Transcript Monitoring marine litter, a part of the joint

Monitoring marine litter, a part of the
joint Norwegian/Russian ecosystem
survey in the Barents Sea
Bjørn Einar Grøsvik1, Elena Eriksen1,
Tatiana Prokhorova2, Pavel Krivosheya2
1) Institute of Marine Research
2) PINRO, Russland
Stranded litter at Garnes, Bergen
EU: Good environmental status by 2020
11 descriptors:
1- Biological diversity is maintained.
6 - Sea-floor integrity is at a level that ensures that the structure and functions of the
ecosystems.
8 - Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects.
9 - Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed
levels established by Community legislation or other relevant standards.
10 - Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal
and marine environment.
▶ Main goal
• Explore the environment and the biology of the oceans
and coasts
• Give advice to the Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal
Affairs, the Food Safety Authority, the fishing industry
and other stakeholders regarding management of the
ocean and coast’s biological resources and
environment
• Communicate the research results
• Develop technology for fisheries and catching
IMR has a free and independent role in all scientific questions
▶ Main focus areas
• Aquaculture and coastal areas
• Oceans
• External influences
Autumn survey activity
Joint Norwegian-Russian Ecosystem survey in the Barents Sea
during autumn aimed to obtain capelin, herring, polar cod, blue whiting,
shrimps and 0-group abundance estimates/ indices, and monitor the status of
some ecosystem components and processes
August-September: largest ice-free area and minimal stocks migration. Timing is optimal to
reflect feeding success and for assessing pelagic fish stocks for assessment and fisheries
management advice.
Advantages
with the present monitoring
 highly functional collaboration
between Norway and Russia
 comprehensive spatial coverage
and adequate resolution
Helmar Hanssen
Johan Hjort
G.O.Sars
Vilnius
 the results/output covers
important assessment tasks and
some ecosystem components and
processes
 multidisciplinary focus increases
the scientific knowledge about the
ecosystem
Some examples..
Litter observed at surface
2010
2011
m3
m3
m3
2012
2013
m3
m3
m3
m3
Surface currents averaged for 2000-2011
Map by Vidar Lien, IMR
Litter in pelagic and bottom trawls
2010
2011
g
Pelagic: contour
Bottom: without
2012
2013
g
g
Bottom currents averaged for 2000-2011
Map by Vidar Lien, IMR
Still there are many questions
• The litter registration is dependent of catchability
and the amount may be underestimated
• We do not register degradation products
like microplastic and nanoplastic
• To which degree may these be taken up by
organisms?
• And how it may affect their fitness
• We do not know of which other pollutants that
adsorbs to different types of plastic
Plastic ingestion by the supralittoral
amphipod Orchestia gammarellus
Photo: Anlaug Furu Boddington
•
•
•
•
•
OSPAR: 15 countries together with EU, cooperate to protect the
marine environment of the North-East Atlantic.
It started in 1972 with the Oslo Convention against dumping of
hazardous waste in the Atlantic and the North Sea.
It was broadened to cover land-based sources and the offshore
industry by the Paris Convention of 1974.
These two conventions were unified, up-dated and extended by the
1992 OSPAR Convention.
Annex on biodiversity and ecosystems was adopted in 1998 to cover
non-polluting human activities that can adversely affect the sea.
Conclusion
• We should work for reducing discharges of litter
• Produce more environmental friendly and
degradable plastic products
• Improve methods and develop standards for
monitoring
• We need more knowledge on how litter or
degradation products may effect ecosystem
health
Thanks for your attention!
Thanks for your attention!