Management, Retrieval and Recycling of End-of-Life and Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear THE EVIDENCE BASE FROM CAPTURE FISHERIES 1 This report is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction 2 and Development/The World Bank, with contributions from Hatfield Indonesia and Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS © 2022 The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org SOME RIGHTS RESERVED The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non-commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. AT T R I B U T I O N Suggested Citation: World Bank (2022). Management, Retrieval and Recycling of End-of-Life and Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear: The Evidence Base from Capture Fisheries. The World Bank, Washington, D.C. F O R F U RT H E R I N F O R M AT I O N pubrights@worldbank.org Management, Retrieval and Recycling of End-of-Life and 003 Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear THE EVIDENCE BASE FROM CAPTURE FISHERIES Acknowledgements 004 This report was prepared by a World Bank team led by Katelijn Van den Berg and Celine Lim, and a core team comprising of Sapta Ginting and Andrew Harvey. Valuable contributions were received from Ambroise Brenier, David Adeyemi Aromokeye, and Yadranka Farita. The team would like to thank officials in the Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, particularly from the Directorate General for Marine Spatial Management, Directorate General of Capture Fisheries, Directorate General for Aquaculture, and also officials in the Coordinating Ministry for Maritime and Investment Affairs for their valuable feedback on the study and the finalized report. Consulting firms Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management and Hatfield Indonesia provided general support for the completion of this report. The report was funded by the Indonesia Oceans Multi-Donor Trust Fund, established in 2017 at the request of the Government of Indonesia with the support of the Governments of Norway and Denmark. The Oceans Multi-Donor Trust Fund provides technical assistance to implement oceans policy, reduce marine debris, and strengthen coastal resilience. 005 Contents 022 006 INTRODUCTION 028 ALDFG TERMS AND THEIR DEFINITIONS 032 046 066 CONTEXT OF INDONESIA’S LIFECYCLE OF FISHING GEAR IN FISHING GEAR WASTE FISHERIES INDONESIA MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES IN INDONESIA 033 Fishery Management Areas 047 Description of the fisheries in the sampled ports 067 Policy and regulatory 034 Fishing ports frameworks 048 Fishing gear suppliers and 038 Fishing fleet middlemen 069 ALDFG prevention 039 Fishing gears 049 Fishing gear storage and repair 070 ALDFG mitigation 044 Fish resources 049 EOLFG collection, 074 ALDFG retrieval processing and storage 044 Social structure 075 ALDFG in the circular economy 050 EOLFG recycling 077 Public-private partnerships 052 Fate of fishing gears 078 Other waste issues 056 082 RISK ASSESSMENT OF FISHING RECOMMENDATIONS GEAR 057 Quantity of end-of-life material 088 generated REFERENCES 059 Vulnerability to damage and loss 062 Likelihood of ecological impacts 063 Overall ecological risk ANNEX 1 - 099 METHODOLOGY 099 Definitions and classifications used in this study ANNEX 8 - 160 100 Field surveys GLOBAL EXPERIENCES AND BEST PRACTICES FOR ALDFG 102 Plastic weight estimations & FISHING GEAR WASTE 103 Assessment of gear-specific MANAGEMENT ALDFG risk in Indonesia 160 Monitoring ALDFG 007 105 Data limitations and caveats 161 Managing plastic waste from fisheries at sea ANNEX 2 - 106 163 Re-use, recycling and the INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRES circular economy for plastics from fisheries waste ANNEX 3 - 112 GEAR-SPECIFIC QUANTITIES ANNEX 9 - 168 AND ANNUAL REPLENISHMENT WEIGHTS MARPOL ANNEX V ANNEX 4 - 116 168 Garbage Record Book (Regulation 10.3) GEAR-SPECIFIC WEIGHTS OF PLASTIC DEPLOYED IN INDONESIA’S 169 Port Reception Facilities FISHERIES (Regulation 8) ANNEX 5 - 122 169 Reporting of lost fishing gear ALDFG RISK ASSESSMENT - (Regulation 10.6) SCORING TABLES 170 Relevance to Indonesia’s ANNEX 6 - 128 fisheries ALDFG RISK ASSESSMENT - ANNEX 10 - 172 RATIONALE AND EXPLANATORY NOTES REPORTING AND MONITORING OF EOLFG AND ALDFG ANNEX 7 - 140 ANNEX 11 - 176 GOVERNANCE CONTEXT OF RATIONALE FOR THE FEASIBILITY INDONESIA’S FISHERIES AND PRIORITISATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS 142 Classification of fishing gears 148 Fishing gears permitted in each fishery management area and fishing zone 158 Distribution of fishing ports across fishery management areas Tables and Figures TABLES 008 029 Table 1 048 Table 10 084 Table 17 Glossary of ALDFG-related Fishing gear manufactures in Recommended actions to terms and their definition in Indonesia. enhance ALDFG prevention, English and Bahasa Indonesia. mitigation, retrieval and circular 054 Table 11 economy in Indonesia, with 035 Table 2 Main purse seine brands sold in an indication of feasibility and Typology of fishing ports in Indonesia, with indicative price priority Indonesia. and encounter frequency during field surveys 100 Table 18 036 Table 3 Criteria considered in the Number of Fishing Ports in 054 Table 12 selection of the ten ports each WPP. Main hook and line brands sold where field surveys were in Indonesia, with indicative conducted 035 Table 4 price. Annual catch volume (metric 101 Table 19 tonne) landed at all province 054 Table 13 Target ports selected for and port classes in 2019. Main trawl brands sold in EOLFG and ALDFG field Source: BPS, 2019. Indonesia, with indicative price surveys and encounter frequency during 037 Table 5 field surveys 104 Table 20 Distribution of fishing ports 5 x 5 risk matrix for the across Indonesian provinces. 051 Table 14 likelihood and severity of Case study of a fishing net damage and loss 038 Table 6 recycling business in Bekasi. Composition of the Indonesian 123 Table 21 fishing fleet from 2012 to 2016. 053 Table 15 Gear-specific scorings for the Relative proportions of each likelihood of damage and loss. 038 Table 7 fishing gear that are disposed Breakdown of the number of of on land or at sea, based on 124 Table 22 fishing vessels by GT class and interview responses obtained Gear-specific scorings for the fishing gear type. during field surveys. Column n severity of damage and loss 039 Table 8 indicates the number of gears disposed annually as reported 125 Table 23 Breakdown of the number of by respondents. Percentages Gear-specific scorings for the fishing vessels by fishing gear are relative to n. overall vulnerability to damage sub-category. and loss. 047 Table 9 057 Table 16 Total volume (metric tonne) Total weight of fishing gears of fish landed in each fishing deployed and replaced for each port in 2019, disaggregated gear category, with proportion by species group. Demersal of Indonesia’s total fishing fleet includes reef fish. Other indicated. species includes cephalopods, crustaceans, and other species. FIGURES 009 126 Table 24 024 Figure 1 041 Figure 10 Gear-specific scorings for the Problem tree analysis Illustration of a boat operated likelihood of ecological identifying the causes of falling gear impacts arising from ALDFG derelict fishing gear from trawl gillnet and purse seine 042 Figure 11 162 Table 25 fisheries. Source: Richardson Illustration of a set anchored Examples of global policy and et. al., 2019 gillnet (top left), drift gillnet (top management mechanisms to right), gillnet fixed on stakes address ALDFG 033 Figure 2 (bottom left), trammel net Fishery management areas of (bottom center) and trammel 165 Table 26 Indonesia. net capture process (bottom Examples of global policies right). and measures to support the 034 Figure 3 circular economy within the Distribution of fishing ports 042 Figure 12 fishery sector across Indonesia’s major Illustration of a fixed pound trap islands. Source: BPS, 2019 (top left), crustacean pots (top 174 Table 27 right), fyke net (bottom left) and Five principal actors play an 034 Figure 4 stow net (bottom right). essential role in a successful Numbers of fishing ports gear reporting system according to classification 043 Figure 13 system (BPS, 2009) Illustration of hand operated 175 Table 28 pole and line (top left), set Number and types of ports in 036 Figure 5 anchored longline (top right), the top five landing provinces Composition of the Indonesian drifting longline (bottom left) fishing fleet by vessel size and trolling line (bottom right). based on 2016 data. Source: MMAF, 2018. 049 Figure 14 Current gear repair practices in 039 Figure 6 the fishing port. Single boat purse seine. 049 Figure 15 040 Figure 7 Abandoned fishing gear. Illustration of a beach seine (top) and boat seine (bottom) 050 Figure 16 A waste fishing gear collector 040 Figure 8 from Pekalongan receives seine Illustration of a bottom trawl nets from Bajomulyo. (top) and midwater trawl (bottom) 050 Figure 17 Schematic diagram of the 041 Figure 9 fate of EOLFG observed in Illustration of a portable lift net Pekalongan and Bajomulyo. (top) and boat operated lift net (bottom) 010 051 Figure 18 063 Figure 24 078 Figure 32 Plastic recycling facilities in ALDFG may be colonized and Fishing gear waste and PPS Kendari (top) and PPS act as a vector for invasive general waste in PPN Bitung (bottom). species (left) or cause Pelabuhan Ratu (top) & PPS physical damage to benthic Bitung (bottom) 052 Figure 19 habitats (right). Source: A plastic waste collector in Werner et al., 2016 079 Figure 33 Pelalongan who currently Intermediate waste storage focusses on plastic bottles 064 Figure 25 facilities at PPN Pelabuhan and packaging. Gear-specific likelihood of Ratu (top) and PPN Ternate ecological impacts of ALDFG. (bottom) 053 Figure 20 Proportion of in-use fishing 065 Figure 26 079 Figure 34 gears that generate ALDFG, Gear-specific overall relative Plastic recycler unit in PPS EOLFG, or are retained in use risk rating Kendari (top) and the existing annually, based on interview condition (bottom). responses obtained during 069 Figure 27 field surveys. ALDFG socialisation and 080 Figure 35 awareness raising at PPN Unloading fish at the landing 058 Figure 21 Ternate in 2017. center of PPP Bajomulyo (top) Gear-specific risk associated and collection of waste plastic with the quantity of end-of-life 071 Figure 28 used by the cantrang fishers material Waste water bottles are often (bottom). generated annually. reused as floats or, as in this case, weights for fishing 102 Figure 36 060 Figure 22 gears. Formula for the calculation of Gear-specific vulnerability to netting weighting. damage and loss 072 Figure 29 FADs used by fishers operating 103 Figure 37 062 Figure 23 from PPS Bitung (top) & PPN Formulae used to derive ALDFG may entangle Pekalongan (bottom). weights of fishing gear marine mammals, reptiles, plastics and the proxy value elasmobranchs, 075 Figure 30 for ALDFG. seabirds and other marine Gear repair activities found in wildlife, and represents a PPN Ternate (top) and PPS 163 Figure 38 major conservation issue Kendari (bottom). Production in a circular in addition to wasting economy. Source: Oceanwise commercially important fish 076 Figure 31 stocks via the process Waste warp ropes from Danish of ghost fishing. seine (cantrang) fishing gear in PPN Brondong. BOXES 011 164 Figure 39 025 Box 1 There is potential for Perceptions of fishers in robust and environmentally Indonesia and Australia on sustainable business the main drivers of ALDFG opportunities to be developed generation. at multiple stages within the circular economy for 104 Box 2 discarded fishing nets. Source: Operational variables Circular Ocean. contributing to fishing gear vulnerability to ALDFG 173 Figure 40 Outline of a mass balance 104 Box 3 approach to monitoring and Exogenous variables reporting EOLFG and ALDFG contributing to fishing gear vulnerability to ALDFG 161 Box 4 Requirements in Taiwan fisheries for the marking of gillnets, reporting of lost gillnets, and disposal of EOLFG. Acronyms and Abbreviations ALDFG Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear 012 AP2HI Asosiasi Perikanan Pole & Line dan Handline Indonesia - Indonesian Pole-and-Line and Handline Association API Asosiasi Purse Seine Indonesia – Indonesian Purse Seine Association APRI Asosiasi Pengelolaan Rajungan Indonesia - Indonesian Blue Swimming Crab Association ASTUIN Asosiasi Tuna Indonesia - Indonesia Tuna Association ATLI Asosiasi Tuna Longline Indonesia - Indonesia Tuna Longline Associations BPPI Balai Besar Pengembangan Penangkapan Ikan - Fishing Technology Development Center BPS Badan Pusat Statistik - Central Bureau of Statistics BRSDM Badan Riset dan Sumber Daya Manusia - Agency for Research and Human Resources DJPT Direktorat Jenderal Perikanan Tangkap - Directorate General of Capture Fisheries EC European Commission EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EOLFG End of Life Fishing Gear EPR Extended producer responsibility EU European Union FAD Fish Aggregation Device FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GGGI Global Ghost Gear Initiative GOI Government of Indonesia GRB Garbage Record Book GT Gross Tonnage HNPN Himpunan Nelayan Purse Seine Nasional - Indonesia Purse Seine Association HNSI Himpunan Nelayan Indonesia – Indonesian Fishers Association ISO International Organization for Standardization IUU Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (fishing) IUU Keamanan, Ketertiban, Kebersihan, Keindahan, dan Keselamatan Kerja - Security, Order, Cleanliness, Beauty, and Work Safety Report MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships MMAF Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forestry MPA Marine Protected Area 013 MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSP Marine spatial plan NGO Non-Governmental Organization NPOA National Plan of Action NPOA-MPD National Plan of Action on Marine Plastic Debris P3 Public Private Partnership PA Polyamide Nylon 6/Nylon 66 PE Polyethylene PES Polyester PEPRES Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia – Regulation of the President of Indonesia PERUM Perusahaan Umum – Public Corporation PP Polypropylene PPI Pangkalan Pendaratan Ikan - Fish Landing Quay PPN Pelabuhan Perikanan Nusantara - Archipelagic Fishing Port PPP Pelabuhan Perikanan Pantai - Coastal Fishing Port PPS Pelabuhan Perikanan Samudera – Oceanic Fishing Port RR Relative Risk RZWP3K Rencana Zonasi Wilayah Pesisir dan Pulau-Pulau Kecil - Zoning Plans for Coastal Zone and Small Islands SIUP Surat Ijin Usaha Perikanan - Fishery Business License SME Small - and Medium-size Enterprise SNI Standar Nasional Indonesia - Indonesian National Standards TPA Tempat Pembuangan Akhir - Landfill TPI Tempat Pelelangan Ikan – Fish Auction TPS Tempat Penampungan Sementara – Temporary Disposal Site UN United Nations UPT Unit Pelaksana Teknis - Technical Implementation Unit WPP Wilayah Pengelolaan Perikanan – Fisheries Management Area 014 Executive Summary The Government of Indonesia’s National Plan of Action on To support the development of measures to manage and ad- 015 Marine Plastic Debris (NPOA-MPD 2017-2025) outlines the dress ALDFG in Indonesia, a common understanding of key ambitious objective to reduce marine plastic debris by 70 per- terms and their definitions is essential. This report presents a cent by 2025. One of the five pillars of this plan is dedicated glossary of key ALDFG terms and their definitions in the con- to “reducing sea-based leakage” that is reported to contribute text of Indonesia’s fisheries, including: at least 20 percent of all marine plastic debris in Indonesia. • End-of-life fishing gear includes fishing gears and fish- Global studies indicate that Abandoned, Lost and Discarded ing gear components that, through wear and tear, need Fishing Gear (ALDFG) is a major component of sea-based to be replaced. sources of marine debris, and causes significant impacts on • Abandoned fishing gear could be retrieved by operator the environment, economy, livelihoods and food security. The but is deliberately left at sea due to force majeure or other scale of ALDFG impacts on fisheries, marine ecosystems and unforeseen reasons. human users has prompted international action, including un- • Lost fishing gear cannot be located and/or retrieved by der Sustainable Development Goal 14. the operator, and hence is fishing gear over which the op- erator has accidentally lost control. ALDFG management and mitigation strategies have the poten- • Discarded fishing gear is released at sea without any at- tial to contribute to Indonesia’s goals for marine plastic waste tempt for further control or recovery by the owner/operator. management and debris reduction, while also providing eco- nomic opportunities. End-of-life fishing gear (EOLFG)—fishing Field surveys were conducted in 10 Oceanic Fishing Ports gears and fishing gear components that through wear and tear (PPS, Pelabuhan Perikanan Samudera) and Archipelagic Fish- need to be replaced—can be a major source of material stock ing Port (PPN, Pelabuhan Perikanan Nusantara) to determine for recycling provided such materials are landed ashore and the lifecycle of fishing gears in Indonesia. Fishing gear storage not disposed of or discarded at sea. Many of the materials and repair infrastructure and facilities are not available in most used in modern fishing gears such as nylon (PA), polyethylene ports, and fishers undertaking gear repair activities at home or (PE) and polypropylene (PP) are recyclable materials that can in open areas near to the location where catches are landed. be processed into raw materials for secondary products. Practices for managing fishing-related waste vary from one port to another, with irreparably damaged fishing gear gener- This report aims to enhance the evidence available to support ally disposed in intermediate storage facilities, together with efforts to improve management, retrieval and recycling of EO- other general waste, before being transported to landfill facili- LFG and ALDFG in Indonesia. It includes details on the devel- ties. Some incidental reuse of EOLFG occurs, including the use opment and testing of a methodology to assess gear-specific of nets to construct aquaculture cages or fences for agricul- risk of ALDFG impacts, to establish baselines for the elements ture purposes. However, there are currently low rates of recy- relevant to managing EOLFG and ALDFG and, in the longer cling of fishing-related waste, which may in part be due to the term, to monitor and evaluate the impacts of prevention, miti- condition of this waste which is usually mixed and contaminat- gation and/or curative actions. ed —sorting and cleaning of the waste are the largest compo- nent of recycling costs. Greater economies of scale, increased based on global best practices, and adapted for the unique supply (and hence lower cost) of raw materials, and/or cheaper context and dynamics of Indonesia’s fisheries. The risk as- processing costs are required to enhance the profitability and sessment considers three risk factors: (i) quantity of end-of-life hence scale of fishing gear recycling enterprises. plastic material generated; (ii) vulnerability to loss and damage (i.e., likelihood of a specific gear being abandoned, lost or dis- A methodology for monitoring and evaluating ALDFG risk was carded); and (iii) magnitude of ecological impacts. developed, field tested and validated. This methodology was QUANTITY OF END-OF-LIFE MATERIAL GENERATED 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 0.20 02 016 02.2.1. Danish seine 0.20 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 0.20 02.2.4. Boat seine* 0.20 02.2.5. Boat seine* 0.20 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 0.20 03 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 0.20 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 0.20 05.1. Portable lift net 0.20 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 0.20 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 0.20 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 0.20 06.1 Cast net 06 0.20 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 0.80 07 07.2. Drift gillnet GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 0.40 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 08 0.40 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 0.20 09 09.3. Set longline 0.20 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 0.20 09.5. Trolling line 0.20 10.5. Pushnet 0.20 10 10.6. Scoopnet 0.20 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR Risk Rating 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Purse