Blessing of the Fleet

 The Blessing of the Fleet was held this past Saturday and Sunday in Cape Town Harbor at the V&A Waterfront in perfect sunny conditions. The masses that participated in the weekend’s proceedings were treated to good food, music and above all witnessed a century old tradition still being enjoyed today. The blessing of the fleet has been in existence for centuries in Mediterranean fishing communities and has only been practiced in Cape Town since 1989 when the local Portuguese Community decided to celebrate this tradition as well. Today, this festival signifies the readiness of our tuna fleet as we patiently await the arrival of the tuna which usually occurs between September and October every year. And how fitting was it for the south easterly trade wind to blow, as this is the wind that also signifies the change in seasons and assists in pushing the warmer waters around our coast?

With selected vessels all being decorated in traditional fare such as palm leaves and flags, they departed for a procession around the harbor and once they were beyond the breakwater, all attending on board bare witness of the Catholic Mass and blessing for a safe and bountiful season. The vessels are blessed so that all on board may have safe return and earn an honest living. Words are also expressed for those seamen whose souls were lost at sea but never forgotten and a flowered anchor wreath is cast into the ocean in their honor. The procession returns to the quayside upon when the keenly awaited festivities of dancing and entertainment begins. Traditional Portuguese food is prepared with the same enthusiasm as one would expect from their mother’s kitchen. All funds raised from this 2 day festival are in aid of the Portuguese Cultural and Welfare Center.

The majority of tuna vessel owners and captains in South Africa are Portuguese and mostly originate from Madeira. Unfortunately for this industry, we are not seeing the younger generations following in their parent’s footsteps and pursuing a career on sea, as they would rather pursue more glamorous occupations. Rather, there is a trend for younger South African’s seeking ownership and employment within this industry. Possibly next year, we could see a change in venue to Hout Bay Harbor where I would imagine there being a better participation from the South African tuna fishermen.

With the 2013 blessing have come and gone, all are now occupied with their final preparations for this year’s (hopefully) plentiful season…so many livelihoods are at stake. 

This Channel's Credibility Is Seriously Questionable...Discovery or Disgrace???

The Discovery Channel aired “Shark Week” in the States starting on the 4th of August 2013. I was informed of the Megalodon attack near Hout Bay by concerning friends living in Boston who were shocked to have learnt that an entire fishing boat was sunk and all on board subsequently eaten by a suspected prehistoric shark. Search results indicate that the last recorded shark attack in Cape Town was on the 19th April 2012 involving body boarder David Lilienfeld near Kogel Bay and a Great White shark. There is no media coverage regarding the Megalodon attack in Hout Bay, despite the program having “actual footage” from local news broadcasters. The Discovery Channel has done themselves a serious discredit to their audience by broadcasting this fictional episode.

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/shark-week/videos/megalodon-attacks-a-boat.htm

For the record, there was never a Megalodon attack in Hout Bay, Cape Town and here’s why. The Megalodon shark was an apex predator existing around 1.5+ million years ago during the Cenozoic Era. Remains of excavated fossils suggest that they grew to a lengthy 18 meters with individual teeth diagonally measuring a staggering 170mm making this one of the most powerful predators in vertebrae history.

Pictures: Wikipedia

This shark could have easily sunk the vessel that Discovery Channel suggests but there is no convincing evidence that these once powerful creatures are still in existence. Yes, one could argue that we have yet to explore and discover all of the oceans and that the Coelacanth was a famous discovery made not so long ago off our coastal waters. So what are the chances of a Megalodon swimming off Clifton beach or Hout Bay? Very slim! An apex predator of this magnitude would have to consume vast quantities of fish and other ocean mammals to sustain its self. I couldn't imagine a Megalodon sitting down to a nice vegetarian buffet of seaweed and the likes thereof. Surely with today’s modern technology, such as sonar, we would have found a Megalodon shark - especially with the tuna fleet operating from Hout Bay Harbor, someone should have caught one by now?

According to Marine Biologist Alison Kock, in recent years an ­average of only six people have been attacked every year in South ­African ­waters, with 26 attacks since 1960. Only one in 10 shark attacks are fatal. As ­tourists in particular spend more time in the waters sharks favor off Australia, America and in the ­Pacific, globally the number of attacks is ­growing. 

Cape Town has employed the services of "Shark Spotters” at all major beaches and hot spots along the Cape Peninsula. The spotters indicate to the public any presence of sharks with a color flag system as follows:

              Shark Have Been Spotted

 High Shark Alert

                   Spotting Conditions Are Poor

                         Spotting Conditions Are Good

       

  The previous shark attack involving a British tourist was due to his own ignorance as he had been warned about the shark sightings and still chose to swim. Use your common sense and take note of the Shark Spotter flags!

