Environmental assessment of sardine (Sardina pilchardus) purse seine fishery in Portugal with LCA methodology including biological impact categories

PurposeThe purse seine fishery for sardine is the most important fishery in Portugal. The aim of the present study is to assess the environmental impacts of sardine fished by the Portuguese fleet and to analyse a number of variables such as vessel size and time scale. An additional goal was to incorporate fishery-specific impact categories in the case study.MethodsLife Cycle Assessment methodology was applied, and data were collected from nine vessels, which represented around 10 % of the landings. Vessels were divided into two length categories, above and below 12 m, and data were obtained for the years 2005 to 2010. The study was limited to the fishing phase only. The standard impact categories included were energy use, global warming potential, eutrophication potential, acidification potential and ozone depletion potential. The fishery-specific impact categories were overfishing, overfishedness, lost potential yield, mean trophic level and the primary production required, and were quantified as much as possible.Results and discussionThe landings from the data set were constituted mainly by sardine (91 %), and the remainders were other small pelagic species (e.g. horse mackerel). The most important input was the fuel, and both vessel categories had the same fuel consumption per catch 0.11 l/kg. Average greenhouse gas emissions (carbon footprint) were 0.36 kg CO2 eq. per kilo sardine landed. The fuel use varied between years, and variability between months can be even higher.Fishing mortality has increased, and the spawning stock biomass has decreased resulting in consequential overfishing for 2010. A correlation between fuel use and stock biomass was not found, and the stock condition does not seem to directly influence the global warming potential in this fishery. Discards were primarily non-target small pelagic species, and there was also mortality of target species resulting from slipping. The seafloor impact was considered to be insignificant due to the fishing method.ConclusionsThe assessment of the Portuguese purse seine fishery resulted in no difference regarding fuel use between large and small vessels, but differences were found between years. The stock has declined, and it has produced below maximum sustainable yield. By-catch and discard data were missing but may be substantial. Even being difficult to quantify, fishery impact categories complement the environmental results with biological information and precaution is need in relation to the stock management. The sardine carbon footprint from Portuguese purse seine was lower than that of other commercial species reported in.

[1]  James T. Thorson,et al.  Eco-Label Conveys Reliable Information on Fish Stock Health to Seafood Consumers , 2012, PloS one.

[2]  Mattias Sköld,et al.  Accounting for overfishing in life cycle assessment: new impact categories for biotic resource use , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[3]  Friederike Ziegler,et al.  Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis , 2007 .

[4]  Laura Wise,et al.  Interactions between small cetaceans and the purse-seine fishery in western Portuguese waters , 2007 .

[5]  Almudena Hospido,et al.  Estimation of the carbon footprint of the Galician fishing activity (NW Spain). , 2010, Science of the Total Environment.

[6]  Mikkel Thrane,et al.  LCA of Danish Fish Products. New methods and insights (9 pp) , 2006 .

[7]  Dentes De Carvalho Gaspar Natacha,et al.  Legal notice , 1989 .

[8]  Mithchel Sussex,et al.  Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries , 2014 .

[9]  M. T. Moreira,et al.  Life cycle assessment of horse mackerel fisheries in Galicia (NW Spain): Comparative analysis of two major fishing methods , 2010 .

[10]  D. Pauly,et al.  Primary production required to sustain global fisheries , 1995, Nature.

[11]  D. Pauly,et al.  Fishing down marine food webs , 1998, Science.

[12]  P. Tyedmers,et al.  Life cycle environmental impacts of three products derived from wild-caught Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba). , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  T. Pitcher,et al.  Conserving wild fish in a sea of market-based efforts , 2010, Oryx.

[14]  Per-Anders Hansson,et al.  Emissions from fuel combustion in Swedish cod fishery , 2003 .

[15]  Malin L. Pinsky,et al.  Unexpected patterns of fisheries collapse in the world's oceans , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  Guillen Garcia Jordi,et al.  The 2011 Annual Economic Report on the EU Fishing Fleet (STECF-11-16) - Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) , 2011 .

[17]  Sara Hornborg,et al.  Trophic indicators in fisheries: a call for re-evaluation , 2013, Biology Letters.

[18]  Heleen Bartelings,et al.  The 2011 Annual Economic Report on the EU Fishing Fleet (STECF-11-16) , 2011 .

[19]  Yorgos Stratoudakis,et al.  Sardine slipping during purse-seining off northern Portugal , 2002 .

[20]  Gumersindo Feijoo,et al.  Inclusion of discard assessment indicators in fisheries life cycle assessment studies. Expanding the use of fishery-specific impact categories , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[21]  M. Metian,et al.  Fishing for Aquaculture: Non-Food Use of Small Pelagic Forage Fish—A Global Perspective , 2009 .

[22]  Maria Teresa Moreira,et al.  Environmental assessment of the Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) season in the Basque Country. Increasing the timeline delimitation in fishery LCA studies , 2011 .

[23]  Ole Jørgen Hanssen,et al.  Effect of different allocation methods on LCA results of products from wild-caught fish and on the use of such results , 2011 .

[24]  H. Westhoek,et al.  The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes , 2012 .

[25]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Life cycle assessment An operational guide to the ISO standards , 2001 .

[26]  Harald Ellingsen,et al.  The Carbon Footprint of Norwegian Seafood Products on the Global Seafood Market , 2013 .

[27]  Pablo Carrera,et al.  Stock dynamic of the Iberian sardine ( Sardina pilchardus , W.) and its implication on the fishery off Galicia (NW Spain) , 2003 .

[28]  Almudena Hospido,et al.  Best practices in life cycle assessment implementation in fisheries. Improving and broadening environmental assessment for seafood production systems , 2012 .

[29]  Daniel Pauly,et al.  Funding Priorities: Big Barriers to Small‐Scale Fisheries , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[30]  Nathan Pelletier,et al.  Impact categories for life cycle assessment research of seafood production systems: Review and prospectus , 2007 .

[31]  Borges,et al.  By-catch and discarding practices in five Algarve (southern Portugal) metiers , 2001 .

[32]  Rainer Froese,et al.  FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. , 2014 .

[33]  Almudena Hospido,et al.  Updating the carbon footprint of the Galician fishing activity (NW Spain). , 2011, The Science of the total environment.

[34]  Rui Coelho,et al.  Reducing discards in a demersal purse-seine fishery , 2008 .

[35]  G. Psacharopoulos Overview and methodology , 1991 .

[36]  Pablo Carrera,et al.  Geographic variability of sardine dynamics in the Iberian Biscay region , 2009 .