seine fisheries deploy 56 percent (47,212 t) of all plastic material deployed in Indonesia’s fisheries, while purse seine vessels represent only 4.9 percent (8,265 vessels) of the total fleet of motorized inboard fishing vessels. An estimated 13,824 t of plastic material is replaced annually. Gillnet and entangling net fisheries deploy 34.3 percent (28,764 t) of the plastic material in Indonesia’s fisheries, with an estimated 18,206 t replaced annually. Gillnet vessels represent 40 percent (67,032 vessels) of Indonesia’s total motorized inboard fishing fleet. VULNERABILITY TO DAMAGE AND LOSS 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 4.2 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines 4.1 ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 2.5 02 017 02.2.1. Danish seine 7.0 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 5.1 02.2.4. Boat seine* 6.2 02.2.5. Boat seine* 5.8 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 7.2 03 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 5.2 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 6.8 05.1. Portable lift net 1.2 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 2.6 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 2.4 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 2.3 06.1 Cast net 06 2.5 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 9.8 07 07.2. Drift gillnet 4.9 GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 9.1 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 08 9.6 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 4.0 09 09.3. Set longline 4.4 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 3.6 09.5. Trolling line 2.1 10.5. Pushnet 3.6 10 10.6. Scoopnet MISCELLANEOUS 1.9 OTHER GEAR Vulnerability 0 5 10 15 20 25 The fishing gears most vulnerable to damage and loss are: (i) plastic pots and traps; (ii) set anchored gillnets; and (iii) set anchored trammel nets. High vulnerability to damage and loss is associated with passive fishing gears that (i) operate without the attendance of the vessel; (ii) have relatively long soak times; (iii) operate through stealth; and (iv) are set on the seabed. LIKELIHOOD OF ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 2.0 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines 2.0 ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 1.2 02 02.2.1. Danish seine 1.5 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 1.8 02.2.4. Boat seine* 1.8 02.2.5. Boat seine* 2.0 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 2.2 03 018 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 2.0 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 2.0 05.1. Portable lift net 1.0 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 1.5 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 1.5 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 1.2 06.1 Cast net 06 1.2 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 3.8 07 07.2. Drift gillnet 3.2 GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 3.5 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 08 2.8 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 1.0 09 09.3. Set longline 1.5 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 1.8 09.5. Trolling line 1.0 10.5. Pushnet 1.8 10 10.6. Scoopnet MISCELLANEOUS 1.0 OTHER GEAR Impact 0 1 2 3 4 5 Gillnets and entangling nets have the highest likelihood of ecological impact due to their ability to remain in the water column for long periods during which ghost fishing, entanglement and rafting of invasive species can occur. Pots and traps may also have a high likelihood of ecological impact due to their robust materials, longevity, and ability to self-bait and continue ghost fishing for prolonged periods. OVERALL RISK 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 0.51 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines 0.49 ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 0.04 02 02.2.1. Danish seine 0.16 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 0.12 02.2.4. Boat seine* 0.15 02.2.5. Boat seine* 0.15 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 0.20 03 019 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 0.14 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 0.17 05.1. Portable lift net 0.00 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 0.06 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 0.05 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 0.04 06.1 Cast net 0.04 06 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 07 07.2. Drift gillnet 0.64 GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 0.51 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 0.49 08 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 0.06 09 09.3. Set longline 0.10 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 0.10 09.5. Trolling line 0.02 10.5. Pushnet 0.09 10 10.6. Scoopnet 0.02 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR Relative risk rating 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Gilnets and entangling nets pose the greatest ALDFG risk in Indonesia due to the large quantities of plastic material deployed and replaced annually, relatively high vulnerability of to loss and damage, and high likelihood of ecological impacts arising from ghost fishing, entanglement, rafting of invasive species or smothering of habitats. Purse seines and encircling nets were assessed as having high relative risk. The small number of vessels operating these gears in Indonesia make these fisheries a good candidate for piloting ALDFG prevention and mitigation approach- es. Traps and pots pose the third most significant ALDFG risk. Existing waste management initiatives in Indonesia could be built upon to address issues associated with ALDFG. POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS Government Regulation 81/2012 on Domestic Waste Manage- en that MARPOL Annex V in its present form is not sufficiently ment implements the International Convention for the Preven- tailored to Indonesia’s fishing operations and practices, the tion of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). The requirements un- Government of Indonesia could develop national policy, laws der MARPOL Annex V Regulation 10.3 to implement a garbage and regulations that build upon and go beyond the require- management plan apply to 858 fishing vessels in Indonesia ments of MARPOL Annex V in order to improve the reporting that are larger than 100 GT, while the requirement to carry and requirements of the national fleet. fill out a garbage record book does not apply to any of Indone- sia’s 171,744 inboard or 181,178 outboard motor vessels. Giv- ALDFG PREVENTION It is more cost-effective to first prevent ALDFG before looking due to insufficient and inadequate gear stowage. While Gov- at measures to mitigate impacts or recover ALDFG. Effective ernment Regulation 27/2021 on Governance of the Marine and marine spatial plan (MSP) implementation, notification and Fishery Sector includes specific clauses addressing vessel de- 020 zoning enforcement can contribute to ALDFG prevention by sign, including fish hold and wastewater system design, there minimizing the damage and losses that arise from gear con- are currently no clauses addressing gear storage and securing flicts or resource user interactions. Stakeholder education systems. Opportunities may exist under the APEC Roadmap and awareness-raising are important tools to build knowledge on Marine Debris to strengthen capacity for vessel innovation about the issues surrounding ALDFG, and contribute to chang- in Indonesia to combat marine debris, and Ministerial Decree ing public perceptions and behaviors. 29/KEPMEN-KP/2021 on Technical Guidelines for Assistance to Fishing Vessels provides one avenue via which assistance Certification bodies and eco-labels establish market incen- related to vessel design and technical specifications could be tives to prevent ALDFG, hold tremendous potential to leverage delivered to stakeholders. industry action, while also strengthening compliance with na- tional, regional and international obligations. Vessel design is amongst the main direct drivers of ALDFG generation, including ALDFG MITIGATION Improvements in gear design and materials can mitigate the on Capture Fisheries Business addresses several issues that impacts of ALDFG by, for example, minimizing rates of dam- could support the implementation of gear marking schemes, age and loss, improving rates of detection and recovery, and including unique vessel identifiers (tanda pengenal kapal peri- reducing the incidence and duration of ghost fishing. While In- kanan) and defintion of the fishing gears that are permitted in donesian National Standards (SNI, Standar Nasional Indonesia) each fishery management area and fishing zone. Integrating exist for some categories of fishing gears, these could be ex- ALDFG management measures into the fisheries licensing tended to define key material and operational specifications for process can help to establish the incentive structures for fish- all gear types, while still maintaining flexibility to accommodate ers and fishing operators to minimize their contribution to ALD- the wide variety of gear designs in Indonesia. The absence of FG generation. The license to fish could include requirements gear specifications can result in suboptimal gear design or ma- such as (i) gear marking; (ii) use of appropriate biodegradable terials that contribute to ALDFG, including the re-use of waste materials, escape mechanisms, or passive deterrents to reduce plastic water bottles as fishing gear components or inferior the time that lost fishing gear remains active; (iii) reporting of materials used in the construction of fish aggregation devices. end-of-life and lost gears; and (iv) installation of adequate on- Gear marking can assist with identifying ownership, detecting board gear storage and securing systems. illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing, enhancing the visibility of passive gears, and aiding monitoring and enforce- ment of ALDFG regulations. Government Regulation 27/2021 provides a framework for gear marking, to some extent, via clause 136 point (f) which refers to the catch eligibility of fish- ing vessels and explicitly addresses the prevention of owner- less nets, while Ministerial Regulation 58/PERMEN-KP/2020 ALDFG RETRIEVAL The detection, location and careful retrieval of ALDFG is the gations that specifically address ALDFG are currently limited only way to eliminate its negative impacts on navigational safe- in Indonesia. While a number of one-off and ad hoc clean up ty, resource users and the environment. ALDFG reporting is im- initiatives have occurred in Indonesia, these tend to be focused portant for two reasons: (i) lost gears can often be retrieved if on the wider issue of marine debris rather than explicitly ad- their location is known; and (ii) an understanding of the scale, dressing ALDFG retrieval and clean up. Regular coordinated sources, locations and causes of gear loss is essential to de- ALDFG retrieval efforts could be implemented in Indonesia, and velop effective prevention and management strategies. Under may include the establishment of requirements or incentive for the framework of the NPOA-MPD 2017-2025, the Ministry of fishers to remove ALDFG when encountered. Environment and Forestry has developed guidelines for mon- itoring marine debris, however monitoring and reporting obli- ALDFG IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Adequate maintenance and repair facilities can keep gears and storage infrastructure and facilities at fishing ports can 021 in service longer, minimize damage and reduce rates of waste facilitate the aggregation of dispersed sources of waste, aid and ALDFG generation. The Food and Agriculture Organiza- the sorting of different gear and material types, and facilitate tion of the United Nations recommends that small- and medi- cleaning to minimize contamination. In turn, these facilities um-sized fishing ports should have dedicated gear repair facil- provide opportunities to extract additional value from materials ities, with 500 m2 allocated in artisanal ports and 1,000 m2 of by enhancing raw material supply and reducing costs associat- part-covered areas for coastal and offshore fishing ports. While ed with the reuse and recycling of EOLFG. Policy and regulato- informal open areas in or adjacent to ports are currently used ry frameworks that promote price stability, market stability and for gear repairs, opportunities exist to improve the adequacy market accessibility can establish the enabling conditions for of these areas, including under Ministerial Regulation 8/PER- the development of markets for EOLFG, while greater econo- MEN-KP/2012 on Fishing Ports which specifies the facilities to mies of scale, increased supply (and hence lower cost) of raw be provided by a fishing port, including “places for the mainte- materials, and/or cheaper processing costs can enhance the nance of vessels and fishing gear, such as places for repairing profitability of net recycling enterprises. nets” (article 4, clause 3.d). The installation, maintenance and management of fit-for-purpose fishing gear waste collection 022 Introduction The Government of Indonesia’s (GoI) National Plan of Action ALDFG has increased in recent decades due to the expansion 023 on Marine Plastic Debris (NPOA-MPD 2017-2025) outlines of fishing effort and greater use of synthetic fishing gear ma- the ambitious objective to reduce marine plastic debris by terials. Plastic is considered an excellent fishing gear material 70 percent by 2025. Sea-based leakage is reported to contrib- because it is highly resistant to abrasion and rust, is recognized ute at least 20 percent of all plastic waste that leaks into In- for its longevity and durability, is lightweight and buoyant thus donesia’s marine environment (World Bank, 2018). Sea-based reducing handling and associated costs, and is relatively cheap leakage includes pollution from maritime activities such as (Huntington, 2019; Derraik, 2002; Halpern et al., 2008). Because aquaculture, shipping, fisheries and tourism, as well as debris of these characteristics, combined with the expanding footprint transported by ocean flows. Recognizing the significance of of fishing effort across all oceans (Kroodsma et al., 2018), plas- this source, one of the five pillars of the NPOA-MPD 2017-2025 tic-based fisheries equipment has greatly accelerated since the is dedicated to “reducing sea-based leakage”. Achieving this 1960s (Macfadyen et al., 2009). goal will require an integrated suite of actions including “green- ing” of ports (e.g., via investments in the development of effi- Drivers of ALDFG generation include gear characteristics, cient waste management systems that include fit-for-purpose fishery management frameworks and socioeconomic factors. waste collection facilities), incentivizing and enforcing good Causes of ALDFG generation include loss during inclement practices to ensure waste enters collection systems, strength- weather, snagging on submerged features and debris, con- ening and implementing regulatory frameworks such as Presi- flicts between gears or other marine vessels, practices by in- dential Regulation 83/2018 on Handling of Marine Waste, and experienced new entrants, and availability of affordable and identifying and mitigating the main components of sea-based convenient port reception facilities for gear maintenance or marine debris. end-of-life disposal (Gilman et al. 2022; Macfadyen et al., 2009; MacMullen et al., 2003; Richardson et al., 2018, 2021). A grow- Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear (ALDFG) is ing body of research (e.g., MacMullen et al., 2003; Gilman et considered to be a major component of sea-based sources al., 2018; Proctor et al., 2019; Sinopoli et al., 2020; Richardson of marine debris. Some studies have estimated that ALDFG et al., 2018, 2021; Stevens, 2021) indicates that the drivers of comprises more than 50 percent of all marine debris (e.g., Con- ALDFG generation vary considerably across gear types, fisher- soli et al., 2021). Current estimates of global ALDFG leakage ies, operational characteristics (e.g., whether gears are attend- are as high as 1.14 Mt per year (Eunomia, 2016; Gilman et al., ed or unattended), regions, and other categories, including the 2021), though scientists are currently working to improve quan- robustness of the fisheries management framework and influ- titatively rigorous estimates (Richardson et al., 2021). A recent ence of market-based incentives (Gilman et al., 2022). Socio- meta-analysis of global fishing gear losses during the period economic factors are amongst the most important drivers of 1975 to 2017 estimated that 5.7 percent of all fishing nets, 8.6 ALDFG generation, influencing the types and qualities of gears percent of all traps and 29 percent of all lines are lost each year employed, as well as gear stewardship behaviors such as main- (Richardson et al., 2019). tenance, replacement and end-of-life disposal (Richardson et al., 2018). A recent study of trawl, gill and purse seine nets fishers in Indonesia and Australia identified potential drivers of ALDFG generation relevant to the Indonesia context (Box 1), and analyzed their causes, effects and interactions (Figure 1). Skippers taking risks Not keeping Poor a listening Weather watch to radio Lack of broadcasts Inadequate storm/ crew training, weather resource warning limitations Structural Inadequate damage to weather vessel forecasts Stower gear washed Inadequate overboard maintennace Tie ropes break Inadequate crew training Resources Unchartered limitations: Gear territory tools/ improperly No technologies stored dedicated gear storage Overcrowding, gear conflict Inadequate Inadequate zone crew training legislation 024 Working on Inadequate rough ground watch or too close maintenance Working to reefs overtime Lack of Working in enforcement suboptimal conditions Skippers Poor Market taking Weather pressure risks Pressures Net caught in Boat from illegal, DERELICT FISHING GEAR propeller stalled Unreported or Inadequate crew unregulated Dwindling Fishing (IUU) Working training & resources Net wrapped inexperience around another too close to boat’s anchor anchored chain vessels Gear lost or abandones Operational during Poor problem Weather operation Net damage: net tears in half Oversized gear Net damage: too many fish, Soak time Market or mud too long pressure Over- Inadequate allocation of maintenance Equipment and/ licenses or machinery failure Resource limitations: lack of money for repairs Gear Conflict Over- with third Over allocation Overcrowding: Skipper not party crowding of licenses encroaching providing a courtesy on other call to share fishers location of gear Oversized Inadequate gear crew training: Inadequately ignorance of marked gear Worn out impact Skippers nets and/or taking repair scraps Poor risks discarded Weather overboard Inadequate Inadequate crew training: Wornout maintenance no known gear regime alternatives Events leading to Events leading to gear Events leading to worn Top event - Intermediate event Intermediate event stowed gear washing loss or abandonment out nets and/or repair the primary undesired - caused by more - caused by more overboard during operations scraps discarded event of interest primary level events primary level events overboard described below described below Figure 1: Problem tree analysis identifying the causes of derelict fishing gear from trawl gillnet and purse seine fisheries. Source: Richardson et. al., 2019 Box 1: Perceptions of fishers in Indonesia and Australia on the main drivers of ALDFG generation. Interviews conducted with trawl, gill and purse seine • Indonesian fishers reported: (i) over-allocation of nets fishers at ports in Indonesia and Australia licenses; (ii) inadequate zone legislation; and (iii) (Richardson et al., 2018) revealed that: lack of enforcement as the ‘basic initiating events’ • Australian fishers reported replacing nets when of gear loss in the region. worn (preventative measure) compared to Indonesian fishers replacing nets when damaged Importantly, Indonesian fishers attributed ineffective (reactive measure); management regimes as a contributing factor to • One-third of Indonesian trawl fishers and 12 declining resources that leads to increased fishing percent of Indonesian gillnet fishers reported that, effort (to maintain catches) and ultimately to if net damage was too severe, unusable nets were fatigue and