Statistically speaking you are safer in the sea than your own car… scary fact! You are more likely to die from cows, ants, mosquitoes, lightning, traffic light intersection (robots) and so on, than a shark attack let alone a Megalodon. Take a look at the list of the top 25 things more likely to kill you as opposed to sharks: http://kafe.com/news/25-shocking-things-more-likely-to-kill-you-than-a-shark/. I had a good chuckle at this list.

So Discovery Channel, I must admit that your episode on the Megalodon while it was more convincing than the original Jaws Trilogy in 1975, it is still flawed. Unfortunately for the tourism industry in Cape Town, there are Americans wondering the streets back home believing everything they saw. This is a fact as I have received numerous emails and phone calls from friends abroad. So on land one might consider yourself a “big fish,” but in the ocean we are merely part of the food chain. Respect it.

REF: Discovery Channel & Wikipedia

The Affect of Seismic Surveying on Bluefin Tuna Migration in the Bight off Australia

Following on from my previous blog: Seismic Effects on the South African and Namibian Tuna 2012/2013 Season, as mentioned I would discuss the effects the seismic testing has had on the Australian’s Southern Bluefin Tuna migration and subsequent poor catches.

The Australian Southern Bluefin Tuna Industry (ASBTIA) is strongly opposing and contesting the seismic surveying being conducted in the Great Australian Bight in first half of 2013 by Bight Petroleum (a Canadian Company). The tuna industry is arguing that the surveys are being conducted near the eastern part of the Bight where the bluefin tuna migrate through.  The association has gone on to say that due to the high level of concern they were considering launching action under the Common Wealth Environment Act to put a stop to the surveys. Some 3000 locals are employed in their tuna industry both directly and indirectly. This would be ideal for us in South Africa and Namibia if we had such acts in our constitution…but alas we have no such Act but since both governments are prioritizing job creation for the unemployed I feel that this should be a priority considering the number of people employed within the fishing sector. (One would think?) 

Now back on topic, the bluefin tuna migrate normally through the Bight for approximately five months out of the year and a temporary solution would therefore be to conduct the surveys outside of these months. During November 2011 to May 2012 whilst BP was conducting their seismic surveying in the Western Bight, the migration paths of the tuna completely changed. The ASBTIA went on to say that long term documented data by CSIRO from the past 30 years indicated that the tuna migrate directly thought the surveying area each year. The Australians usually catch their tuna west of Port Lincoln and the 2012 season catch data shows the exact opposite and in fact was caught east of the port. The last time bluefin were caught near Kangaroo Island was way back in 1980 according to ASBTIA. The only change to the Australian tuna season is that of the seismic activity and this variable is now speculated to have been the real factor behind this. 

The tuna industry has since done research to try and explain the reasoning behind the change. The Australians have gone on to spend approximately AUS$20mill (A portion contributed by BP) to fund the study of the ecosystem as a whole. I can never imagine either of the Southern African countries collectively budgeting, even a small portion of this amount into the same research here. (Long may I live to eat my own words)

On the political front there are two politicians opposing the seismic testing namely Senators Penny Wright and Rachel Siewert who argue that the seismic testing around Kangaroo Island has unacceptable environmental risks no matter the time of year. They have gone on to say that the region is home to more than 20 species of whales and dolphins and the Southern Bluefin Tuna are known to migrate here as well and marine reserves should not be compromised by industries which damage biodiversity and sustainable fishing. 

Just like back home, an immediate solution would be for the seismic surveying to be conducted outside of the tuna migrating and catching season. Until we have conclusive data documenting that seismic activity does in fact impact the migration of tuna, this will remain a “David VS Goliath” scenario.

Ref: Port Lincoln Times

Seismic Effects on the South African and Namibian Tuna 2012/2013 Season

The evidence accumulated by the Large Pelagic and Hake Longlining Association of Namibia points out that it is mostly the albacore and bigeye tuna that are negatively impacted by the seismic testing currently being conducted in both the Namibian and South African EEZ.

In Namibia and South Africa, the seismic explorations are threatening livelihoods, jobs, investments and the already ailing respective economies. The past tuna season has been dismal at best and it is speculated that this seismic testing being conducted is the direct result. For your reference the tuna export company that I am employed as the trade manager has only exported this past season 10% of what’s considered “normal” volumes.

The albacore pole and line industry is seasonal (October to May), which impacts on its economic viability, and given the very poor catches these past three years, particularly this season, it needs support more than ever before, to secure its future.

