1. Shrimp trawling and the benthic
habitats of West Greenland
Chris Yesson

2. Shrimp fishing – a >1.9bn DKK industry

3. • MSC - An independent, global, non-profit organisation
working to enhance responsible development of seafood
resources
• Standard for sustainable fishing and seafood traceability
• To carry the label everyone in the
supply chain must conform to the
MSC Chain of Custody standard
• other ecolabelling schemes are
available

4. Potential impact of trawling gear
• Some trawling has been likened to
forest clear cutting
• Gear that is dragged along the
bottom of the seabed can disturb,
damage or destroy many organisms
• But the 'right gear' used in the 'right
habitat' could have negligible
ecosystem impact
Unimpacted
Impacted
Althaus et al (2009) M.E.P.S 397: 279-294
Watling & Norse (1998)
Cons. Biol. 12: 1180-97

5. Our mission
• What benthic habitats are there on the west Greenland
shelf?
• Are there any vulnerable marine ecosystems?
• Where are they?
• What is the impact of shrimp trawling on these habitats?
• Feed back into the MSC certification process

6. Pamuit – survey ship

7. Example seabed images

8. Computer assisted recognition
Collaboration with UCL

9. A guide to the benthic fauna

10. Find diversity and fishing impact
H=0.4
Impact=0
H=0.9
Impact=Low

11. Diversity and fishing impact
Weakly negative impact

12. Are all sites directly comparable?
• Sites with rocks have different species composition to
those with only sand & mud
• Impact of fishing may be different for these habitats
Most soft corals are
permanently attached to rock
Many soft sediment species can
bury themselves in the sand/mud

13. Are all sites directly comparable?
• 3D MDS plot (3d stress=1.47)

14. Different response of habitats

15. Habitats differ by environment too

16. What effects diversity?
Generalised linear models
Diversity ~
Fishing + Environment
Muddy seabed:
- Fishing impact**
Rocky seabed:
+ Depth***
- Current Speed***

17. A historical perspective
• Per Kanneworff's benthic
images (1975-1986)
• 50 reels of film (~40,000
images)
• Measure change over 40
years

18. Bycatch of large vulnerable organisms

19. Identifying vulnerable habitats
• Submarine
telecoms
cable
planned
• Offering
advice on
potential
impact

20. Identifying vulnerable habitats
• Submarine
telecoms
cable
planned
• Offering
advice on
potential
impact

21. Conclusions
• Benthic (seabed) habitats in Greenland are diverse
• Rocky habitats have seen lower fishing impact and
seem less disturbed
• Muddy habitats may be negatively impacted by fishing
• 3 more years of surveys will give us more robust data
• A historical perspective will be useful
• Our observations are feeding back into monitoring and
marine spatial planning

22. Contributors & Collaborators
• At IoZ
– Kirsty Kemp
– Irina Chemshirova
– Poppy Simon
• Others
– Ed Johns
– Sustainable Fisheries Greenland
– Peder Munk Pedersen
– Greenland institute of natural resources
– Nanette Hammeken
– Martin Blicher
– Crew of M/T Pamiut