increased risk taking. Over allocation discarded; of fishing licenses was reported by fishers to result • Gear loss reported in Indonesian gillnet fishers in overcrowding of fishing grounds, increased was commonly caused by: (i) snagging on an competition and gear conflicts that leads to gear loss obstruction; (ii) gear conflict with trawlers; and (iii) / damage. Risk taking included fishing in suboptimal 025 bad weather. conditions such as poor weather, fishing on rough ground or too close to reefs. The impacts of ALDFG on the environment, economy, liveli- The scale of ALDFG impacts on fisheries, marine ecosystems hoods and food security are significant. ALDFG compromis- and human users has prompted international action. The es fisheries sustainability through losses of gear and catch, United Nations (UN) has called upon members to take action as well as adverse impacts to marine habitats, target and to reduce ALDFG (FAO, 2016a; UNEA, 2014; 2016; 2018), and non-target species, gear efficiency and associated fisheries to support UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goal profits (DelBane et al., 2019; Macfadyen et al., 2009; NOAA, 14 which asks members to regulate destructive fishing prac- 2016; Scheld et al. 2016). Under certain conditions, ALDFG tices and significantly reduce marine pollution (UNSDG, 2018). can travel long distances (Brown et al., 2005) and continue to In addition, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN ensnare and capture marine organisms for years or decades, (FAO) has emphasized the need for fishing gear marking and a phenomenon known as ‘ghost fishing’ (FAO, 2016; Good et ALDFG reporting and recovery via its Committee on Fisher- al., 2010; Kaiser et al., 1996; NOAA, 2015). Ingestion of hooks, ies, Code of Conduct on Responsible Fisheries and Voluntary lines, nets or weights by marine wildlife causes harmful ef- Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear (FAO 2016a; 2018; fects including perforation of the gastrointestinal tract, ob- 2019b), and the International Maritime Organization has out- struction, sepsis, toxicity, or starvation (McCauley & Bjorndal, lined actions to reduce ALDFG from fishing via vessels (IMO, 1999; Moore et al. 2013; Zabka et al., 2006) that can result in 2018). population level impacts on marine mammals, seabirds, chelo- nians and other wildlife (e.g. Boren et al., 2006; Franson et al., ALDFG management and mitigation strategies have the po- 2003; Good et al., 2009; Hanni & Pyle, 2000; Orós et al. 2016; tential to contribute to Indonesia’s marine plastic debris van der Hoop et al. 2013), and significant commercial losses while also providing economic opportunities. Increasingly a from fisheries (Goodman et al., 2021). This potential to entan- variety of ALDFG management and mitigation strategies are gle, ensnare or be ingested over long distances and timescales being implemented around the world, including modifying gear results in disproportionately higher impacts to marine wildlife materials and design (e.g., OSPAR, 2020), marking gears (e.g., compared to other types of debris (Gilardi et al., 2010; Laist, He & Suuronen, 2018), improving monitoring of ALDFG volume 1995; Wilcox et al., 2016). ALDFG can also cause significant and distribution (e.g., Gilman, 2015), incentivizing the collec- damage to marine ecosystems and benthic habitats (Gilman, tion of ALDFG and marine debris (e.g., Cho, 2009) and enhanc- 2015; Macfadyen et al., 2009; NOAA , 2015), present hazards ing the collection, disposal and recycling of fishing gears (e.g., to navigation and safety at sea (Hong et al., 2017), damage Weißbach et al., 2022). Many of the materials used in modern marine infrastructure and submarine cables (IPCC, 2021), fishing gears such as nylon (PA), polyethylene (PE) and poly- transport invasive alien species (Enrichetti et al., 2021), reduce propylene (PP) are recyclable materials that can be processed the socioeconomic value of coastal areas (English et al., 2019) into raw materials for secondary products (Chen et al., 2020). and transfer toxins and microplastics into marine food webs These circular economy methodologies have been tested and with associated risks to human health from seafood contam- proven by several enterprises globally (e.g., Juan et al., 2021; ination (Barnes et al., 2009; Foley et al., 2018; GESAMP, 2015; Charter et al., 2022), and have potential to contribute to Indo- Rochman, 2015). nesia’s goals for marine plastic waste management and debris reduction, while also providing alternative incomes for coastal communities. End-of-life fishing gear (EOLFG)—fishing gears and fishing gear components that through wear and tear need to be replaced—can be a major source of material stock for re- cycling provided such materials are landed ashore and not dis- posed of or discarded at sea. Successfully addressing ALDFG in Indonesia will require an improved understanding of the life cycle and end-of-life management of Indonesia’s fishing gears, and a framework to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent, minimize and mitigate the generation and effects of ALDFG (Kuczenski et al., 2021; Richardson et al., 2021; Gilman et al. 2021). This study aims to enhance the evidence available to support efforts to improve the management, retrieval and recycling 026 of EOLFG and ALDFG in Indonesia. This evidence base report presents: • A glossary of key ALDFG terms and their definitions in the context of Indonesia’s fisheries (Chapter 2); • An overview of Indonesia’s fisheries, including a descrip- tion of fishery management areas, fishing ports, main fishing fleets and the fishing gear in use to provide con- text for the EOLFG and ALDFG issues presented in subse- quent sections of the report (Chapter 3); • A description of the lifecycle of fishing gear in Indonesia, including existing EOLFG collection, processing and recy- cling systems, based on information obtained during field surveys (Chapter 4); • A description of the development and testing of a meth- odology to assess the gear-specific risk of ALDFG im- pacts, to establish baselines for the elements relevant to managing EOLFG and ALDFG and, in the longer term, to monitor and evaluate the impacts of prevention, mitiga- tion and/or curative actions (Chapter 5); • An overview of current EOLFG and ALDFG management in Indonesia—including current facilities and practices for handling EOLFG and retrieved ALDFG and their entry into the re-use, recycling and waste disposal chains—and how this compares with international best practices (Chapter 6); and • Recommendations to inform the development of a Fisher- ies and Aquaculture Plastic Action Plan (Chapter 7). 027 028 ALDFG terms and their definitions To support the development of measures to manage and ad- of ALDFG management measures in Indonesia, and provide 029 dress ALDFG in Indonesia, a common understanding of key definitions for many of the key terms associated with ALDFG. terms and their definitions is essential. The Voluntary Guide- These terms were reviewed to identify any gaps related to the lines on the Marking of Fishing Gear (FAO, 2019b)—developed specific context and needs of Indonesia’s fisheries and to en- via Expert and Technical Consultations in which Indonesia par- sure compatibility with Indonesia’s existing policy and regula- ticipated, and adopted by the Food and Agriculture Organiza- tory frameworks. To develop working terms to serve the needs tion of the United Nations at the 33 session of the Committee rd of this study and to inform follow up activities—including the on Fisheries in July 2018—are a tool that contributes to devel- promulgation of such terms and definitions into law where ap- oping sustainable fisheries, improving the state of the marine propriate—a review of the global literature on ALDFG was con- environment, and enhancing safety at sea by combatting, mini- ducted, key terms were identified, and definitions were translat- mizing and eliminating ALDFG and facilitating the identification ed into Bahasa Indonesia (Table 1). Terms and definitions were and recovery of such gear. consulted with stakeholders during the course of this study, and were revised to enhance clarity and comprehension where The Voluntary Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear are necessary. The compatibility of terms and definitions with ex- a useful starting point for discussions on the development isting laws and regulations was reviewed. Table 1: Glossary of ALDFG-related terms and their definition in English and Bahasa Indonesia. TERM ENGLISH DEFINITION INDONESIAN DEFINITION Fishing Gear refers to any physical device or part thereof or Setiap perangkat fisik yang ditempatkan di atau di combination of items that may be placed on or dalam air atau di dasar laut dengan tujuan untuk in the water or on the seabed with the intended menangkap organisme laut. Alat tangkap biasanya purpose of capturing or controlling for subsequent terdiri dari sejumlah komponen berbeda (lihat di capture or harvesting marine organisms, in bawah) yang secara bersama-sama membentuk satu accordance with MARPOL Annex V.1 set atau unit alat tangkap. Catatan: Alat Tangkap termasuk Alat Pengumpul Ikan NOTES - FAD is not part of the definition but has been included as supporting device since FAD mooring lines can be a significant element of ALDFG. Ministerial Regulation 18/PERMEN-KP/2021 defines fishing gears as ”tools, equipment or other items used to catch fish” and auxiliary fishing equipment as “tools used to aggregate fish for fishing activities” Components Individual elements of fishing gear, including net Bagian atau elemen alat tangkap, termasuk panel (of fishing gear) panels, ropes, floats (buoys), weights, fastenings. jaring, tali, pelampung (pelampung), pemberat, pengikat. 1 Definition / term adopted at the FAO Technical Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear and endorsed by the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) in 2018 http://www.fao.org/3/ca5184en/CA5184EN.pdf Abandoned Fishing gear over which the operator/owner has Alat tangkap yang dikendalikan oleh operator / fishing gear control and that could be retrieved by owner/ pemilik dan alat tangkap dapat diambil kembali operator, but that is deliberately left at sea due to oleh pemilik / operator, tetapi alat tangkap tersebut force majeure or other unforeseen reasons. sengaja ditinggalkan di laut karena keadaan kahar atau alasan tak terduga lainnya. Lost fishing gear Fishing gear over which the owner/operator Alat penangkapan ikan yang tanpa sengaja has accidentally lost control and that cannot be kehilangan kendali oleh pemilik / operator dan tidak located and/or retrieved by the owner/operator. dapat ditemukan dan / atau diambil oleh pemilik / operator Discarded Fishing gear that is released at sea without any Alat tangkap yang dilepas ke laut tanpa adanya upaya fishing gear attempt for further control or recovery by the pengendalian atau pemulihan lebih lanjut oleh pemilik owner/operator. / operator Ghost fishing The capture and/or entanglement of fish and other Penangkapan dan / atau terbelitnya ikan dan 030 animals by fishing gear that has been abandoned, hewan laut lainnya dengan alat tangkap yang telah lost or otherwise discarded. ditinggalkan, hilang atau dibuang Replenishment The total quantity / volume of fishing gear or Jumlah total / volume alat tangkap atau komponen (of fishing gear) component of fishing gear that are added to a alat tangkap yang ditambahkan ke kapal penangkap fishing vessel to replace or top up any fishing ikan untuk mengganti atau menambah alat tangkap gear or components of fishing gear that are atau komponen alat tangkap yang ditinggalkan, abandoned, lost, discarded or removed from the hilang, dibuang atau dipindahkan dari kapal dengan vessel for any reason whatsoever. alasan apa pun. Annual Annual Replenishment Rate of Fishing Gear Laju penggantian tahunan dari alat tangkap adalah Replenishment refers to the amount of fishing gear and fishing jumlah alat tangkap dan komponen alat tangkap yang Rate gear components replenished by a fishing diganti oleh kapal penangkap ikan dalam satu tahun. vessel in one year. Retrieval The recovery of fishing gear after it has been Pemulihan peralatan hantu setelah ditinggalkan, abandoned, lost or discarded. The retrieval can be hilang atau dibuang. Pengambilan kembali dapat conducted by either the fisher responsible for the dilakukan oleh nelayan yang bertanggung jawab atas gear or an authorized third party. peralatan tersebut atau pihak ketiga. Collection The process by which fishing gear or ALDFG is Proses dimanah alat tangkap atau ALDFG gathered into one or more designated locations dikumpulkan ke dalam satu atau lebih lokasi / tempat / spaces for subsequent repair, recycling or yang ditentukan untuk perbaikan, daur ulang atau disposal. pembuangan selanjutnya. 031 032 Context of Indonesia’s Fisheries 033 Figure 2: Fishery management areas of Indonesia. FISHERY MANAGEMENT AREAS The marine waters of Indonesia are divided into 11 Fishery • WPP 712 Java Sea; Management Areas (WPP, Wilayah Pengelolaan Perikanan) (Fig- • WPP 713 Makassar Sea, Bone Bay, Flores Sea and Bali Sea; ure 2) based on the characteristics of the fish resources and its • WPP 714 Tolo Bay and Banda Sea; environment. These are: 2 • WPP 715 Tomini Bay, Maluku Sea, Halmahera Sea, Seram • WPP 571 Malacca Strait and Andaman Sea; Sea and Berau Bay; • WPP 572 Indian Ocean of Western Sumatera and Sunda • WPP 716 Sulawesi Sea and Northern sea of Halmahera Strait; Island; • WPP 573 Indian Ocean of Southern Java, Southern Nusa • WPP 717 Cendrawasih Bay and Pacific Ocean:; and Tenggara, Sawu Sea, and Western of Timor Sea; • WPP 718 Aru Bay, Arafuru Sea, and Eastern Timor Sea. • WPP 711 Karimata Strait, Natuna Sea and South China Sea; 2 Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 18/PERMEN-KP/2014 on Fishery Management Areas. https://jdih.kkp.go.id/peraturan/18-permen-kp- 2014-ttg-wilayah-pengelolaan-perikanan-negara-republik-indonesia.pdf Kalimantan Papua Sumatra 50% 50% 50% Sulawesi 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% Java 50% Lesser Sunda Islands 50% National 100% 0% 0% 034 PPI (526) PPP (28) PPN (14) PPS (8) 0% Figure 3: Distribution of PPS, PPN, PPP and PPI class fishing ports across different regions of Indonesia (left) and the national distribution (right). Source: BPS, 2019. FISHING PORTS There are 576 fishing ports throughout Indonesia (BPS, 2019), with the greatest concentration in western Indonesia (Figure 3). The province of Aceh has the most fishing ports (114), while the provinces of Jambi, South Sulawesi and West Papua have the least (1) (Table 2). Kalimantan Papua Sumatra 50% 50% 50% Sulawesi 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% Java 50% Lesser Sunda Islands 50% National 100% 0% 0% PPI (11,962 Mt) PPP (787 Mt) PPN (2,970 Mt) PPS (1,457 Mt) 0% Figure 4: Distribution of fishery production across different regions of Indonesia (left) and the four classes of fishing port (right). Source BPS, 2009 Indonesia’s fishing ports are classified into four classes3 (Table 3): Fishery production volumes vary across ports and provinces • Fisheries Port Class A or Oceanic Fishing Port (PPS, (BPS, 2019) (Figure 4). The top five most productive provinces Pelabuhan Perikanan Samudera) serve fishing vessels are West Java, Aceh, East Java, Central Java and Banten which that operate in Indonesia’s territorial seas, Indonesia’s Ex- together account for 54.7 percent of Indonesia’s annual cap- clusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and the high seas. Indone- ture fishery production (Table 5). sia has eight PPS, located in the provinces of Aceh, North Sumatra, West Sumatra, DKI Jakarta, Central Java, East Table 2: Distribution of fishing ports across Indonesian provinces. Java, North Sulawesi and Southeast Sulawesi (Table 2). • Fisheries Port Class B or Archipelagic Fishing Port (PPN, PROVINCE PPS PPN PPP PPI TOTAL Pelabuhan Perikanan Nusantara) serve fishing vessels Aceh 1 113 114 that operate in Indonesia’s territorial seas and Indonesia’s North Sumatra 1 1 19 21 EEZ. Indonesia has 14 PPN distributed across 12 prov- West Sumatra 1 8 9 inces, with the provinces of Bangka Belitung and Maluku both having two PPN. Riau 3 3 • Fisheries Port Class C or Coastal Fishing Port (PPP, Pela- Jambi 1 1 buhan Perikanan Pantai) serve fishing vessels that oper- South Sumatera 1 1 035 ate in Indonesia’s territorial seas. Indonesia has 28 PPP, Bengkulu 28 28 with the greatest concentration in Central Java (9 PPP). Lampung 9 9 • Fisheries Port Class D or Fish Landing Quay (PPI, Pang- Bangka Belitung Islands 2 7 9 kalan Pendaratan Ikan) serve fishing vessels that operate in Indonesia’s territorial seas. Indonesia has 526 PPI dis- Riau Islands 2 2 tributed throughout all provinces and with the greatest DKI Jakarta 1 1 2 concentration in Aceh Province (113). West Java 1 3 44 48 Central Java 1 1 9 67 78 The greatest number of fishing ports are located in WPP 712, DI Yogyakarta 1 16 17 WPP 572 and WPP 573 (Table 4, see Annex 7 for a breakdown East Java 1 1 5 50 57 of the number4 of ports in each class and their competent au- Banten 1 1 25 27 thorities). Bali 1 9 10 West Nusa Tenggara 6 6 East Nusa Tenggara 1 7 8 West Kalimantan 1 2 14 17 Table 4: Number of Fishing Ports in each WPP. Central Kalimantan 6 6 South Kalimantan 4 4 FISHERY MANAGEMENT AREA NO. FISHING PORTS East Kalimantan 8 8 WPP 712 174 North Kalimantan 1 1 2 WPP 572 159 North Sulawesi 1 1 6 8 WPP 573 135 Central Sulawesi 12 12 WPP 713 82 South Sulawesi 1 27 28 WPP 711 77 Southeast Sulawesi 1 9 10 WPP 571 60 Gorontalo 1 11 12 WPP 715 53 West Sulawesi 2 2 WPP 714 34 Maluku 2 3 5 WPP 716 27 North Maluku 1 2 5 8 WPP 717 7 West Papua 1 1 WPP 718 6 Papua 3 3 TOTAL 814 TOTAL 8 14 28 526 576 3 Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 8/PERMEN-KP/2012 on Fishing Ports. http://jdih.kkp.go.id/peraturan/per-08-men-2012.pdf 4 The actual number of fishing ports and their distribution by class vary in different Indonesian publications. Table 3: Typology of fishing ports in Indonesia (HS = high seas, EEZ = exclusive economic zone, TS = territorial seas). CRITERIA PPS PPN PPP PPI Operational area served HS, EEZ, TS EEZ, TS TS TS Mooring facilities ≥60 GT ≥30 GT ≥10 to <30 GT ≥5 GT Port length ≥300 m ≥150 m ≥100 m ≥50 m Port water depth ≥3 m ≥3 m ≥2 m ≥1 m Ship holding capacity ≥6,000 GT ≥2,250 GT ≥300 GT ≥75 GT Average fish landed volume 50 t/day 30 t/day 5 t/day 10 t/day Export targeted market Yes Yes No No 036 Total port area ≥20 ha ≥10 ha ≥5 ha ≥1 ha Source: Ministerial Regulation 8/KEPMEN-KP/2012 20-30 GT 6,481 >30 GT 10-20 GT 3,671 9,790 5-10 GT 35,988 <5GT 115,814 Figure 5: Composition of the Indonesian fishing fleet by vessel size. Source: MMAF, 2018. Table 5: Annual catch volume (metric tonne) landed at all province and port classes in 2019. Source: BPS, 2019. PROVINCE PPS PPN PPP PPI TOTAL RANK Central Java 3,650 5,794 81,943 305,642 397,029 1 Aceh 1,825 240,480 242,305 2 East Java 374 56,301 15,485 107,620 179,781 3 West Java 3,230 4,106 165,126 172,463 4 South Sulawesi 159,651 159,651 5 DKI Jakarta 67,799 66,905 134,703 6 West Kalimantan 8,943 12,958 73,794 95,694 7 037 North Sulawes 49,001 10,877 34,912 94,791 8 North Sumatera 19,637 23,926 45,671 89,233 9 Banten 2,281 1,460 64,277 68,018 10 Southeast Sulawesi 27,229 26,609 53,838 11 North Maluku 3,833 5,110 30,660 39,603 12 West Sumatera 639 37,048 37,686 13 West Nusa Tenggara 35,816 35,816 14 East Kalimantan 33,142 33,142 15 Bangka Belitung Islands 8,669 24,455 33,124 16 South Kalimantan 8,121 23,816 31,938 17 Bali 12,136 16,425 28,561 18 West Sulawesi 23,451 23,451 19 Papua 22,218 22,218 20 Central Kalimantan 21,143 21,143 21 DI Yogyakarta 2,281 16,945 19,226 22 East Nusa Tenggara 4,745 10,685 15,430 23 Bengkulu 11,078 11,078 24 Maluku 8,486 456 8,943 25 Gorontalo 3,833 4,995 8,787 26 Central Sulawesi 8,012 8,012 27 Lampung 7,537 7,537 28 North Kalimantan 5,293 1,049 6,342 29 Riau 4,198 4,198 30 Riau Islands 2,674 2,674 31 West Papua 1,369 173 1,542 32 South Sumatera 548 548 33 Jambi 34 INDONESIA 170,154 137,432 153,747 1,627079 2,088,411 FISHING FLEET There are 171,744 vessels with inboard engines in the Indone- sian fishing fleet. Of these, 67 percent are smaller than 5 GT, 88 percent are smaller than 10 GT, and 98 percent (168,073 vessels) are smaller than 30 GT (Table 6, Figure 5). In addition, there are 181,178 vessels equipped with outboard motors, and 190,923 non-motorized vessels. Table 6: Composition of the Indonesian fishing fleet from 2012 to 2016. YEAR CATEGORY 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Non-motorized vessels 172,333 175,510 165,066 143,135 190,923 Outboard motor 245,819 237,625 238,010 246,882 181,178 Inboard motor: 198,538 226,573 222,557 178,312 171,744 038 <5 GT 137,587 151,939 153,493 117,848 115,814 5-10 GT 37,694 46,358 41,374 39,429 35,988 10-20 GT 11,583 15,208 14,301 10,515 9,790 20-30 GT 7,611 8,782 9,578 7,680 6,481 30-50 GT 917 1,074 1,029 825 805 50-100 GT 1,641 1,727 1,766 1,435 2,008 100-200 GT 1,167 1,127 840 571 847 > 200 GT 338 358 176 9 11 GRAND TOTAL 616,690 639,708 625,633 568,329 543,845 Source: MMAF, 2018. Based on the data from BPS and MMAF, the national fleet of Because of major differences in weights of fishing gears with- 171,733 fishing vessels equipped with inboard engines are 5 in subcategories, the numbers of vessels within each subcat- distributed across the ten major categories of fishing gears egory and weights of fishing gears within subcategories were listed in Fishery Regulation Number 59/PERMEN-KP/2020. 