国外渔具选择性研究进展

为了保护和可持续利用渔业资源 ,渔具选择性的研究在国际上倍受重视。该文以比较作业法中渔具选择性曲线的推导 ,特别是利用扩张 SEL ECT模型推导渔具选择性曲线为例 ,介绍国外渔具选择性研究的最新进展 ,以期作为我国开展这方面研究工作的参考     

台湾海峡海流结构及海水通量

主要根据台湾海峡的实测海流资料，以夏、冬为代表季节，分析了台湾海峡２—３个纬向断面的海流结构，计算出各断面的海水通量。结果表明：夏季，台湾海峡中、北部海域各层的海流一般偏Ｎ向流动，Ｎ向的海水净通量为３．３２×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１；冬季，高温高盐的黑潮水和南海水由南向北经南部断面进入台湾海峡，其海水通量分别为１．６９×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１和０．５９×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１；而东海水由北向南通过北部断面进入台湾海峡，其海水通量为１．０２×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１，其中，有０．４０×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１的海水沿着福建和广东近岸流进南海，其余０．６２×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１的海水在台湾海峡北部混合后随同黑潮水和南海水流入东海。总之，流经台湾海峡的Ｎ向海水净通量为１．７４×１０６ｍ３·ｓ－１。     

Eddy Shedding from the Kuroshio Bend at Luzon Strait

TOPEX/POSEDIENT-ERS satellite altimeter data along with the mean state from the Parallel Ocean Climate Model result have been used to investigate the variation of Kuroshio intrusion and eddy shedding at Luzon Strait during 1992–2001. The Kuroshio penetrates into the South China Sea and forms a bend. The Kuroshio bend varies with time, periodically shedding anticyclonic eddies. Criteria of eddy shedding are identified: 1) When the shedding event occurs, there are usually two centers of high Sea Surface Height (SSH) together with negative geostrophic vorticity in the Kuroshio Bend (KB) area. 2) Between the two centers of high SSH there usually exists positive geostrophic vorticity. These criteria have been used to determine the eddy shedding times and locations. The most frequent eddy shedding intervals are 70, 80 and 90 days. In both the winter and summer monsoon period, the most frequent locations are 119.5°E and 120°E, which means that the seasonal variation of eddy shedding location is unclear.     

副渔获物对渔业资源的影响及其减少方法的探讨

由于渔具不同的选择性和多鱼种鱼类共栖 ,人们在对目标种类进行捕捞时 ,不可避免地产生副渔获物及其抛弃。由于渔业资源的下降和人们对海洋环境保护意识的加强 ,副渔获物及其抛弃问题日益成为人们关注的焦点。本文对世界范围内的渔业活动所产生的副渔获物进行分析 ,根据副渔获物的种类、被抛弃情况和原因以及对渔业资源的影响 ,提出了减少副渔获物和抛弃的方法。     

Ghost fishing in European waters: Impacts and management responses

In this paper we review levels of net loss, what happens to the gear once it has been lost, and the resulting levels of ‘ghost catches’ made in passive net fisheries in the EU. We also consider ghost catches resulting from lost gear in other types of fisheries, and the extent to which the value of ghost catches has been quantified. We consider why fishing gear is lost, and profile common management responses. We present a cost benefit model to assess the relative cost effectiveness of different management measures, and suggest that gear retrieval programmes may provide less value for money than other management responses.