One of the major consequences is that of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT is a RFMO – Regional Fishery Management Organisation) quota utilization. Since tuna is migratory, ICCAT sets the respective tuna and swordfish quotas for the entire Atlantic Ocean. ICCAT moderates the albacore tuna quota sharing arrangement between Namibia (5000mt), South Africa (5000mt), Brazil (3500mt), Chinese Taipei (13500mt) and Uruguay (1200mt) Namibia is fortunate to be able to work with South African Tuna Pole and Line (P&L) vessels to catch its quota, because Namibia currently only has a limited number of its own vessels. Annually ICCAT adjusts each country’s quota according to catches; size of the country’s fishing fleet, the importance of the tuna on the local economy, amongst other criteria. Should a country under perform, then they stand a real chance of losing a portion of their quota to another nation. Each country has to govern and regulate their fishery in accordance to the ICCAT rules and regulations. ICCAT’s annual conference will be held in Cape Town this year and we are all looking forward to hosting this important event.

There is a large concern in the Namibian large pelagic sector as three years ago (2011), more than 4000 tonnes of albacore tuna was caught by around 40 vessels landing into Luderitz alone. During 2012 only around 1800 tonnes was caught, and devastatingly, only around 600 tonnes for 2013 so far where over 70% of the annual catch is during February to March – everything points to increases in seismic exploration in Namibia and northern South African waters being the main reason, due to fish avoidance. The tuna are migratory and are mostly caught off the “Tripp” underwater seamount, close to the border of South Africa, where much of the seismic exploration activity has and is currently still taking place. Low catch performance also threatens the likelihood of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) further decreasing Namibia’s quotas.

There are also other possible other impacts on tuna catch rates such as the effects of the sonar that are fitted to most of the vessels which direct impacts are unknown at this stage. El Nino (climate change), stronger than usual winds, swell as well as currents and water temperatures during the fishing season have directly impacted the ability to successfully catch tuna. This past season we have found that there has been an abundance of feed around the fishing grounds and it is speculated that the tuna could not be hungry enough to catch. There are no records of landings of albacore during its migratory cycle through international waters before it reaches our waters again. Large volumes of the school could be caught by vessels operating in international waters and therefore less and less fish reappears each year.

This map below show an interpretation of the migration route of albacore tuna based upon catches:

Area 1. October – April.      

Area 2. September – January          

 Area 3. August – December

This map indicates the albacore migratory route south to north showing catch concentration zones. Which route it takes from the northern point is unknown as this graph is based on landings only. The majority of Namibia’s catch is on Tripp Sea Mount. I'm not a 100% sure of migratory periods for area 2 & 3 but this looks somewhat accurate based upon landings in South Africa.

The effect of noise pollution on marine animals is documented as they are highly sensitive to acoustic sound. Marine fish and mammals depend on sound for various functions such as; avoiding predators / hazards, navigation, reproduction, communication with group members and young, food-finding and sensing their environment. (Source: Dr. Simon Harding & Dr. Lindy Weigart, October 2012. Scientific Synthesis of the Impacts of Underwater Noise on Marine and Coastal Biodiversity: Key Findings and Future Research Needs. International Biodiversity Conference, India UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA16/INF/12)

The seismic noise being generated by the exploration for oil and gas penetrates the sea floor 100kms+ below. The airgun sends a very loud blast between 230-250 decibels at predetermined intervals towards the seabed. The decibels may increase according to whether it is 2D or 3D testing being conducted. The effects of the seismic airguns are far reaching as such recorded by the moored hydrophones along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge some 4,000km!!! (Nieukirk et al. 2012)

Seismic surveys are carried out during marine oil and gas exploration in order to investigate subsea geological formations. During seismic surveys high-level, low frequency sounds are directed towards the seabed from near-surface sound sources towed by a seismic vessel. Signals reflected from geological interfaces below the seafloor are recorded by multiple receivers (or hydrophones) towed in streamers. Analyses of the returned signals allow for interpretation of subsea geological formations. Seismic surveys are undertaken to collect either 2D or 3D data

                                                   

Airguns are used on an individual basis or in arrays. Usually and in the past  a single source airgun array consisting of three strings of 10 airguns (30 in total) is used. While a single airgun could typically produce sound levels of the order of 220-230 dB re 1 mPa @ 1m, arrays produce sounds typically in the region of 250 dB re 1 mPa @ 1m. The majority of energy produced is in the 0 to 120 Hz bandwidth, although energy at much higher frequencies is also recorded. High-resolution surveys and shallow penetration surveys require relatively high frequencies of 100 to 1000 Hz, while the optimum wavelength for deep seismic work is in the 10 to 80 Hz range. One of the required characteristics of a seismic shot is that it is of short duration (the main pulse is usually between 5 and 30 milliseconds). The main pulse is followed by a negative pressure reflection from the sea surface of several lower magnitude bubble pulses. Although the peak levels during the shot may be high, the overall energy is limited by the duration of the shot.