6 also determined (Table 8). The distribution of the fleet across these ten gear categories are shown in Table 7. Table 7: Breakdown of the number of fishing vessels by GT class and fishing gear type. GT CATEGORY CODE TOTAL % <5 5-10 10-20 20-30 > 30 Surrounding Gear 01 1,706 1,782 2,030 1,766 980 8,265 4.8 Seines 02 6,697 2,211 910 346 53 10,217 5.9 Trawls 03 2,497 609 37 2 0 3,145 1.8 Dredges 04 1,223 195 11 0 0 1,428 0.8 Lift Nets 05 4,883 1,887 431 829 601 8,630 5.0 Falling Gear 06 924 54 0 3 99 1,079 0.6 Gill/ Entangling Nets 07 47,757 15,625 2,508 1,188 711 67,789 39.5 Traps 08 15,076 3,077 413 74 364 19,003 11.1 Hooks & Lines 09 34,565 10,430 3,445 2,273 852 51,565 30.0 Misc. gears 10 487 118 5 0 0 610 0.4 TOTAL 115,814 35,988 9,790 6,481 3,660 171,733 % 67.4 21.0 5.7 3.8 2.1 100 FISHING GEARS Table 8: Breakdown of the number and proportion of fishing Indonesia’s fishing gear typology is well described in fishery reg- vessels by fishing gear sub-category. ulations.7 This section provides a brief illustrated description8 of the major gears used in Indonesia. Annex 7 provides a detailed FISHING VESSELS breakdown of the types of fishing gear that are permitted for use FISHING GEAR in each WPP. NO % Surrounding Gear (Jaring Lingkar) SURROUNDING NETS A surrounding net is a long net that is generally constructed from Purse seine <30GT 8,265 88.1 rectangular sections of netting framed by ropes. A headrope with Purse seine >30GT 11.9 numerous floats runs across the top of a surrounding net, while a weighted footrope runs along the lower edge (Figure 6). This SEINE NETS causes the net to hang vertically in the water, where it catches by Beach Seine 10,217 14.0 surrounding a school of fish. The netting is generally comprised Danish Seine 22.6 of small mesh sizes to minimize fish becoming enmeshed and is Pair seine 2.4 comprised of polyamide (PA) or polyester (PES) twine. There are 039 two types of surrounding nets: purse seines with a purse line, and Payang 38.3 other surrounding nets without a purse line. The gear is attached Cantrang 12.7 to the vessel at all times, reducing the risk of loss or damage result- Lampara dasar 9.9 ing from other vessels running over the gear. The weight of plastic material in a single purse seine ranges from 4,800 - 13,200 kg. TRAWLS Bottom otter trawl 3,145 33.6 Shrimp trawl 7.0 Purse seine - main components Single boat midwater trawl 16.7 headrope float LIFT NETS bunt main body wing Bagan 8,630 59.4 netting (PA or PES) Bouke ami 11.1 Bagan Tankap 29.0 FALLING GEARS footrope (chain) purse ring purse line Cast net 1,079 97 GILLNETS & ENTANGLING NETS Set anchored gillnet 67,789 22.5 Driftnet 49.2 Trammel net- Combined 22.1 TRAPS Set net 19,003 0.2 Pot 81.2 Fyke net – Stow nets 8.1 HOOKS AND LINES Figure 6: Single boat purse seine. Handline and hand 31,398 60.9 operated pole & line Set longlines 51,565 16.1 5 The discrepancy between 171,444 and 171,733 is a result of rounding errors. Drift longlines 4.9 6 http://www.perizinan.kkp.go.id/portal/assets/portal/embed/274/59- permen-kp-2020tentangJalur.pdf Trolling lines 17.4 7 Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 59/PERMEN- KP/2020 on Fishing Routes and Fishing Gears in the Fishery Management MISCELLANEOUS Areas of Indonesia and the High Seas. http://www.perizinan.kkp.go.id/portal/ assets/portal/embed/274/59-permen-kp-2020tentangJalur.pdf Pushnet 344 8 Text and illustrations are based on He, P., Chopin, F., Suuronen, P., Ferro, R.S.T and Lansley, J. 2021. Classification and illustrated definition of fishing TOTAL 167,289 gears. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 672. Rome, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4966en Seine Nets (Pukat Tarik) can tow one trawl (most common), two trawls (twin trawl), or Seine nets are cone-shaped nets with long wings and a co- more than two trawls (multi-rig trawls). A single trawl can be dend. A seine net is usually framed by a headrope along the towed by one boat (most common) or two boats (pair trawl- upper edge and a footrope along the lower edge of the net. ing). Trawls are very versatile and can be used to catch many The weighted footrope is used to maintain ground contract different species. The towing speed is usually determined by and reduce net abrasion. The wings are often elongated and the behavior and swimming capacity of the target species and used in conjunction with long ropes which act simultaneously the power of the boat. The weight of plastic material in a trawl for herding fish and for hauling the net. The bunt is typically in ranges from 73 - 185 kg. the center of the net and may consist of a netting bag similar to a trawl codend, but some seines may not have a bag. The mesh size in the bunt or the codend usually determines the size of animals caught. This gear may be set from the shore (beach seine) or from one or two boats (boat seine) (Figure 7). Seine nets can also be operated on the seabed or pelagi- cally. With the exception of beach seines, the fishing gear is attached to the vessel at all times reducing the risks of loss 040 of gear or damage from other vessels running over the gear. However, vessels operating these types of gears may collide with untended fishing gears such as set gillnets, longlines and pots. The weight of plastic material in a single seine ranges from 44 - 114 kg. Figure 8: Illustration of a bottom trawl (top) and midwater trawl (bottom) Dredges (Penggaruk) A dredge is a cage-like structure often equipped with a scraper blade or teeth on its lower part, either pulled or towed to dig animals out of substrate and lift them into the cage or bag. As dredges are in heavy contact with the substrate, the bot- tom part of the dredge, sometimes the entire cage, is made of metal rods or chain mesh to withstand chafing with the sea- Figure 7: Illustration of a beach seine (top) and boat seine (bottom) bed; however, mesh bags made of synthetic materials are also used. Dredges may be operated either by hand, wading in the Trawls (Pukat Hela) water or from a small boat in shallow waters, or towed behind The trawl is a cone-shaped body of netting, usually with one a boat in deeper waters. The dredge is attached to the vessel codend, towed behind one or two boats to catch fish through at all times reducing the risks of loss or damage from other herding and sieving. Trawls are designed to be towed across vessels running over the gear. However, vessels operating the seabed (bottom trawls) or in midwater (midwater trawls) these types of gears may collide with untended fishing gears (Figure 8). The trawl is attached to the vessel at all times re- such as set gillnets, longlines and pots. This gear type was ducing the risks of loss of gear or damage from other vessels omitted from the estimate. running over the gear. However, vessels operating these types of gears may collide with untended fishing gears such as set Lift Nets (Jaring Ingkat) gillnets, longlines and pots. A semi-pelagic trawl is a hybrid A lift net is a piece of netting mounted onto a frame that is that can be set to fish on or off the seabed. A single boat lowered into the water to allow fish to enter the area above the net and is then lifted or hauled upward to collect the fish accumulated there. The net is either a series of simple hori- zontal sheets or a bag-shaped netting panel, like a funnel or cone with the opening facing upwards. The netting is often stretched over a frame of rods made of bamboo, wood, plastic or metal. The fish are often attracted over the net by lights or bait, or drift over the net with the current. These gears may be either small and portable and operated by hand or large in size and assisted by a winch or other mechanical device. They can be operated from shore, from a structure extended from the shore (e.g., a pier) or from a boat (Figure 9). With the excep- tion of shore operated lift nets, the gear is attached to a vessel or floating structure at all times reducing the risks of loss of gear or damage from other vessels running over the gear. The weight of plastic material in a lift net ranges from 45 - 175 kg. 0 41 Figure 10: Illustration of a boat operated falling gear Gillnets and Entangling Nets (Jaring Insang) Gillnets and entangling nets are long rectangular walls of net- ting that catch fish by gilling, wedging, snagging, entangling or entrapping them in pockets. These nets are kept open vertical- ly by floats attached to the head rope and by weights added to the footrope, but they can also be held open vertically by hang- ing the net onto stakes. These nets are usually fished in long fleets with a number of nets tied together to form a long string of nets (which may extend up to several kilometers) but they can also be used singly. Depending on their design, they may be used to fish at the surface, in midwater or near the seabed (Figure 11). They may be anchored to the seabed or allowed to drift freely with marker buoys or with the boat attached to it. Several types of net may be combined in one gear (for exam- ple, a trammel net combined with a gillnet). Fish are primarily caught by gilling and entangling. Drift gillnets are attached to the vessel at all times reducing the risks of loss or damage from other vessels running over the gear. Set anchored gill- nets and trammel nets operate without being attached to the vessel increasing the risk of loss of gear and or other vessels colliding with and destroying / damaging the fishing gear. Set anchored gillnets and trammel nets are also set on the seabed and can be damaged through contact with rocks, corals and other submerged obstructions. The weight of plastic material Figure 9: Illustration of a portable lift net (top) in a gillnet/entangling net ranges from 53 – 1,006 kg (set an- and boat operated lift net (bottom) chored gillnets / trammels) and 63 – 1,330 kg (drift gillnets). Falling Gears (Alat Yang Dijatuhkan Atau Ditebarkan) Falling gear is a net or a basket-like structure which is cast, pushed down or allowed to fall from above to catch fish under- neath it (Figure 10). The use of falling nets is usually restricted to shallow waters. However, some large-scale falling nets can operate in deep waters from a boat with the use of lights to attract and concentrate fish. The gear is attached to a vessel at all times reducing the risks of loss of gear or damage from oth- er vessels running over the gear. The weight of plastic material in a falling gear (Jalah Jatuh) was estimated to be 161 kg. 042 Figure 11: Illustration of a set anchored gillnet (top left), drift gillnet (top right), gillnet fixed on stakes (bottom left), trammel net (bottom center) and trammel net capture process (bottom right). Figure 12: Illustration of a fixed pound trap (top left), crustacean pots (top right), fyke net (bottom left) and stow net (bottom right). 043 Figure 13: Illustration of hand operated pole and line (top left), set anchored longline (top right), drifting longline (bottom left) and trolling line (bottom right). Traps (Perangkap) attached to the vessel at all times reducing the risks of loss Traps are stationary structures of many shapes and sizes (Fig- or damage from other vessels running over the gear. Set an- ure 12) into which fish are guided, or pushed by the current, or chored longlines also operate without being attached to the drawn into the gear by bait or other attractants. Traps usually vessel increasing the risk of loss of gear and or other vessels consist of a fish-holding chamber or a cod-end like bag into colliding with and destroying / damaging the fishing gear. which the fish are held before hauling on to the boat. One or These gears are also set on the seabed and can be damaged more funnels or non-return devices are often incorporated into through contact with rocks, corals and other submerged ob- the design to prevent fish from escaping once they have en- structions. The weight of plastic material in a hook and line tered a chamber. Pots operate without being attached to the gear ranges from <10 kg (handlines), 55 - 375 kg (set long- vessel increasing the risk of loss of gear and or other vessels lines) and 127 - 1,817 kg (drift longlines). colliding with and destroying / damaging the fishing gear. The weight of plastic material in traps ranges from 46 - 122 kg. Miscellaneous Gear (Alat Penangkapan Ikan Lainnya) Miscellaneous gears include all other gears not included in Hooks and Lines (Pancing) other categories. There are a variety of other gears in world Hook-and-line gears are those that use hooks (including jigs) fisheries, especially in small-scale and artisanal fisheries, in and lines to catch fish (Figure 13). Hook-and-line gears catch addition to those described in the nine main categories above. fish by the mouth with baited hooks, or by penetrating their For Indonesia, this includes the push net, scoop net, Muro-ami flesh (impaling, ripping or tearing) with unbaited hooks when and spear, amongst others. they pass within the range of movement of the hook. Bait can include natural bait fish such as mackerel, herring and squid, or artificial lures such as rubber, plastic or feather. Hook-and- line gears may be used with one hook or with a large number of hooks. They may be tended by a fisher or with a machine or may be left untended. For untended gears, they may be set on or near the bottom with anchors or weights, near the surface or in midwater drifting with the currents. Drifting longlines are FISH RESOURCES SOCIAL STRUCTURE Indonesia’s capture fishery resources are categorized into A variety of classification systems have been applied to Indo- large pelagic, small pelagic, demersal, and other species (e.g., nesia’s fisheries to support the diversity of planning purposes miscellaneous non-finfish including crustaceans and mollusks and needs. Classifications based on vessel size separate the that are often caught in association with the small pelagic sector into small-, medium- and large-scale sub-sectors, with group). In general, Indonesia’s demersal fisheries are multi- 9 the distinguishing feature of both medium- and large-scale species fisheries that are exploited by a wide variety of gear sub-sectors being the use of vessels powered by inboard en- types. Large and small pelagics are typically caught by purse gines (Sumiono, 1997).11 Alternative approaches have clas- seine, drifting gillnets, encircling gillnets, lift nets, pole and line, sified fishing operations based on the technology capacity troll line and other surface gears. Squid form one of the most 10 (fishing gear and fleet), market orientation, and production important components of the ‘other species’ category, and are relationship characteristics. For example, Satria (2015) de- caught by squid jigging, lift net and cast net fishing gears. scribed four levels of classification: (i) subsistence or tradi- tional fisheries where catches primarily fulfill the needs of par- Fishing activities in Indonesian waters can be grouped into four ticipants; (ii) post-subsistence fisheries characterized by the use major areas: (i) Eastern Indian Ocean (small pelagics and large of more advanced fishing technologies such as outboard motors; pelagics), (ii) the Sunda Shelf (demersal and small pelagics), (iii) (iii) commercial fisheries that are oriented towards increasing 044 Sulawesi waters (small pelagics and large pelagics) and (iv) Ma- profits; and (iv) industrial fisheries that are typically organized, luku-Papua waters (demersal and small pelagics, with large tuna capital intensive, export-oriented, and generate higher incomes. and skipjack fisheries located in deeper Pacific waters). Large-scale Indonesia’s commercial fisheries include private Indonesian companies, joint venture corporations and state-owned enter- prises, and typically target high-value or export commodities. Significant examples include shrimp otter trawl, long-line tuna, and pole-and-line and purse seine skipjack fisheries. Within these fisheries, operational and maintenance costs—includ- ing for the purchase and maintenance of fishing gears—are generally paid by the company. However, as crew are typically paid via shared remuneration systems rather than fixed wag- es (Muawanah et al. 2021; Purwasih et al, 2016), spending on maintenance has the potential to reduce the profits available for distribution to crew and thus creates incentives to mini- mize such costs. Small-scale Indonesia’s small-scale fisheries—by far the most important in terms of employment, numbers of fishing units and quantity of landings—are distinguished from other subsectors by type (or absence) of boat employed. The sub-sector includes all fishing units which use boats powered by sail or outboard engines, as well as fishers who operate gears without the use of a boat. Fishing operations are labor intensive, and occur primarily in coastal waters. The type of gear commonly used in small- Women make up the majority scale fishing are seine nets, gillnets, handlines, traps and other of workers in processing and traditional gears such as shellfish collections and cast nets. administrative roles and Fishers typically use vessels with a single outboard motor are also involved in middle sized between 1-5 GT. While some fishers may own their own vessels and gears, many more are dependent on patron-cli- management in fishing ent relationships (Glaser et al., 2015; Muawanah et al., 2021). industries. In these relationships, patrons provide capital in the form of 9 Decree of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 19/KEPMEN-KP/2022 on Estimation of Potential, Total Allowable Catch, and Utilisation of Fish Resources in the Fishery Management Areas of the Republic of Indonesia 10 http://www.fao.org/3/bp404e/bp404e.pdf money or production equipment (e.g., vessels, fishing gears or These associations play an important role by organizing mem- machinery), and may facilitate access to markets (Sinaga et bers, engaging with government, improving quality standards al., 2015). Under such patron-client bonds, fishers may receive to meet export market standards, and enhancing standards of only a small proportion of revenues and have limited influence sustainability and traceability, including via the pursuit of in- over significant operational and maintenance budgeting deci- ternational certification schemes such as Marine Stewardship sions (Aida et al., 2020; Sinaga et al., 2015). Council and Fair Trade. Fisher associations Gender roles Fisher associations or kelompok nelayan are widespread Men and women have important roles within Indonesia’s fish- throughout Indonesia. Most are informal, though some may eries and associated value chains (USAID, 2017). Men oc- have a proper organizational structure. Still others are well de- cupy most roles associated with fishing, lifting heavy loads, veloped (Syarif, 2009) and may play a significant role in their the most lucrative export-oriented trade commodities, and local community, establish profitable fishing cooperatives (ko- positions associated with authority, such as managerial and perasi nelayan) or initiate programs and activities to protect executive roles in fishing industries (Barclay et al., 2020). Fur- their coastal areas such as undertaking beach cleanups or thermore, men are typically the main decision-makers when it forming community surveillance groups (POKMASWAS). comes to seeking credit from financial institutions (Gede et al., 045 2017) and controlling access to resources (e.g., vessels, fish- While some kelompok nelayan are based around fish markets ing gears, and larger processing units) (USAID, 2017). and auctions as a way to protect the financial interests of their members, others appear to exist simply to meet government Women make up the majority of workers in processing and criteria for recipients of development assistance (De Alessi, administrative roles and are also involved in middle manage- 2014). For example, around two-thirds of MMAF’s 2017 fisher- ment in fishing industries (Barclay et al., 2020). Women may ies assistance budget (DJPT Rencangan Kegiatan 2017: Ban- occupy as much as 80 percent of the labor in some processing tuan Alat Tangkap) was allocated to the distribution of surface companies (Jumadi et al. 2017), though roles are unevenly dis- and midwater gillnets, with eligibility limited to kelompok ne- tributed with women making up 60 percent of the workforce layan containing 10 members. on the processing floor but only 30 percent of the workforce on the management side of the business (Barclay et al., 2020). Industry associations Within coastal communities women are typically the main op- Several fishing industry associations have been established in erators of small processing units and local marketing facilities Indonesia to organize and represent the interests of medium- (USAID, 2017), the main decision-makers with regard to how and large-scale enterprises. Significant examples include: and where to sell fish, and play important roles in domestic, public, and social activities (Gude et al., 2017). • Indonesian Fishers Association (HNSI, Himpunan Nelayan Seluruh Indonesia) which represents all gear types; • Indonesian Blue Swimming Crab Association (APRI, Asosi- asi Pengelolaan Rajungan Indonesia) which represents trap, gillnet and trawl blue swimming crab fisheries as well as pro- cessing and export companies; • Indonesian Tuna Association (ASTUIN, Asosiasi Tuna Indo- nesia) which represents tuna harvest, processing and export companies; • Indonesian Purse Seine Association (HNPN, Himpunan Ne- layan Purse Seine Nasional) which represents tuna purse seine harvest, processing and export companies; • Indonesian Tuna Longline Associations (ATLI, Asosiasi Tuna Longline Indonesia) which represents tuna long-line harvest, processing and export companies; and • Indonesian Pole-and-Line and Handline Association (AP2HI, Asosiasi Perikanan Pole & Line dan Handline Indonesia) which represents tuna pole-and-line and hand-line harvest, processing and export companies. 