenia: UK – Rekordowo zanieczyszczone powietrze, skończyła się skala. W-wa : LosyZiemi.pl,
2012. http://losyziemi.pl/uk-rekordowo-zanieczyszczone-powietrze-skonczyla-sie-skala/.
42. Mochizuki, I. Archive for the ‘Sea contamination’Category. Japan : Fukushima Diary, 2012. http://fukushima-
diary.com/category/dnews/sea-contamination/.
43. Medonet. Zanieczyszczenie powietrza wpływa na wzrost liczby samobójstw. W-wa : Copyright 1996-2013 Grupa
Onet.pl SA, 2013. http://www.medonet.pl/zdrowie-na-co-dzien,artykul,1619720,1,zanieczyszczenie-powietrza-
wplywa-na-wzrost-liczby-samobojstw,index.html#czytaj-wiecej.
44. Boszke, L., J. Siepak, J. Falandysz. Total Mercury Contamination of Selected Organisms in Puck Bay, Baltic Sea,
Poland. 3. W-wa : Pol.Jour.of Env.Studies, 2003. strony 275-285. Tom 12, http://www.pjoes.com/pdf/12.3/275-
285.pdf.
45. Greenpeace. Zanieczyszczenie i morze - woda i olej. W-wa : ©GREENPEACE, 2011.
http://www.greenpeace.org/poland/pl/co-robimy/morza-i-oceany/zanieczyszczenie/.
46. Lecterro. Farmerzy UE zatruwają Bałtyk. W-wa : Zmianynaziemi.pl, 2013. http://zmianynaziemi.pl/wideo/farmerzy-
ue-zatruwaja-baltyk.
47. Skerfving, S. Exposure to pollutants through consumption of contaminated fish. 2. Helsinki : Scand J Work Environ
Health, 1995. strony 81-83. Tom 21, http://www.sjweh.fi/show_abstract.php?abstract_id=14.
48. Jagr. Wzrasta liczba płatnych wizyt lekarskich. W-wa : Dziennik Gazeta Prawna, 2012.
http://tvp.info/informacje/biznes/wzrasta-liczba-platnych-wizyt-lekarskich/8783686.
49. Portal Polonii Düsseldorf . Liczba wizyt lekarskich na rekordowym poziomie. Düsseldorf : Copyright NaszaZajta ©
2007/3/8, 2010. http://www.naszazajta.pl/news.php?readmore=3642.
50. Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies of the European Commission. Safety of ‘Lipid extract from
Euphausia superba' as a novel food ingredient; Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and
Allergies. Bruksel : The EFSA Journal, 2009.
51. Kryczkowski, J.A., A.M. Jaeszke, E. Proskura. Sposób obróbki wstępnej raczków morskich, zwłaszcza raczków
Euphausia superba. Gdynia : Urząd Patentowy PRL, 1979.
52. Sumaila, R, A.D. Marsden, R. Watson, D. Pauly. A Global Ex-vessel Fish Price Database: Construction and
Applications. Canada : Journal of Bioeconomics, 2007.
53. Everson, I., S. Campbell. Areas of seabed within CCAMLR subarea 48.3, South Georgia. Hobart : CCAMLR
Selected Scientific Papers, 1991. 1990.
54. Sparre, P., S.C. Vanema. Introduction to tropical fish stock assessment. Rome : FAO Fish. Techn. Paper No.306. 1.
Rev, 1982. 1.

25. 25
55. Parkes, G., I. Everson, J. Anderson, Z. Cielniaszek, J. Szlakowski, R. Traczyk. Report of the UK/Polish fish stock
assessment survey around South Georgia in January 1990. London : Imp.Coll. of Sci. & Techn., 1990, str. 20.
56. Lam, V.W.Y., U.R. Sumaila, A. Dyck, D. Pauly, R. Watson. Construction and first applications of a global cost of
fishing database. Canada : ICES Journal of Marine Science, 2011.
57. Anon. Stan zasobów ryb i kryla w atlantyckim sektorze Antarktyki w sezonie 1987/1988. MIR,. Gdynia : MIR, 1988.
58. Furusawa, M. ECHO INTEGRATION NEAR THE SEABED. 3. Japan : Journal of Marine Science and Technology,
2011. strony 259-266. Tom 19.
59. support.echoview.com. About biomass estimation. N.Y. : Echoview, 2012.
http://support.echoview.com/WebHelp/How_to/Estimate_biomass/About_Biomass_Estimation.htm.
60. May, R.M. Beddington, C.W. Clark, S.J. Holt, R.M. Laws. Management of Multispecies Fisheries. UK : Science,
1979. strony 267-277. Tom 205.
61. Rosenberg, A.A. and J.R. Beddington. Hervesting Interacting Species of Different Lifespans. London : IMA Jour.of
Math.Appl.in Med.&Biol., 1987. strony 265-278. Tom 4.
62. Donovan, G.P. (Editor IWC). Annual Reports of the International Whaling Commission 1970...2012. Cambridge :
IWC, www.iwcoffice.org, 2012. http://www.iwcoffice.org/annual-reports.
63. Luna. Whaling Library. Whaling Statistics. [Online] luna.pos.to, 2011. http://luna.pos.to/whale/sta.html.
64. Ozean food. HALF SHELL GREEN MUSSEL (PERNA CANALICULA). Auckland NZ : Ozean food Ltd, 2013.
http://www.ozeanfood.com/portfolio/half-shell-green-mussel-perna-canalicula/.
65. HELCOM. Hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea. An Integrated Thematic Assessment of hazardous substances in
the Baltic Sea. Balt. Sea Environ. Proc. . Helsinki : HELCOM BMEPC, 2010. 120B.
66. Ślósarczyk, W., Z. Cielniaszek. Postlarval and juvenile fish (Pisces, Perciformes and Myctophiformes) in the
Antarctic Peninsula region the Antarctic Peninsula region, 1983/1984. 1-2. W-wa : Pol. Polar Res., 1985. strony 159-
165. Tom 6.
67. Cielniaszek, Z., Szlakowski, J., R., Traczyk. Report of the anglo-polish ichthyology-fishery research in the Shag
Rocks area and under the South Georgia shelf in January 1990. (m/t “Hill Cove”, 02.01.-29.01.1990). Gdynia : SFI,
1990.
68. Kwaśniak, J. Dystrybucja narządowa, kumulacja i detoksykacja rtęci w rybach poławianych w południowym Bałtyku.
Gdynia : UG WOiG, 2012. Publ. obrona dokt..
69. Kramer, M.J. What You Need to Know About Mercury. USA : Fish FAQ, 2006.
70. US FDA. Mercury Levels in Commercial Fish and Shellfish (1990-2010). US Food and Drug Administration.
[Online] US Department of Health & Human Services, 2013. http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/product-
specificinformation/seafood/foodbornepathogenscontaminants/methylmercury/ucm115644.htm.