The data collected allows for interpretation where the most likelihood of deposits of natural resources such as gas and oil may be found.

  An  airgun  array  being  fired  during  a  marine  geophysics  research  project:

And aft view of the seismic airgun and hydrophones being trailed behind the vessel

A view of the seismic airgun explosion

Documented research on noise impacts on fish or invertebrates have shown the following:

•       Disruption in schooling and migration (Sarà et al. 2007)

•       Disruption of homing or orientation (Simpson et al. 2010).

•       Masking of mating calls (Vasconcelos et al. 2007)

•       Decreased feeding efficiency (Purser and Radford 2011)

•       Reduced catch rates of 40-80% > 30 km from seismic survey (Engås et al. 1996)

•       Seismic noise deafened fish ears- no recovery after 58 days (McCauley et al. 2003)

•       Massive hearing trauma in 4 squid species (Andre et al. 2011)

•       Increased stress signs (Buscaino et al. 2010; Graham and Cooke 2008; Wysocki et al. 2006;      Santulli et al. 1999)

Noise Impacts on Whales and Dolphins

•       Increased stress hormones (Rolland et al. 2012)

•       Change in feeding or mating calling behavior (Parks et al. 2007; Castellote et al. 2012;  Melcón et al.   2012; Risch et al. 2012), even 200 km away

•       Disruptions of feeding and displacement over days (McCarthy et al. 2011; Tyack et al. 2011; Miller et al. 2009)

•       Displacement over weeks (Castellote et al. 2012) or years (Morton & Symonds 2002; Bryant et al. 1984)

•       Sudden unexpected permanent hearing damage (Reichmuth et al. 2009)

•       Catatonic behaviour, loss of control of muscle movement (Gray & Van Waerebeek 2011)

•       Hearing damage in whales causing more net entanglement  (Mann et al. 2010; Todd et al. 1996)

•       Decreased species diversity   (Parente et al. 2007)

We know that marine animals are highly dependent on sound. Noise can cause deafness, avoidance of important habitat, stress, and declines in fisheries’ catch rates. The seismic testing affects ecosystem-wide, cumulative, and synergistic impacts on marine biodiversity and genetic resources.

These pictures below clearly illustrates the effect of the seismic testing on other species:

 In this picture one can notice the "triangular fish ears" before the seismic blast.

After the seismic blast one can notice the absence of these "triangles" considered to be the fish's ears.

From: McCauley et al. 2003

Seismic  testing  activities  around  Namibia’s  Tripp  Sea  Mount  fishing  grounds

These maps below show the extent of the seismic testing being conducted off our coast.

 Overview  of  recent  seismic  surveys  off Namibia  and  South  Africa (18 months)

At the beginning of 2012, the seismic surveys (in red) in Namibia started in January through March during the peak of the tuna season.  The seismic surveys (in yellow and orange) on the South African side of the border were very close to Namibia’s Tripp Seamount fishing grounds, starting in October 2012 and running through to May 2013.  On the Namibian side of the border (in blue) the surveys started in February 2013.The majority of the seismic activity is between the October – April months of the Namibian tuna season, and some overlaps with the South African season of August to January respectively.

There are a few “Immediate” Solutions” available to the tuna industry. Such could possibly be the undertaking seismic exploration outside the tuna season, due to the risk of the seismic operations impact on the fish’s migration patterns. (I will discuss this topic with regards to the the migration patterns of the Australian bluefin tuna case in a later blog posting) A quieter airgun alternative such as vibroseis could be utilized as long as this is scientifically proven to be effective. Undertake research to assess how far away from fishing grounds seismic testing should occur for there to be no impact on migrating tuna.

I would like to conclude that the pole and line fishery, due to low financial margins and recent poor catches is struggling financially. The sector fears seismic exploration could financially destroy the fishery if immediate actions are not taken. Seismic testing is consequently a trans-boundary issue with South Africa and Namibia and possible consultation with the Benguela Commission may be necessary. The effects on fish, especially fish distribution and seismic avoidance, as well as food chain organisms are scientifically proven. It remains to be seen if the tuna will follow their usual migration pattern and return this year.