11 This distinction is further clarified, including with regard to investment levels and areas in which sub-sectors are permitted to operate, via Government Regulation 27/2021 on Governance of the Marine and Fisheries Sector. 046 Lifecycle of fishing gear in Indonesia Field surveys were conducted to provide a baseline assessment of ALDFG volumes and replenishment rates, to identify relevant stakeholders, and to describe current gear repair and disposal systems. Field surveys were conducted in 10 ports, with data collected via observational surveys and stakeholder interviews. Detailed methodologies, including port selection criteria, are described in Annex 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE FISHERIES IN THE 0 47 SAMPLED PORTS Field surveys were conducted in ten ports: PPS Bitung, North PPP Bajomulyo also has the highest landings of small pelag- Sulawesi; PPN Pekalongan, Central Java; PPN Ambon, Maluku; ics, dominated by scads and mackerels (Decapterus spp.) PPN Ternate, North Maluku; PPN Tual, Maluku; PPN Kupang, caught with purse seines. Based on 2018 capture fishery pro- NTT; PPP Bacan, Maluku Utara; PPP Sorong, West Papua; PPI duction statistics (BPS, 2019), PPN Ambon had the lowest to- Daeo Majiko, North Maluku; and PP Merauke, Papua. tal production amongst the ports sampled in this study, while PPP Bajomulyo had the highest and is amongst the highest Field surveys were conducted in ten PPS and PPN class ports. production across all ports in Indonesia (Table 9). These large ports support large and diverse fishing fleets, thus providing insights into a wide variety of gear lifecycles. The majority of large pelagics (mainly tuna) are landed into PPS Bitung, and are mainly caught in WPP 716 using purse seine, handline, and pole and line gear. The largest landings of demersal fish are in PPP Bajomulyo and are dominated by Kuniran goatfish (Upeneus sulphureus), with trawl, bottom longline and squid nets the main gears. Table 9: Total volume (metric tonne) of fish landed in each fishing port in 2019, disaggregated by species group. Demersal includes reef fish. Other includes cephalopods, crustaceans, and other species. LARGE SMALL FISHING PORT PELAGIC PELAGIC DEMERSAL OTHER* TOTAL PPN Pelabuhan Ratu 2,918.71 507.13 939.96 1,048.44 5,411.24 PPP Bajomulyo 11,537.44 43,944.93 17,967.23 32,730.05 106,179.64 PPS Cilacap 8,843.62 648 782.94 4,475.24 14,749.8 PPN Brondong 0 0 36,754 16,285 53,039 PPP Muncar 2,074 10,282 1,099 1,320 14,774.28 PPN Ambon 1,743.79 98.16 31.91 69.71 1,943.56 PPN Ternate 1,943 1,587.1 549.9 62.15 4,142.15 PPS Bitung 37,713.70 10,348.62 25.51 806.07 48,893.90 PPS Kendari 9,951.42 8,453 6.91 208.98 18,620.30 PPN Kejawanan 277.30 428.79 304.23 2,554.71 3,565.03 Source: BPS, 2019. FISHING GEAR SUPPLIERS The main fishing gear manufacturers in Indonesia are shown in AND MIDDLEMEN Table 10. Around three-quarters of gear manufactured in Indone- sia is for domestic use, with the remaining quarter exported. Table 10: Fishing gear manufactures in Indonesia. PT Pacific Prima Nusajaya annual production Jl Peternakan II 15-B JAKARTA 11720, 500-600 70% 30% P.O. Box: 11720, Jakarta, Indonesia, 021-6192131 TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS EXPORTS PT Indoneptune Net Manufakturing annual production Jl. Raya Bandung Garut Km. 25, Bandung, 240 50% 50% Jawa Barat TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS EXPORTS Inti Jaringmas Fishing Net Industri annual production 150 80% 20% 048 Jl. Raya Mauk Km. 5/47, Tangerang, Banten 021 - 558553 TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS EXPORTS United Rope12 annual production Jl. Muara Karang Raya No.161, RT.11/RW.3, Pluit, Kec. Penjaringan, 550 85% 15% Kota Jkt Utara, Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta 14450, (021) 6606150 TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS EXPORTS PD. Matahari13 annual production Jl. Kapuk Kamal Muara No. 29 Penjaringan Jakarta utara 14470 Telephone: +62 (021) 555 2943, Fax: +62 (021) 619 1400 N /A PT Namyoung Indonesia annual production Jl. Raya Pecangaan-Batealit, RT.01/RW.01, Krajan, Geneng, Kec. 150 75% 25% Batealit, Kabupaten Jepara, Jawa Tengah 59462, (0291) 7512968 TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS EXPORTS King Dragon Fishing Net annual production Dsn. Keceling Ds. Kemiri Sewu, Pasuruan, Jawa Timur 100 100% 0343629937 TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS annual production Water Dragon Fishing Net Industry14 Sell online (marketplace) and based in Malaysia N /A Pt. Arteria Daya Mulia15 annual production Jl. Dukuh Duwur No. 46 Cirebon City West Java, Indonesia 45113, +62 231 206507 N /A annual production Pacific Prima Nusa Jaya 100 95% 5% TONS/YEAR LOCAL NEEDS EXPORTS annual production Inja Fish Tangerang N /A annual production King Da Fish Semarang N /A 12 http://unitedrope.net/pr_nets.php 13 http://pd-matahari.com/contact.php FISHING GEAR STORAGE AND REPAIR Fishing gear storage and repair infrastructure and facilities are not available in most ports throughout Indonesia. In PPP Ba- jomulyo, PPS Cilacap, PPN Brondong and PPN Kendari, fisher- men were observed to undertake gear repair activities at home or in open areas near to the location where catches are landed. These open areas are 50-100 m2 and around one tonne of gear may be repaired annually. Fishing gear storage and repair infrastructure and facilities were observed in PPS Pelabuhan Ratu and PPN Kejawanan. In PPN Pelabuhan Ratu, the repair area is an open space covered by 5 x 10 m roof (Figure 14). No repair services are provided, instead repairs are carried out by the fishermen. Consequently, no records of repair activities are maintained, making it diffi- cult to estimate the number of fishing gears repaired or dis- 049 posed annually. Any gears that are beyond repair are left in the repair center, and the port authority occasionally cleans up the center and moves disposed gears to an intermediate storage container before they are transported to landfill. In 2019, PPN Sibolga established a netloft16 as a service to support fishery business activities. The netflot building is used by fishermen and stakeholders to repair damaged fishing nets. In both PPN Kendari and PPN Bitung, stakeholders described plans to construct 800m2 gear repair facilities as part of the Government of Indonesia’s “Eco Fishing Port” program. Figure 14: Current gear repair practices in the fishing port. EOLFG COLLECTION, PROCESSING AND STORAGE Practices for managing fishing-related waste vary from one port to another. In general, irreparably damaged fishing gear is disposed in intermediate storage facilities, together with other general waste, before being transported to landfill facilities. Transport of waste is typically managed by the port authority, and occurs 2-3 times per week. Two types of intermediate storage facilities were observed in the ports surveyed. In PPS Pelabuhan Ratu, half-opened con- tainers made from metal and measuring 310 x 190 x 135 cm were observed. Waste was stored for 2-3 days, with the port authority operating three trucks, each with 8,400 liter capaci- ty, to transport waste to landfill. In PPN Kejawanan, open wall storage facilities measuring 1200 x 1200 x 200 cm were ob- served, with the port authority operating two trucks of 9,000 liter capacity to transport waste to landfill. Fishermen also abandon damaged nets in undesignated areas within the port. In PPS Pelabuhan Ratu, about 0.2 m3 of dam- aged and abandoned net was observed in the repair center. In PPS Kendari, around 80 m³ of abandoned gear had accumu- lated in the docking facility, and in PPS Cilacap, fishing gears Figure 15: Abandoned fishing gear. were disposed of on the wharf (Figure 15). EOLFG RECYCLING Recycling of EOLFG depends on the availability of waste collectors. Collectors play an important role in aggregating and organizing gear waste and transporting it to market and plastic recycling plants. However, such collectors were rare- ly found during the surveys. One of the reasons noted in PPS Pelabuhan Ratu was a trend for fishers to use hook and line instead of gillnets, resulting in insufficient quantities of gillnet waste for economically feasible recycling. In addition, the low rate of recycling of fishing-related waste in ports may be due to the condition of the waste, which is usually mixed and con- taminated. Sorting and cleaning of the waste are the largest component of recycling costs, and the current condition of Figure 16: A waste fishing gear collector from fishing gear waste means it is not feasible to recycle. Another Pekalongan receives seine nets from Bajomulyo. factor contributing to low recycling rates is the limited number of recycling plants that use nylon as a raw material. collected and sold at 2,500 - 5,000 IDR/kg to waste collectors 050 for further recycling and repurposing into e.g., dish sponges. Informal collection, repair and recycling businesses have be- come established where there are viable waste streams. For Efforts to recycle EOLFG were observed in ports where col- example, in Pekalongan up to ten net repair businesses were lectors are present. In PPN Pekalongan and PPP Bajomulyo, identified, with some importing purse seine nets from larger when the EOLFG has reuse or recycling value, fishermen trans- scale fishing operators in Bali and Java (Figure 16). Respon- port it via motorcycle or rickshaw to sell to collectors (Figure dents reported that around 50 percent of nets can be repaired 17). Collectors primarily source gillnet and millennium type while the remaining 50 percent are sold to waste collectors for nets made from nylon, which have first been cleaned by inter- further recycling. Offcuts from the net repair process are also mediate actors. Fisherman Collector NO YES END OF LIFE END OF LIFE END OF LIFE Reparable Reusable FISHING GEAR FISHING GEAR FISHING GEAR COLLECTION REUSE/REPURPOSE Fish Pond Filter, Volley Net, YES Animal Husbandry Cage, Gardening Wall Net Repair Business NO END OF LIFE END OF LIFE FISHING FISHING GEAR GEAR RECYCLING REPAIRMENT Fisherman PLASTIC PELLET REPAIRED RESIDUE OF Kite Industry, FISHING GEAR FISHING GEAR Raffia (but not economical), REPAIRMENT Dish Sponge, Handline Fishing Gear, Plastic Pellet (for importer) Figure 17: Schematic diagram of the fate of EOLFG observed in Pekalongan and Bajomulyo. 16 https://kkp.go.id/djpt/ppnsibolga/artikel/9516-operasionalkan-layanan-perbaikan-jaring-di-netlof-ppn-sibolga Some incidental reuse of EOLFG was observed. In PPN Kend- of the selling price, fishing gear recycling in its current form ari, waste gears were reused for agriculture or aquaculture appears to offer only marginal profitability, and is potentially purposes, whereas in PPS Pelabuhan Ratu damaged nets are loss-making once the capital costs of machinery are account- often resold between fishermen. In almost all locations sur- ed for. Greater economies of scale, increased supply (and veyed, damaged nets were reused as fencing for agriculture. hence lower cost) of raw materials, and/or cheaper processing PPN Kendari and PPS Bitung are both equipped with plastic costs are required to enhance the profitability of net recycling recycling facilities (Figure 18), but these are not actively used enterprises. due to administrative issues. The port authorities have now started to engage with plastic recycling businesses outside the ports to help manage these facilities. A major challenge that has been identified in these locations is the distance to plastic recycling plants, resulting in high transportation costs and limiting the economic feasibility of recycling efforts. It is estimated that there are less than ten plastic recycling businesses in Indonesia. The main fishing net recycling cen- 051 ters are located in Java (Cirebon, Tegal, Tangerang and Bekasi) and Kalimantan. While PP and PE are the main materials recy- cled in the general waste stream, nylon is the dominant recy- clable material in fishing waste. Polyester cannot be recycled, but can be reused by braiding into rope. A fishing net purchasing agent from a net recycling business in Bekasi, West Java was interviewed during this study and provided information about the materials recycled, the prod- ucts produced, and the operational costs (Table 14). In this business, the cost of purchasing raw materials accounts for 60 percent of the selling price of the final product, the recy- cling process accounts for 27 percent, and transport costs account for 6 percent. While the 95 percent process efficiency Figure 18: Plastic recycling facilities in PPS Kendari (left) and represents a good yield, with a gross profit of only 7 percent PPS Bitung (right). Table 14: Case study of a fishing net recycling business in Bekasi. Gear types recycled All ‘end of life’ gillnets made of nylon in a clean and dry condition Source End of Pekalongan, Central Java Life nets Cirebon, West Java Sukabumi, West Java Indramayu, West Java Year established Price paid Pekalongan IDR 7,000 (USD 0.47) / kg 2017 Sukabumi IDR 6,000 (USD 0.41) / kg Indramayu IDR 7,500 (USD 0.51) / kg Recycling capacity Equipment Crusher and Injection molding machine (nylon pelletizing machine) 40mt Recycling Process Net crushing, washing, drying and pelletizing. R AW M AT E R I A L / M O NT H Residue 5% of the input. This residue is sent to the plastic waste extruder for further plastic (results in 38 mt of pellets) extruding. Extruded plastic is then fed back into the recycling process. The cost for plastic extruding is IDR 4,000 IDR (USD 0.27) / kg Selling price of plastic pellet 12,000 Recycling cost Transport/pick up IDR 500 - 1,000 (USD 0.03 – 0.06) / kg IDR (USD 0.82) / kg Recycling IDR 2,000 – 3,000 (USD 0.14 – 0.28) / kg Competitors 1 - 10 Recycled product Plastic (nylon) pellet RECYCLING Market Kite Industries BUSINESS ENTITIES Handline fishing gear industries Plastic pellet industries (exported to Southeast Asia countries, such as Thailand) Source: PTHI fieldwork (Interview with an unnamed company in Jati Asih Bekasi). 052 Figure 19: A plastic waste collector in Pelalongan who currently focuses on plastic bottles and packaging. Collectors need to perceive a clear economic benefit from main constraint to increasing the weight of EOLFG recycled in collecting and processing waste fishing gear compared to Indonesia. Other challenges include: other plastic waste, which is plentiful and has more economic value. One of the respondents interviewed during this study • Contaminated net waste. The condition of fishing gear was a plastic waste (PE, PP) collector who has run his own waste is generally contaminated by sludge, fish flesh, business in Pelalongan for more than 15 years (Figure 19). fish blood, plastic, and other materials. Cleaning must This collector does not currently collect fishing gear nets, and be performed before materials are transported to the instead focusses on recycling plastic bottles and packaging. recycling plant The collector stated that he has limited knowledge about the market for EOLFG, and that price stability, market stability and • Unsorted net waste. During the field surveys it was ob- market accessibility are important considerations that would served that net waste is usually a mixed assemblage of influence his decision to collect fishing gear in the future. nylon and PE nets. In many cases sorting is challenging, because of the difficulty of identifying net materials. PT Nelayan Samudra Jaya is a plastic molding company in Pekalongan, Central Java that uses plastic pellets to manu- FATE OF FISHING GEARS facture synthetic raffia that replace the traditional use of raffia Based on the information obtained during field surveys, esti- palm leaves to make rough woven products such as hats, rugs, mates were made of the proportion of fishing gears by type or broom bristles. PT Nelayan Samudra Jaya have success- that are abandoned onshore or at sea, disposed of in landfill, fully trialed the use of plastic pellets derived from recycled or collected and recycled. Implications for the corresponding fishing nets but have yet to confirm that this is commercial- plastic material weight were also considered. ly viable. Similar to the plastic recycling business in Bekasi described above, PT Nelayan Samudra Jaya consider that Interview respondents indicated that 70 percent of fishing EOLFG (and potentially recovered ALDFG) could represent a gears are retained and reused every year (Figure 20), whilst 18 major source of good quality plastic waste material, but have percent are damaged and/ or reach end-of-life and are land- concerns about the current lack of established collection or ed for: (i) storage at the houses of fishermen or on company distribution chains. This, together with competition for good property; (ii) resale to waste collectors; or (iii) final disposal quality waste material from other recycling businesses, is the in landfill. The remaining fishing gears potentially become Table 15: Relative proportions of each fishing gear that are disposed of on land or at sea, based on interview responses obtained during field surveys. Column n indicates the number of gears disposed annually as reported by respondents. Percentages are relative to n. FISHING GEAR n LAND SEA (units) Stored Reused Sold Port Landfill Abandoned Lost Discarded Purse seine 259 25% 42% 1% 25% 0% 2% 5% 0% Cantrang 286 0% 0% 8% 0% 87% 0% 1% 4% Pancing 77 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 55% 45% Gill net 10 10% 0% 70% 0% 10% 10% 0% 0% Bubu trap 32 38% 0% 0% 0% 38% 3% 9% 13% ALDFG, with 11 percent of gears reported to be lost and 1 per- Traps (bubu) also have a relatively high probability of becoming cent discarded at sea every year. ALDFG. Interview respondents indicated that one-quarter of all traps are either abandoned (3 percent), lost (9 percent) or dis- 053 The fate of the waste fishing gears can be divided into two carded (13 percent) at sea. Traps and hook-and-line fishing gears end points: (i) disposed of on land; or (ii) disposed of at sea. are relatively cheap, and hence fishers have little incentive to in- Disposal on land includes storage at the houses of fishermen vest time and effort into preserving or recovering gears. or on company property, internal reuse, reselling to collectors, and final disposal in landfills. Disposal at sea includes gears