Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.

The growing seal populations of the Baltic have led to more frequent interactions with coastal fisheries. The motivation for seals to interact with fishing gear is high. It provides high densities of fish. A successful means of mitigating the conflict is the pontoon trap. Seal visits here have been...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Linda Calamnius, Mikael Lundin, Arne Fjälling, Sara Königson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6062063?pdf=render
id doaj-33829309595542d3891868de214eccd2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-33829309595542d3891868de214eccd22020-11-25T01:35:48ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01137e020116410.1371/journal.pone.0201164Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.Linda CalamniusMikael LundinArne FjällingSara KönigsonThe growing seal populations of the Baltic have led to more frequent interactions with coastal fisheries. The motivation for seals to interact with fishing gear is high. It provides high densities of fish. A successful means of mitigating the conflict is the pontoon trap. Seal visits here have been frequent. Seals have access to most parts of the trap system including the middle chamber, which is an overhead environment. Concerns have been raised about seals possible entanglement in this specific part of the trap. As a means of keeping seals from entering the middle chamber, two different Seal Exclusion Devices (SEDs) were tested. A diamond mesh SED and a square mesh SED, which was rotated 45°. The aim was to compare the functionality of the different SEDs with respect to seal deterrent abilities and catch composition. The hypothesis tested were (i) that seals would not be able to enter the middle chamber, (ii) that the catch would increase and (iii) that the SED would deter larger fish from swimming into the middle chamber. Catch data and underwater film were collected. Larger salmons were caught in traps equipped with SEDs. The SEDs did not affect the number of caught fish or the total catch per soak day.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6062063?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Linda Calamnius
Mikael Lundin
Arne Fjälling
Sara Königson
spellingShingle Linda Calamnius
Mikael Lundin
Arne Fjälling
Sara Königson
Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Linda Calamnius
Mikael Lundin
Arne Fjälling
Sara Königson
author_sort Linda Calamnius
title Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
title_short Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
title_full Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
title_fullStr Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
title_full_unstemmed Pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
title_sort pontoon trap for salmon and trout equipped with a seal exclusion device catches larger salmons.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2018-01-01
description The growing seal populations of the Baltic have led to more frequent interactions with coastal fisheries. The motivation for seals to interact with fishing gear is high. It provides high densities of fish. A successful means of mitigating the conflict is the pontoon trap. Seal visits here have been frequent. Seals have access to most parts of the trap system including the middle chamber, which is an overhead environment. Concerns have been raised about seals possible entanglement in this specific part of the trap. As a means of keeping seals from entering the middle chamber, two different Seal Exclusion Devices (SEDs) were tested. A diamond mesh SED and a square mesh SED, which was rotated 45°. The aim was to compare the functionality of the different SEDs with respect to seal deterrent abilities and catch composition. The hypothesis tested were (i) that seals would not be able to enter the middle chamber, (ii) that the catch would increase and (iii) that the SED would deter larger fish from swimming into the middle chamber. Catch data and underwater film were collected. Larger salmons were caught in traps equipped with SEDs. The SEDs did not affect the number of caught fish or the total catch per soak day.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6062063?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT lindacalamnius pontoontrapforsalmonandtroutequippedwithasealexclusiondevicecatcheslargersalmons
AT mikaellundin pontoontrapforsalmonandtroutequippedwithasealexclusiondevicecatcheslargersalmons
AT arnefjalling pontoontrapforsalmonandtroutequippedwithasealexclusiondevicecatcheslargersalmons
AT sarakonigson pontoontrapforsalmonandtroutequippedwithasealexclusiondevicecatcheslargersalmons
_version_ 1725066237553147904