References:

• ·         CapFish SA (Pty) Ltd Notices to Mariners of Offshore Seismic Surveys
• ·         Dr. Simon Harding & Dr. Lindy Weigart, October 2012. Scientific Synthesis of the Impacts of Underwater Noise on Marine and Coastal Biodiversity: Key Findings and Future Research Needs. International Biodiversity Conference, India UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA16/INF/12
• ·         Ministry of Fisheries & Marine Resources catch statistics
• ·         Ministry of Mines and Energy seismic exploration license data.
• ·         Presentation made by K. Lauffer of the Large Pelagic and Hake Longlining Association of Namibia  and David Russel

The State of the Pole and Line Tuna Industry

My first blog entry refers to the current situation facing the South African and Namibian tuna pole and line vessel owners. The tuna trading company that I work for provides financial assistance on an annual basis. 2013 has seen a record high of applicants seeking assistance to cover the financial costs associated with the repairs and maintenance of their respective vessels. Each vessel needs to undergo a bottom (hull) and top survey. Only upon passing both surveys will the vessel then be granted a seaworthy status by the South African Maritime Safety Association (SAMSA).

A photo before the surveying and maintenance of the MFV Otterdam on the slip

A photo showing the MFV Otterdam surveyed and ready to come off the slip

The past 3 years we have seen a steady decrease in the total tonnages being landed by each vessel despite the majority of the fleet now having sonar fitted. The past 3 years of poor fishing has compounded the financial troubles of the vessel owners and will soon have no other options but to sell their vessels or apply to the Department Of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) to fish in another sector, such as Hake long line.

The fishing method of poling for tuna is extremely labor intensive with vessels accommodating a crew capacity of upwards of 20 fisherman. Poling for tuna is proven to be the most sustainable method for wild caught tuna but this comes at a price. As the vessels are catching free schooling tuna, the diesel consumption per liter of diesel is higher than most other fishing methods when converted down to a per kilogram ration percentage. In South Africa we will pole mid ships on the leeward side of the vessel with the crew protected from the elements by a shelter deck spanning the length of the windward side of the vessel which is predominantly the starboard side of the vessel. In the Maldives for example, the poling vessels catch around an open stern area of the vessel and this is possible due to the calmer seas in which they operate.

There are various factors pertaining to the steady decrease but one can only speculate without the necessary scientific data to back up these speculations.

Firstly, we need to understand that our tuna caught in South African and Namibian 200 nautical mile (nm) Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is a migratory animal and wonders the Atlantic Ocean with disregard for political borders and is seasonal. The pole and line vessels usually catch tuna in South Africa between October to May and the winter months for the long line vessels.

Climate change as documented by the effects of El Nino has created a shift in our currents and prevailing winds. Last year the SE wind only blew for a fraction of what is considered "normal" and somewhat lack luster at that. We rely upon this wind to blow the warmer Mozambique current around Agulhas upon where large eddy’s of warmer water, some spanning many a tens of nautical miles in diameter around our coast, where it is helped along by the colder Benguela current up towards Namibia. We are finding the surface temperatures of the Atlantic around our coast changing which has the added result of higher concentrations of chloroform. The tuna like specific conditions and if these are not met, they will simply move on to “greener pastures.” We are finding these suitable conditions less and further in between.

The below satellite image shows the warmer water (red) approaching Cape Aghulas from where it will begin to wrap around our coast up towards the Namibian border. Currently the 15-16* Celsius water is ideal for the tuna longliners. The tuna pole vessels will look to target the schooling albacore and yellowfin found in the warmer temperature band.

Courtesy of Buoyweather.com

South Africa’s EZZ stretches some 200 nm parallel to our cost except for the Namibian border which is deviated in the Namibian’s favor and this I shall touch on in a later blog, as this subject will be hotly contested in the future. Beyond the 200 nm EEZ, the international waters are fair game to foreign fishing fleets such as the vessels that discharge in Cape Town Harbor. The entire fishing effort within the Southern Atlantic needs to be taken into account as a factor here as these vessels are able to operate beyond our borders and target the tuna with long lining and other fishing methods such as purse seining.

Seismic testing that is being conducted in South African and Namibian waters is speculated as playing a major role in the absence of the tuna this past season. But once again we lack the scientific data specifically pertaining to tuna and this remains to be recognized as a direct factor. I shall touch more on this subject at a later date as this is a topic all unto itself.

With the past couple of years having been felt as the worst in recorded history for this industry, we can only wait and see what the future will hold for the South African and Namibian tuna fishermen. With fingers crossed and abated breath we all patiently await the arrival of the first albacore and yellowfin tunas.