Purse seines and gillnets were reported to have the highest that have been abandoned, accidentally lost or deliberately rates of reuse and recycling. This may be a result of both gears discarded. being usually made from PA (Nylon) which is considered to be a medium value material. These high reuse and recycling Hook-and-line (pancing) is the gear that is reported to most likely rates are, however, location dependent. For example, high become ALDFG (Table 15). Interview respondents indicated that rates of reuse and recycling of Danish seines (cantrang) were 90 percent of broken hook-and-line fishing gears are either dis- not observed, despite these gears being made from the same carded (45 percent) or lost (55 percent). However, it should be material as purse seines and gillnets. Danish seines were pre- noted that the actual volumes of plastic material are low. dominantly found in Sulawesi, where the number of collectors and recyclers is relatively low. Lost at sea 11% Discarded at sea 1% Damaged 18% In Use 70% Figure 20: Proportion of in-use fishing gears that generate ALDFG, EOLFG, or are retained in use annually, based on interview responses obtained during field surveys. Purse Seine There are seven main brands of purse seine sold in Indonesia (Table 11). The price ranges from 800,000 to 7,000,000 IDR per kg. The high variability in price is likely to be due in part to the variable cost of transporting gears to different ports. The most frequently purchased brands are Ocean (from Taiwan) and Ikan Mas (from Indonesia). Table 11: Main purse seine brands sold in Indonesia, with indicative price and encounter frequency during field surveys BRAND ORIGIN PRICE FREQUENCY % IDR/Kg Sutra Indonesia 1,000,000 1 2 Arida Indonesia 800,000 - 1,000,000 9 17 054 Ocean Taiwan 3,500,000 - 5,000,000 16 31 Superstar - - 1 2 Ikan Mas Indonesia 3,500,000 - 7,000,000 11 21 Eagle Thailand 7,000,000 2 4 United Indonesia 7,000,000 12 23 Hook and line (pancing) Table 12: Main hook and line brands sold in Indonesia, with indicative price. Three main brands of hook and line gear were identified during the field surveys: Supreme, Maguro and Perfex (Table 12). All BRAND ORIGIN PRICE three originate from Japan, and have similar prices ranging from IDR/Unit 200,000 to 500,000 IDR per unit. Supreme Japan 200,000 - 500,000 Maguro Japan 200,000 - 500,000 Danish seine (cantrang) Perfex Japan 200,000 - 500,000 Most respondents interviewed during the field surveys did not know what brand of cantrang they were using (Table 13). Pric- es ranged from 100,000 to 1,000,000 IDR per unit. No Chinese cantrang brands were detected during the field surveys, and no evidence for or against price dumping of nets was found. Table 13: Main trawl brands sold in Indonesia, with indicative price and encounter frequency during field surveys BRAND ORIGIN PRICE FREQUENCY % IDR/Kg United Indonesia 800,000 - 1,000,000 3 14 Unknown Unknown 100,000 - 200,000 19 86 14 http://Fishingnet-Wdfn.Com/Products.Html 15 https://arida.co.id/ 055 056 Risk assessment of fishing gear This study undertook a preliminary assessment of the relative risks of ALDFG impacts arising from the various fishing gears deployed in Indonesia’s fisheries. This assessment aimed to develop, field test and validate methodologies for monitoring and evaluating ALDFG risk, and to evaluate the applicability of these methodologies to the unique context and dynamics of Indonesia’s fisheries. While this risk assessment is based on best available data QUANTITY OF END-OF-LIFE MATERIAL 057 obtained from literature review and field surveys conducted GENERATED during this study, the authors recognize that data limitations The quantity of end-of-life material generated annually was may arise from the limited scope and duration of this study, calculated for each gear type. The total weight of plastic ma- including constraints resulting from the COVID19 pandemic. terials deployed in each gear category (Table 16) was calcu- Consequently, the results of this risk assessment should be lated from the number of fishing units (obtained from national viewed as indicative, and actions to improve primary data fishery statistics) and the average weight of netting, ropes and availability and to regularly reassess ALDFG risk are highly rec- floats in a single gear (see Annex 4 for a detailed breakdown ommended. of these estimates). Gear replacement periods and rates of wear and tear were obtained from interviews with operators. The methodological approach adopted for this risk assess- A quantity risk index (Q) between 1 (low risk) and 5 (high risk) ment is consistent with global norms (e.g., Gilman et al., 2021), was assigned based on the annualized replacement weight and considers three risk factors: (i) quantity of end-of-life (i.e., the weight of EOLFG generated annually) and the per-ves- plastic material generated; (ii) vulnerability to loss and dam- sel weight of gears deployed (i.e., the potential for a small in- age (i.e., likelihood of a specific gear being abandoned, lost crease in fleet size to result in a large increase in weight of or discarded); and (iii) ecological impact. The risk assessment plastic deployed). Purse seine and drifting gillnet fisheries calculates a relative risk index (RR) for each gear type ranging were assessed as generating the greatest quantities of end-of- from 1 (low risk of ALDFG impacts) to 5 (high risk of ALDFG life plastic materials, closely followed by set gillnets, and with impacts). Detailed methodologies are described in Annex 1. traps and pots generating moderate quantities of end-of-life plastic material (Figure 21). Table 16: Total weight of fishing gears deployed and replaced for each gear category, with proportion of Indonesia’s total fishing fleet indicated. Weight Replacement Annual Annual Annualized No % delpoyed % period replacement replacement replacement Vessel Vessel (tonnes) weight (years) (%) (tonnes) (tonnes) Score 01 Encircling nets 8,265 4.9 47,212 56.30 7 15 7,081 13,824 5.0 02 Seine nets 10,217 6.1 805 0.96 5 20 159 318 1.0 03 Trawls 2,801 1.7 271 0.32 4 25 67 156 1.0 05 Lift nets 8,630 5.1 1,114 1.33 6 10 111 297 1.0 06 Falling gear 123 0.1 20 0.02 3 10 2 9 1.0 07 Gillnets and 67,032 39.9 28,746 34.28 3 30 8,624 18,206 4.0 entangling nets 08 Pots and traps 18,397 11.0 2,015 2.40 7 15 302 1,310 2.0 09 Hook and lines 51,565 30.7 3,647 4.35 4 10 365 1,581 1.0 10 Miscellaneous 954 0.6 28 0.03 1 10 3 16 1.0 other gear 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 0.20 02 02.2.1. Danish seine 0.20 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 0.20 058 02.2.4. Boat seine* 0.20 02.2.5. Boat seine* 0.20 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 0.20 03 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 0.20 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 0.20 05.1. Portable lift net 0.20 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 0.20 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 0.20 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 0.20 06.1 Cast net 0.20 06 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 0.80 07 07.2. Drift gillnet GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 0.40 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 0.40 08 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 0.20 09 09.3. Set longline 0.20 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 0.20 09.5. Trolling line 0.20 10.5. Pushnet 0.20 10 10.6. Scoopnet 0.20 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR Quantity 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Figure 21: Gear-specific risk associated with the quantity of end-of-life material generated annually. Purse seine fisheries deploy 47,212 t of plastic material, rep- gear by target species, and hence reducing fishing efficiency. resenting 56 percent of all plastic material deployed in Indo- Thus a fisher must consider the tradeoffs between materials nesia’s fisheries. In contrast, purse seine vessels represent that achieve the desired catch rate for the species targeted, only 4.9 percent (8,265 vessels) of the total fleet of motorized and those that maximize the strength, resilience and longevity inboard fishing vessels. Incidental wear and tear results in the of the fishing gear. replacement of 7,081 t of plastic material annually, with this quantity increasing to 13,824 t when scheduled full gear re- On the other hand, capture techniques involving chasing, herd- placement was also considered. 17 ing and surrounding fish such as trawls, seines and purse seines are typically made of more robust materials that can Gillnet and entangling net fisheries deploy 34.3 percent withstand the higher forces that are placed on netting during (28,764 t) of the plastic material in Indonesia’s fisheries, and the capture process and that are generated during mechanical represent 40 percent (67,032 vessels) of the total motorized retrieval. For those fishing gears that operate on the seabed inboard fishing fleet. Incidental wear and tear results in the re- (e.g., bottom trawls and demersal seines), construction mate- placement of 8,264 t of plastic material annually, increasing to rials are selected that can withstand the forces of towing and 18,206 t when scheduled full gear replacement is considered. a reasonable level of wear and tear from abrasion of netting as it is towed over the seabed. Heavier materials (e.g., thicker 059 Hooks and line fisheries deploy just 4.3 percent (3,647 t) of the twines with increased breaking strain) are selected if the sea- plastic material in Indonesia’s fisheries, despite representing bed characteristics change from sand and mud to shingle and 30.7 percent (51,565 vessels) of the total motorized inboard rock. However, the use of heavier materials requires a greater fishing fleet. Incidental wear and tear results in the replace- towing force to move the net through the water which in turn ment of 365 t of plastic material annually, increasing to 1,581 t leads to higher fuel consumption and higher operating costs. when scheduled full gear replacement is considered. Although a vessel operator has the option to reduce towing speed, this can reduce fishing efficiency. Accordingly, a vessel Trap fisheries deploy 2.4 percent (2,015 t) of the plastic ma- operator must decide which combination of materials and op- terial in Indonesia’s fisheries. However the per-vessel weight erating characteristics provides the optimal balance between of plastic material is relatively high, with these fisheries repre- operating costs and catch rates. senting only 11 percent (18,397 vessels) of the total motorized inboard fishing fleet. Incidental wear and tear results in the re- Vulnerability to damage is also influenced by the degree of placement of 302 t of plastic material annually, increasing to mechanization on the vessel. Some fishing gears are set and 1,310 t when scheduled full gear replacement is considered. retrieved by hand (e.g., pole and line gear, handlines, hand set gillnets and pots), while others use mechanized winches of VULNERABILITY TO DAMAGE AND LOSS varying size. For gears that become snagged on the seabed, ALDFG generation is driven in part by the behavior of vessel mechanized winches are capable of generating high loads that operators through, for example, the deliberate discarding and exceed the breaking strains of ropes and netting and may re- disposal of fishing gears at sea even when such disposal are sult in damage. prohibited under international law. However, accidental loss and damage are equally important contributors to ALDFG gen- Vulnerability to loss eration, and are influenced by the design, construction and op- The most common type of fishing gear loss is typically as- erating characteristics of the fishing gear and its vessel. sociated with stealth fishing gears. Stealth fishing gears are set by the vessel and then left for several hours up to several Vulnerability to damage weeks before the vessel returns to retrieve them. These gears Of the ten major fishing gear categories used in Indonesia, include set anchored gillnets and trammel nets, set anchored some have inherent weaknesses that make them particularly longlines and pots. Losses may occur for a variety of reasons, vulnerable to damage. For example, fishing gears that operate including: by stealth (e.g., gillnets) are made from light, flexurally com- pliant materials that are difficult to detect by fish. These ma- • An inability to re-locate set gillnets and pots due to limited terials typically have low breaking strengths, and are readily navigational skills or limited equipment to re-locate the damaged should nets unintentionally come into contact with set gear; seabed obstructions during setting or retrieval. Modifying gear • Setting gillnets and traps without adequately considering design to increase the breaking strength and minimize risk of parameters such as water depth, currents and tides, all of damage often has the undesired consequence of reducing which can lead to surface marker floats becoming sub- flexural stiffness, increasing visibility and detectability of the merged and non-detectable, or cause significant move- 17 In addition to replacement of materials through wear and tear, vessel operators also have a schedule for full gear replacement. The schedule for such replacements varies according to gear type. ment of the fishing gear from its set location (e.g., due to 5-point scale for likelihood of occurrence (1 = unlikely, 5 = fre- king tides); or quent), and for severity of impact to the gear (1 = negligible, 5 = • Interactions with other vessels, for example where towed catastrophic). An overall vulnerability index (V) was calculated gears such as trawls and seines operate on the same as the average likelihood multiplied by the average severity. A fishing grounds as set gears such as gillnets, longlines full description of the vulnerability assessment methodology or pots, there is an elevated risk of the towed gears run- is described in Annex 1, including details of all 14 variables as- ning over the set gears, particularly if set gears are poorly sessed. The rationale for the awarded risk assessment scores marked. is presented in Annex 6, and complete likelihood and severity scorings for all variables are presented in Annex 5. Overall vulnerability assessment Each fishing gear was evaluated against 14 variables that The fishing gear used in Indonesia that are most vulnerable contribute to wear, tear and subsequent damage or loss (e.g., to damage and loss (Figure 22) are: (i) plastic pots; (ii) set contact with seabed obstructions and poor maintenance), and anchored gillnets; and (iii) set anchored trammel nets. High two exogenous factors that impact all fishing fleets (severe vulnerability to damage and loss was associated with pas- weather and fleet separation). Each variable was scored on a sive fishing gears that (i) operate without the attendance of 060 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 4.2 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines 4.1 ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 2.5 02 02.2.1. Danish seine 7.0 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 5.1 02.2.4. Boat seine* 6.2 02.2.5. Boat seine* 5.8 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 7.2 03 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 5.2 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 6.8 05.1. Portable lift net 1.2 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 2.6 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 2.4 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 2.3 06.1 Cast net 06 2.5 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 9.0 07 07.2. Drift gillnet 4.9 GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 9.1 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 08 9.6 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 4.0 09 09.3. Set longline 4.4 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 3.6 09.5. Trolling line 2.1 10.5. Pushnet 3.6 10 10.6. Scoopnet MISCELLANEOUS 1.9 OTHER GEAR Vulnerability 0 5 10 15 20 25 Figure 22: Gear-specific vulnerability to damage and loss. the vessel; (ii) have relatively long soak times, often exceeding • Trawls. Moderate vulnerability to damage and loss is as- 24 hours; (iii) operate through stealth using lightly constructed sociated with trawls that operate in contact with the sea- materials to entrap fish (e.g., gillnets and entangling nets); and bed such as demersal otter trawls (V = 7.2) and shrimp (iv) are set on the seabed. Factors influencing the vulnerability trawls (V = 6.6). This study assumed that bottom trawls of each gear type are summarized in the paragraphs below. (including shrimp trawls) are designed and operated for use on smooth-medium ground, and vulnerability scores • Pots. Plastic pots are the fishing gears that are most vul- for damage and loss would need to be increased if trawls nerable to damage and loss in Indonesia, due to the qual- are towed at relatively high speed over rough and broken ity of materials used in construction. Similar to bottom ground. Deep water bottom trawls targeting fish in very set gillnets, pots operate in the absence of a vessel, with deep water (>1,000 m) on seamounts are particularly relatively long soak times and in contact with the seabed. prone to damage and loss. Midwater trawls, by their na- While the gears are passive, when large numbers of pots ture, operate off the seabed, are less likely to encounter are set from a mainline there can be considerable abrasion seabed obstructions or set anchored fishing gears, and to the mainline and pots as gears are retrieved and hauled hence are less vulnerable (V = 5.2) to damage and loss onboard. The level of abrasion depends on substrate, wa- then bottom trawls. Notwithstanding, specialized midwa- ter depth and the number of pots deployed. During this ter trawls for fishing on seamounts may be particularly 061 study, there was insufficient data to assess vulnerability susceptible to catastrophic loss when making contact for different pot designs and different fisheries. Instead, with hard substrates, and the vulnerability of such gears the vulnerability assessment assumed that pots were of should be reassessed if fisheries are present in Indonesia. the type used to target blue swimming crab and which are in widespread use in Indonesia. These pots are relatively • Purse seines and encircling nets. Purse seines and en- light, collapsible traps with light polyethylene netting and circling nets have low vulnerability to damage and loss (V a frame constructed from low grade steel with high iron = 4.2). Although fleets have high levels of mechanization content covered in plastic. for hauling and setting of the gear, and early onset wear and tear is likely, fishing gears are typically well main- • Gill and entangling nets. Relatively high vulnerability to tained due to their high cost and the high value of catch- damage and loss was assessed for bottom set gillnets es. Damages associated with poor hauling and shooting (V = 9.8) and trammel nets (V = 9.1). Drifting gillnet (V = (e.g., propeller wrap) do occur but are not common. Not- 4.9) are slightly less vulnerable to damage and loss com- withstanding, moderate routine damage to netting, bunt pared to bottom set gillnets (V = 9.8). Lower vulnerability and other components can result in high levels of waste scores were attributed to pelagic gears due to (i) a signifi- on board. The likelihood of damage through interaction cantly reduced risk of encountering other gears; (ii) a high with other fishing gears or vessels is low because purse likelihood of the vessel being in attendance, and often at- seines are set off the seabed, are always tethered to the tached to the gear; and (iii) relatively shorter soak times vessel, and sophisticated navigation and echolocation compared to set anchored gillnets. Moderate scores were equipment is carried onboard. achieved for damage resulting from poor seamanship and navigation (poor setting protocols associated with • Beach seines. Beach seines have very low vulnerability to fleet operations) and loss associated with setting and re- damage and loss (V = 2.5). These fishing gear are set in trieving gear in rough weather. known areas in relatively shallow water and close to the shore. In the event of problems occurring during setting • Boat seines. Boat seines that make contact with the sea- and hauling, there is a high likelihood of gear being re- bed such as dogol (V = 7.0), cantrang (V = 6.2) and lam- trieved with minimal risk of damage. para dasar (V = 5.8) have moderate vulnerability to dam- age and loss. Boat seines are designed for towing across • Hook and line. All subcategories of hook and line fishing relatively flat seabeds, and lighter materials are generally were considered to have relatively low vulnerability to used in construction in comparison to e.g., trawls. The damage and loss. least vulnerable of all demersal boat seines was lampara dasar due to its use close to shore and low power due to limited mechanization. Pelagic seines such as payang (V = 5.1) have even lower vulnerability to damage and loss due to their operation off the seabed and away from potential contact with seabed obstructions or other set fishing gears. LIKELIHOOD OF ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS ALDFG has the potential to cause significant environmental impacts. Each fishing gear type was scored from 1 (low likeli- hood) to 5 (high likelihood) with reference to the four common- ly accepted ecological impacts of ALDFG: (i) ghost fishing; (ii) entanglement of marine life; (iii) rafting of invasive species; and (iv) smothering of habitats. In the absence of available data on the ecological impacts of ALDFG in Indonesia’s fisher- ies, scorings were based on published literature for compara- ble fisheries worldwide. Ghost fishing is the continued catching of target and non-tar- get species by ALDFG. It is environmentally detrimental, and the fish caught by ghost fishing are wasted. Active fishing gears are dragged through the water, usually by the fishing vessel, and hence the catching process generally ceases once 062 the gear is no longer attached. Consequently, ghost fishing is a much more prevalent issue for passive fishing gears such as longlines, gill nets, or traps and pots than for active fishing gears such as trawls and seines. Scraps of netting or other materials discarded by a vessel, whilst not classified as a fish- ing gear, may also contribute to ghost fishing. Entanglement is ‘an interaction between marine life and ALD- FG whereby the loops and openings within the ALDFG material entangle animal appendages or entrap animals’ (Laist, 1997). Entanglements can result in death or injury, however obser- vations of scarred individuals indicate that some entangled animals may also die from infection and secondary compli- cations (Hanni and Pyle, 2000). Entanglement of marine ani- mals by ALDFG is largely associated with marine mammals, reptiles, elasmobranchs and seabirds (Figure 23), and is re­ cognized as a major conservation issue (Stelfox et al., 2016). Unlike ghost fishing, where capture and entrapment is often associated with the main fishing element (e.g., gillnet or pot), entanglement can be associated with other components of the fishing gear including anchor lines, float lines and scraps of floating plastic material that can become hooked around the neck, body, limbs, or through the mouth of marine wildlife. Figure 23: Illustrative examples of ALDFG environmental impacts around the world. Sources: NPR, SWOT, FAO. ALDFG may entangle marine mammals, Rafting of invasive species occurs when ALDFG create an arti- reptiles, elasmobranchs, seabirds and other marine wildlife, and represents a major conservation issue in addition to wasting commercially important fish ficial habitat that adds new surfaces for colonization by organ- stocks via the process of ghost fishing. isms (Gündoğdu et al., 2017; Harrison et al., 2011), including both mobile and sessile species (CBD, 2012). Depending on its size and structure (Miralles et al., 2018), ALDFG may car- ry species beyond their native distribution, and hence can be considered potential vectors of invasive species (Rech et al. 2016) that may increase biological invasions and challenges biodiversity conservation (Simberloff et al., 2013). Smothering of habitats by ALDFG causes direct physical impacts (Gregory, 2009) that include scouring, breaking and otherwise damaging sensitive habitats (Figure 24) such as coral reefs or seagrass beds (Dameron et al., 2007; Donohue et al., 2001). If gears become entangled, they may cause fur- ther damage by pulling, breaking, covering sessile organisms OVERALL ECOLOGICAL RISK or obstructing suspension feeders such as sponges and cor- An overall relative ecological risk rating (RR) was calculated als (Consoli et al., 2020). ALDFG may alter microhabitats by for each gear type following the approach described by Gilman e.g., obstructing reef crevices, or entrap fine sediments that et al. (2021) (see Annex 1). A weighting factor was applied to inhibit water flow, creating anoxic areas, which, if prolonged, ecological risk to emphasize the potential for adverse out- can cause substantial mortalities (Gilman, 2015; Levin et al., comes and to reduce the likelihood of false negatives due to 2009). gear quantities being underestimated. Gilnets and entangling nets have the highest relative risk rating due to the high quan- Gillnets and entangling nets were assessed as having the high- tities deployed in Indonesia’s fisheries, the relative high vulner- est likelihood of ecological risk (Figure 25) due to their light ability of these gears to loss and damage, and the high likelihood materials and ability to persist in the water column for extend- of ecological impacts arising from ghost fishing, entanglement, ed periods during which ghost fishing, entanglement and raft- rafting of invasive species or smothering of habitats. ing of invasive species can occur. Pots and traps were also assessed as having a high likelihood of causing ecological Purse seines and encircling nets were assessed as having high impacts, due to their robust materials and ability to self-bait relative risk rating due to the high quantities deployed across and continue ghost fishing for extended periods of time. Oth- Indonesia’s fisheries and the high per-vessel weights of plastic 063 er gear types are typically constructed from heavier materials material, and hence potential for small increases in fleet size and settle out of the water column within a relatively short pe- to result in large increases in the quantity of plastic material riod of time. Consequently, while smothering of habitats may deployed. However, it should be noted that the small number occur, the risk of impacts arising from ghost fishing, entangle- of vessels operating these gears in Indonesia, combined with ment and rafting of invasive species is relatively lower. moderate vulnerability to damage and loss and moderate like- lihood of ecological damage mean that these fisheries could represent low hanging fruit for preliminary ALDFG prevention and mitigation strategies. Traps and pots were assessed as having high relative risk due to high per-vessel weights of plastic material, relatively high vulnerability to loss and relatively high likelihood of ecological impact due to the potential for self-baiting and ghost fishing over prolonged periods. Figure 24: ALDFG may be colonized and act as a vector for invasive species (left) or cause physical damage to benthic habitats (right). Source: Werner et al., 2016. 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 2.0 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines 2.0 ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 1.2 02 02.2.1. Danish seine 1.5 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 1.8 02.2.4. Boat seine* 1.8 064 02.2.5. Boat seine* 2.0 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 2.2 03 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 2.0 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 2.0 05.1. Portable lift net 1.0 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 1.5 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 1.5 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 1.2 06.1 Cast net 06 1.2 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 3.8 07 07.2. Drift gillnet 3.2 GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 3.5 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 08 2.8 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 1.0 09 09.3. Set longline 1.5 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 1.8 09.5. Trolling line 1.0 10.5. Pushnet 1.8 10 10.6. Scoopnet MISCELLANEOUS 1.0 OTHER GEAR Impact 0 1 2 3 4 5 Figure 25: Gear-specific likelihood of ecological impacts of ALDFG. 01.1.1. Single vessle purse seine 0.51 01 01.1.2. Group operated purse seines 0.49 ENCIRCLING NETS 02.1. Beach seine 0.04 02 02.2.1. Danish seine 0.16 SEINE NETS 02.2.3. Boat seine* 0.12 02.2.4. Boat seine* 0.15 065 02.2.5. Boat seine* 0.15 03.1.2. Demersal otter trawl 0.20 03 03.2.1. Midwater otter trawl 0.14 TRAWLS 03.2.3. Shrimp trawl 0.17 05.1. Portable lift net 0.00 05 05.2.1. Boat operated lift net* 0.06 LIFT NETS 05.2.2. Boat operated lift net* 0.05 05.3. Shore - operated stationary lift net 0.04 06.1 Cast net 0.04 06 FALLING GEAR 07.1. Set gillnet anchored 07 07.2. Drift gillnet 0.64 GILLNETS AND 07.5. Trammel net 0.51 ENTAGLING NETS 08.2. Pot 0.49 08 POTS AND TRAPS 09.1.1. Handline and hand operated poleand-line* 0.06 09 09.3. Set longline 0.10 HOOK AND LINES 09.4. Drifting longlines 0.10 09.5. Trolling line 0.02 10.5. Pushnet 0.09 10 10.6. Scoopnet 0.02 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR Relative risk rating 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Figure 26: Gear-specific overall relative risk rating. 066 Fishing gear waste management initiatives in Indonesia This chapter provides an overview of existing fishing gear management measures and initiatives in Indonesia, and briefly explores gaps and opportunities in the context of the global experiences and best practices presented in Annex 8. POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS 067 MARPOL Annex V implementation in fishing ports • Indonesia has benefitted from the guidance provided on The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution port reception facilities which have been established at from Ships (MARPOL) is the main international convention the 23 PPN and PPS, and this may provide a foundation addressing pollution of the marine environment by maritime for follow up work on EOLFG and ALDFG reporting; shipping. MARPOL currently consists of six technical Annex- • The requirements under MARPOL Annex V Regulation es that address various categories of pollutants via binding 10.3 to implement a garbage management plan apply regulations. Annex V addresses the pollution by garbage from to only 858 fishing vessels that are larger than 100 GT, ships, and entered into force in 1988. while the requirement to carry and fill out a garbage re- cord book does not apply to any of Indonesia’s 171,744 Government Regulation 81/2012 on Domestic Waste Manage- inboard or 181,178 outboard motor vessels; ment implements MARPOL Annex V in Indonesia, and requires • MARPOL Annex V in its present form is not sufficiently all public ports to conduct waste separation, waste collection tailored to Indonesia’s fishing operations and practices and temporary waste storage. It also outlines the subsequent and will not significantly reduce plastic leakage from In- treatment of waste, which includes compaction, composting, donesian fishing operations due to the lack of applicable recycling and energy recovery. reporting obligations; and • As a more expeditious solution that is tailored to the local Presidential Regulation 83/2018 on Marine Debris Manage- context, the Government of Indonesia may wish to im- ment addresses the management of plastic waste from mar- prove the reporting requirements of its national fleet—es- itime activities and outlines targets to establish waste recep- pecially those operating within Indonesia’s EEZ—through tion facilities at 112 public ports, establish waste handling the development of national policy, laws and regulations facilities at 23 PPN and PPS, and to implement ISO 14001 that build upon and go beyond the requirements of MAR- Environmental Management standards in 67 public ports POL Annex V. and 22 PPN/PPS. MMAF, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) and local governments are also obliged to National Plans of Action develop Standard Operating Procedures for the operation of Indonesia recently introduced two National Plans of Action ‘eco-friendly fisheries and aquaculture’. (NPOA) of relevance to fishing and aquaculture gear waste: The NPOA on Plastic Marine Debris 2017-2025 is overseen by Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 26/ the Coordinating Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Investment PERMEP-KP/2021 requires all fishing vessels to: (i) not dis- and adopts five main pillars: pose of fishing gears or fishing tools at sea; (ii) to land and • Improving behavioral change; report damaged and unrepairable fishing gears and tools at • Reducing land-based leakage; ports so that they can be recycled; and (iii) report missing fish- • Reducing sea-based leakage; ing gears and tools at the time of entering port. • Reducing plastics production and use; and • Enhancing funding mechanisms, policy reform and law A detailed review of MARPOL Annex V and its applicability to enforcement. addressing plastic leakage from Indonesia’s fishing fleets is presented in Annex 9. The main conclusions include: Programs responding to these pillars have been developed at Responsibility is reported to be in development. Plastic waste the international (to address transboundary pollution), nation- trade is starting to be addressed via ministerial-level laws, al and local levels, with the ultimate goal of reducing marine while sub-national governments have started to issue instru- plastic debris by 70 percent by 2025. The reduction of waste ments to limit single-use plastics (MoEF, 2020). leakage from activities at sea is to be addressed via: (i) waste reception facilities at ports; (ii) bilateral & regional collabora- These recent developments and stated commitments show a tions; (iii) collecting plastic waste from coastal and marine strong level of political will from the Government of Indonesia areas; and (iv) plastic waste management in tourism. There to address issues related to plastic waste, and the potential has also been awareness-raising to change behavior through for resources to be available to address ALDFG, particularly school education, information campaigns, and beach and when viewed as part of efforts to address marine debris and coastal clean-up actions.18 to improve circularity for fishing gear. Specific activities that are already underway under the coordi- To effectively tackle ALDFG and reduce its contribution to nation of MMAF include: plastic marine debris, certain initiatives (e.g., enhancing • Organizing the “Indonesian Maritime School” or “Sekolah awareness, improving waste management, and undertaking Bahari Indonesia” (24 activities) clean-up operations) should be integrated with activities and 068 • Waste management within estuaries (13 estuaries); objectives under the NPOAs. Some sector-specific develop- • Construction of waste management facilities and infra- ments will also be required to address the key characteristics structure within PPS and PPN (23 PPS/ PPN); of fishing gear waste, such as the risk of ghost fishing, and • Implementation of ISO 14000 Environmental Manage- the use of multi-use and durable materials that result in higher ment standards for waste and waste management within costs of separation, cleaning and recycling when compared to PPS and PPN (22 PPS/PPN); packaging and other consumer plastics. • Preparation of standard operating procedures for environ- mentally friendly capture fisheries (1 Ministerial Regula- tion); • Preparation of standard operating procedures for envi- ronmentally friendly aquaculture activities (1 directorate general regulation); • Construction of temporary disposal facilities (Tempat Pembuangan Sampah [TPS] or landfill) or recycling cen- ters on the outermost small islands (TPS in 29 islands); • Organizing the National Movement to clean beaches and seas or “Gerakan Nasional Bersih Pantai dan Laut“ (24 lo- cations); and • Research on marine debris pollution and its impacts (11 WPPs) The NPOA on Plastic Pollution was published in 2020. It supports Indonesia’s National Action Plan on Marine Debris, Presidential Regulation No. 97/2017 on National Policy and Strategy for the Management of Domestic Waste and Domes- tic Waste Equivalents, and other efforts towards achieving a 70 percent reduction in the nation’s marine plastic debris by 2025. It also looks beyond 2025, with longer-term objectives to achieve near-zero plastic pollution by 2040. Various efforts to restrict the use of plastics have started to be implemented. Presidential Regulation No. 97/2017 sets the target of 30 percent waste reduction and 70 percent waste handling by 2025. Plastic waste management is also ad- dressed under Presidential Regulation No. 83/2018 on Marine Debris Management, and a regulation on Extended Producer 18 http://www.unesco.or.id/publication/SC_Retreat/4_MarineDebrisIndonesia.pdf ALDFG PREVENTION It is more cost-effective to focus first on measures to prevent ALDFG before looking at measures to mitigate impacts or recover ALDFG (GGGI 2021a). Current initiatives in Indonesia that have the potential to contribute to ALDFG prevention are summarized below. Marine spatial planning A well-established marine spatial plan (MSP) framework can contribute to ALDFG prevention by minimizing damage and losses arising from gear conflicts or interactions with other marine users. Effective MSP implementation, notification and zoning enforcement are essential if the contributions to ALD- FG prevention are to be realized. 069 MSP in Indonesia continues to develop. Law 27/2007 on the Management of Coastal and Small Island Areas and Govern- ment Regulation 32/219 on National Marine Spatial Planning provide the overarching regulatory framework. Government Regulation 21/2021 on the Implementation of Marine Spatial Planning outlines the roles and responsibilities of designated Figure 27: ALDFG socialisation and awareness ministries, which are implemented via ministerial-level regu- raising at PPN Ternate in 2017. Source: http:// lations such as Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs pipp.djpt.kkp.go.id/detail_berita/8077 and Fisheries 28/PERMEN-KP/2021. Provincial governments are tasked with developing and implementing Zoning Plans FG, and contribute to changing public perceptions and behaviors. for Coastal Zone and Small Islands (RZWP3K, Rencana Zonasi Programs should target all relevant stakeholders, including the Wilayah Pesisir dan Pulau-pulau Kecil), with coastal zones ex- government agencies tasked with implementing ALDFG man- tending up to 12 nm from the shore. agement measures and the fishermen whose gear stewardship practices play a critical role in preventing ALDFG generation. Usage of maritime zones is governed by Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 54/PERMEN-KP/2020 Awareness-raising to prevent ALDFG has been conducted via on Location Permit, Management Permit and Location Permit local-level pilot initiatives, such as in PPN Ternate.20 As part of at Sea and Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and the NPOA-MPD 2017-2025 socialization and campaigns to re- Fisheries 53/PERMEN-KP/2020 on Administration of Permits duce ghost fishing tool place from October 31 to November 6, for the Utilization of Small Islands and Surrounding Waters for 2017 PPN Ternate (Figure 27). The initiative included two days Foreign Investment. of face-to-face contact with fishermen and business actors accompanied by the dissemination of brochures, posters and Indonesia has developed a national MSP, inter-regional plans, other materials, followed by clean-up of surrounding beaches provincial plans, outermost islands plans, and has defined Na- and the harbor in collaboration with local communities and tional Strategic Areas. According to MSPGlobal 2030, the na- 19 diving clubs. tional plan is approved and implementation is underway, with the lower-level plans currently in progress. All the provincial MMAF has established Fishery Extension (Penyuluh Peri- RZWP3K zoning plans will be enacted through provincial gov- kanan) positions under the Agency for Research and Human ernment regulations, with 26 of Indonesia’s 34 provinces hav- Resources (BRSDM, Badan Riset dan Sumber Daya Manusia), ing enacted these regulations. Offshore waters beyond 12 nm who are responsible for communicating and socializing poli- are addressed under a single plan under the responsibility of cies and regulations to stakeholders, and supporting provincial MMAF. Plans are reviewed and revised every five years. government to manage coastal areas. BRSDM and its Fishery Extension officers could play an important role if a national Awareness raising program for ALDFG education and awareness-raising were to Stakeholder education and awareness-raising are important be developed, possibly linked to ALDFG retrieval and clean-up tools to build knowledge about the issues surrounding ALD- operations. 19 https://www.mspglobal2030.org/msp-roadmap/msp-around-the-world/asia/indonesia/ 20 http://pipp.djpt.kkp.go.id/detail_berita/8077 Certification and eco-labels While Government Regulation 27/2021 includes specific claus- Certification bodies and eco-labels establish market incen- es addressing vessel design, including fish hold and wastewa- tives to prevent ALDFG (Gilman et al., 2022). As such, they hold ter system design, currently there are no clauses addressing tremendous potential to bridge the gap between consumer gear storage and securing systems. These regulations could concern and industry action on ALDFG, while also strengthen- be amended to include specifications for gear storage and ing compliance with national, regional and international obli- securing systems in order to reduce the likelihood of gear be- gations, and helping to differentiate fisheries that implement ing lost overboard. It may be costly and difficult to implement best practices (EIA, 2022). these changes retrospectively, but these requirements could be applied to the design of new fishing vessels entering the The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) began to establish a fleet, especially those larger than 30 GT. This process could presence in Indonesia in 2018. By 2021 three fisheries had be supported by the decision taken by the APEC Ocean and gained MSC certification, 20 suppliers had chain-of-custody Fisheries Working Group in August 2021, under the auspices certifications, and numerous fishery improvement projects are of the APEC Roadmap on Marine Debris, to strengthen capaci- underway. Strong support from MMAF has boosted interest in ty for vessel innovation in Indonesia to combat marine debris. MSC certification in Indonesia. MSC’s Fish for Good21 is a four- year program that supports fisheries in Indonesia to improve 070 towards sustainable practices and potential certification. MSC ALDFG MITIGATION has also supported FAD-tracking within Indonesia’s tuna fish- eries. In 2020 MSC began to review its standard in response to Current initiatives in Indonesia that growing interest on the issue of ALDFG, and an explicit ghost gear scoring element will be incorporated into an upcoming have the potential to contribute to revision to the standard which is due next year (MSC, 2021). mitigating the impacts of ALDFG Vessel design on marine habitats and wildlife, Effective vessel design can help to prevent ALDFG generation. including by ghost fishing, are Amongst the main direct drivers of ALDFG generation is insuf- summarized below. ficient storage space onboard for all gear that are used (e.g., when space used to store gear when starting a trip is subse- Gear design and materials quently used as a fish hold) or for worn and damaged compo- Improvements in gear design can mitigate the impacts of ALD- nents replaced during a trip (Gilman et al., 2022). FG on marine habitats and wildlife by, for example, minimizing rates of damage and loss in the first place, improving rates of Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 23/PER- ALDFG detection and recovery, and reducing the incidence and MEN-KP/2021 on Fishery Vessel Operating Standards and Mon- duration of ghost fishing. itoring Systems 22 establishes a legal operating standard for fishing vessels, while Ministerial Decree 29/KEPMEN-KP/2021 Indonesian National Standards25 (SNI, Standar Nasional Indo- on Technical Guidelines for Assistance to Fishing Vessels23 nesia) exist for eight main categories of fishing gears that op- specifies the types and specifications of government assis- erate in Indonesia’s waters: tance that can be provided to fishing vessels, including assis- • Bottom trawls (pukat tarik dasar); tance related to vessel design and technical specifications. • Midwater trawls (pukat hela); These regulations contribute to the implementation of Gov- • Seines (pukat kantong payang, dogol and cantrang); ernment Regulation 27/2021 on Governance of the Marine • Monofilament gillnets (jaring insang monofilamen); and Fishery Sector, which outlines three main conditions of 24 • Multifilament midwater and surface gillnets (jaring insang license that are reviewed during vessel inspections: pertengahan/ permukaan multifilament); and • the seaworthiness of the fishing vessel; • Trammel net (jaring tiga lapis); • the catchability of the fishing vessel, including suitability of the vessel, fishing equipment and type and size of fish- This list of SNIs does not yet cover all fishing gears defined ing gears for the licensed fishery; and under Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisher- • the suitability of the fishing vessel, including design and ies 18/PERMEN-KP/2021 on the Deployment of Fishing Gears construction of fish holds; effectiveness of systems for and Equipment.26 This is reportedly due to the fact that not all the removal of ice and wastewater; and adequacy of sys- gears used in Indonesia have a standard design, however it tems and processes for monitoring fish hold temperature is worth noting that national standards could be developed to and ensuring cold chain integrity. 22 https://jdih.maritim.go.id/cfind/source/files/permen-kp/ed818-permen-kp-23-tahun-2021.pdf 23 https://jdih.kkp.go.id/peraturan/a4c80-29-kepmen-kp-2021.pdf 24 https://jdih.setkab.go.id/PUUdoc/176360/PP_Nomor_27_Tahun_2021.pdf 071 Figure 28: Waste water bottles are often reused as floats or, as in this case, weights for fishing gears. define key operational specifications, while remaining flexible estimates of as many as 10,000 anchored FADs deployed in to accommodate different designs. Indonesia’s tuna fisheries (Proctor et al. 2019). Addressing the materials used in FAD construction can contribute to a reduc- Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 59/ tion in ALDFG. A wide variety of FAD designs and materials PERMEN-KP/2020 on Fishing Zones and Fishing Gears within are used in Indonesia. FAD floats are often iron cylinders with Fishery Management Areas of Indonesia and the High Seas 27 conical endcaps, and may be filled with polyurethane or ex- specifies the gears that are permitted to operate within each panded polystyrene (Figure 29, top left). Other raft types can WPP. However, this regulation does not provide details on the be found in some locations, such as net-covered foam cubes design specifications for these gears. (Figure 29, top right). Non-entangling natural coconut or nipa (silar) fronds are typically used as attraction materials under The absence of gear specifications can result in suboptimal the pontoon, though smaller scale operators may use logs or gear design or materials that contribute to ALDFG. For exam- other natural floating materials. ple, the re-use of waste plastic such as water bottles as fishing gear components is a low-cost option that provides revenue to Indonesia’s FADs often have a small dwelling (rakit) to house bottle collectors. However, some of these uses are not robust a watchman who may be in radio contact with the company (Figure 28), resulting in ALDFG, marine litter and frequent re- office or vessels, providing security and advising on fish aggre- placement. The use of plastic bottles is also a major contribu- gations. FADs for the tuna purse seiners are typically deployed tor to ALDFG in aquaculture (World Bank, 2022). some distance from shore (>12 nm) to minimize the catch of smaller neritic tunas and other small pelagics, and may be lo- The majority of catches by tuna purse seiners are made using cated at distances of 60 - 200 nm from port. Anchoring depths Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs). Regulation of the Minister may be up to 6,000 m, but are more typically in the range 2,000 of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 26/PERMEN-KP/2014 on Fish – 3,000 m. The cost of materials for deploying individual FADs Aggregating Devices permits up to three FADs to be deployed may be up to IDR 70 million (~USD 5,400), depending on the per vessel, but in practice many more may be deployed, with anchoring depth. FADs can last up to 4 years, but usually much 25 http://www.bkipm.kkp.go.id/bkipmnew/en/sni/SNI%20%20PERIKANAN%20TANGKAP 26 https://jdih.kkp.go.id/peraturan/f06f4-permen-kp-18-tahun-2021.pdf 27 https://jdih.kkp.go.id/peraturan/7e7b0-59-permen-kp-2020.pdf less, and are often sabotaged by competitors (PPS Bitung re- port) which further contributes to ALDFG generation. A number of initiatives in Indonesia are exploring innovations in fishing gear design. Bogor Agriculture University are car- rying out research on environmentally-friendly fishing gears constructed from plant fibers.28 MMAF’s Fishing Technology Development Center (BPPI, Balai Pengembangan Penangka- pan Ikan) is piloting folding traps (bubu lipat) constructed from galvanized iron, wire and rope made from Polyethylene (PE) and Polyamide (PA). The replacement of plastic in fishing gears with alternative materials is not expected to occur soon, as the efficacy of alternative materials compared to plastic tends to be low. Therefore, ensuring gears can be recycled, and developing ef- 072 fective collection and recycling systems is a greater priority. Amendments to gear regulations could outline specifications for recyclability and set targets for recycled material content to reduce the use of virgin plastic and increase demand for re- cycled material. However, this will require the recycling supply chain to be better established. Gear marking Properly marked gear can help to identify ownership, detect illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing, enhance the visibility of passive gears, and aid monitoring and enforcement of ALDFG regulations. Gear marking can disincentivize delib- erate abandonment and discarding, incentivize the retrieval of temporarily lost gear, and may create an incentive to report when gear is lost or abandoned (FAO, 2019b; He & Suuronen, 2018). While Ministerial Regulation 18/PERMEN-KP/2021 regulates the types of fishing gears that are permitted in each WPP and fishing zone, it does not address issues related to gear mark- ing. Similarly, while each Fishery Business License (SIUP, Surat Ijin Usaha Perikanan) includes details of the technical specifi- cations of the fishing gears used by each vessel, they do not include any provisions related to marking of gears. Government Regulation 27/2021 provides a framework for gear marking, to some extent, via clause 136 point (f) which refers to the catch eligibility of fishing vessels and explicitly addresses the prevention of ownerless nets. Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 58/ PERMEN-KP/2020 on Capture Fisheries Business addresses several issues that could also support the implementation of gear marking schemes, including: Figure 29: FADs used by fishers operating from PPS Bitung (top) & PPN Pekalongan (bottom) 28 https://innovation.ipb.ac.id/detail/1042-Jaring-Ikan-Ramah-Lingkungan • Fishing vessel unique identifiers (tanda pengenal kapal porate ALDFG management measures into harvest strategies perikanan); and the associated licensing processes (noting however that • Permitted fishing gears (i.e., non-destructive fishing gears); higher level regulatory controls will be required in the longer-term). and • Permitted fishing gears per WPP and fishing zone. Under MMAF’s new policy of Measurable Fisheries (Penang- kapan Terukur) several types of fishing zone have been de- The tracking of gear using radio buoys or acoustic tags can lineated (industrial fishing zones, small-scale fishing zones, help to reduce ALDFG because gears can be more readily lo- and spawning and nursery ground zones), and establishes a cated and recovered by operators. Ministerial Regulation 18/ precedent for conservation and management measures to be PERMEN-KP/2021 requires radio buoys to be deployed every integrated into the fishing license process. 2,500 m on drifting gillnets and longlines for fishing vessels larger than 30 GT. MMAF is reported to be in the process of drafting a new regulation on marine pollution which will con- tain provisions relating to ALDFG (APEC/GGGI, 2021). A number of gear marking initiatives have been implement- 073 ed in Indonesia. In Pekalongan, Java, the GoI in collaboration with the the Global Ghost Gear Initiative (GGGI) implemented a pilot project to evaluate gillnet marking approaches within small-scale fisheries as a tool for ALDFG prevention. The pi- lot identified several advantages of arising from gear marking, including identification of ownership, traceability to specific fishing gears, and greater accountability to retrieve nets. How- ever, costs were identified as a disadvantage. Many local fish- ers do not have the means to purchase an entire net at once, and nets are often obtained from middlemen and paid back in installments or sometimes in-kind. In addition, tagged nets from international producers are more expensive than locally produced nets. Fisheries licensing Integrating ALDFG management measures into the fisheries licensing process can create incentives for fishermen and fishing operators to make every reasonable effort to minimize their contribution to ALDFG generation. The license to fish could include requirements such as (i) gear marking; (ii) use of appropriate biodegradable materials, escape mechanisms, or passive deterrents to reduce the time that lost fishing gear remains active; (iii) reporting of end-of-life and lost gears; and (iv) installation of adequate onboard gear storage and secur- ing systems. Government Regulation 27/2021 and Ministerial Regulation 58/PERMEN-KP/2020 provide the regulatory framework for fishery licensing, however, do not currently include any explicit mention of ALDFG or its management. Regulation of the Min- ister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 21/PERMEN-KP/2021 on the Development of Fishery Management Plans and Fishery Management Institutions addresses the development of fish- ery management plans, and provides the opportunity to incor- ALDFG RETRIEVAL ALDFG can continue to indiscriminately catch commercially important species and other marine life via the process of ghost fishing, cause physical damage to marine habitats, present a hazard to shipping and navigation, and diminish the intrinsic natural values of marine ecosystems. These issues can be mitigated by the detection, location and careful retrieval (to minimize additional environmental impacts) of ALDFG. ALDFG reporting fishers make reasonable attempts to retrieve their own gear In the context of ALDFG retrieval and management, reporting whenever possible. However, there is no current requirement is important for two reasons. First, lost gears can often be re- or incentive for fishers to remove ALDFG when encountered. trieved if their location is known. Second, an understanding of the scale, sources, locations and causes of gear loss is essen- Occasional, one-off and ad hoc clean up initiatives have oc- 074 tial to develop effective prevention and management strate- curred in Indonesia, though these are often focused on the gies (Drinkwin, 2022). wider issue of marine debris rather than explicitly address- ing ALDFG retrieval and clean up. A beach and port clean up Under the framework of the NPOA-MPD 2017-2025, MoEF has event was implemented in PPN Ternate in November 2017, produced guidelines for the monitoring of marine debris. 29 and is described in Section 6.2 above. The Love of the Ocean However, monitoring and reporting that specifically addresses Movement (Gerakan Cinta Laut or GITA LAUT) is an initiative ALDFG is currently limited in Indonesia. As described in Sec- implemented by MMAF to support the objectives of Presiden- tion 6.1, Ministerial Regulation 26/PERMEP-KP/2021 requires tial Regulation 83/2018. GITA LAUT aims to increase public all fishing vessels to land and report damaged and unrepair- awareness about marine debris, and implements activities able fishing gears and tools at ports so that they can be recy- that engage stakeholders, including: cled. In the absence of measures such as gear marking and • Beach clean-up in South Sulawesi in 2020 initiated by garbage record books, mechanisms to monitor and enforce Pandu Laut Nusantara, Yayasan Eco Nusa and Yayasan the requirement to report lost gears are, however, limited. Konservasi Laut (YKL);30 • Beach clean-ups in Labuan Bajo and Probolinggo in 2020 Opportunities exist to enhance monitoring and reporting of ALD- initiated by MMAF; FG in Indonesia, and Annex 10 outlines a proposed approach. • The Indonesia Jamboree for Clean and Waste Free Period 2016-2019;31 ALDFG retrieval programs • The Clean Indonesia Movement (Gerakan Indonesia The retrieval of ALDFG is the only way to eliminate its nega- Bersih) initiated by the Coordinating Ministry of Marine tive impacts on navigational safety and the environment. For Affairs and Investment; and some fishing gears, such as gillnets, retrieval is most effec- • Other activities and events initiated by the Indonesian tive as soon as possible after the gear is lost. Nets may lose navy and MMAF.32 their structural integrity and fishing capacity over time, which The GoI implemented a ghost net collection and recycling ini- means that waiting to retrieve the gear after weeks or even tiative in Merauke, Papua, with positive uptake and interest by years may have little effect on reducing its negative impacts local communities, and with government interest in replicating (Ayaz et al., 2006; Baeta et al., 2009; Good et al., 2010). For oth- the model. Over a ten-month period, ten tonnes of discarded er gears, such as some traps and pots, their ability to catch can nets were collected by a fishers cooperative who received di- persist for a long time and retrievals conducted days, weeks or rect cash payments for delivering the clean nets to established months after the loss can still eliminate negative environmen- collection points. Baling and shipping of the nets were handled tal impacts (Antonelis et al., 2011; Butler et al., 2018). by the Coral Triangle Center’s SeaNet project, which has estab- lished a market with the Slovenia-based firm, Aquafil. Aquafil This study did not identify any regular coordinated ALDFG processes the nets and transforms them into EcoNyl® regen- retrieval efforts in Indonesia other than attempts at retrieval erated nylon, which is sourced by brands globally for apparel by the operators themselves when gear snagging occurs. As and interiors such as carpets. gear loss represents an economic loss it may be expected that 29 http://pertalindo.or.id/download/file/Pedoman_Pemantauan_Sampah_Laut.pdf 30 http://www.mongabay.co.id/2020/03/18/aksi-bersih-pantai-kumpulkan-1436-kg-sampah-didominasi-plastik/ 31 http://bebassampah.id/files/uploads/laporan-dampak-jambore-ibbs-periode-2016-2019-rev1.pdf 32 https://kkp.go.id/djprl/p4k/page/4709-penanganan-sampah-laut-oleh-ditjen-prl ALDFG IN THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY In a circular economy the value of products and materials is maintained for as long as possible. The development of a circular economy for fishing gears can help to keep resources in use for as long as possible, extract the maximum value from materials whilst in use, and create systems and incentive structures to recover materials at the end of their serviceable life and repurpose or regenerate new products and uses. Current initiatives in Indonesia that have the potential to contribute to the circular economy for ALDFG and fishing gear waste are summarized below. Repair facilities 075 Adequate maintenance and repair of fishing gears and their components can keep gears in service longer, minimize dam- age and reduce rates of waste and ALDFG generation. Fishing gears in Indonesia are repaired wherever possible, of- ten by small-scale fishers themselves or by informal net repair businesses. An important consideration is ensuring that fish- ers possess relevant and adequate skills to repair gear, thus contributing to the minimization of fishing gear waste genera- tion and disposal. MMAF has organized technical trainings on techniques to repair fishing gears, such as the virtual training on PE net repair delivered to 465 participants from 34 province in July 2021.33 FAO recommends that small- and medium-sized fishing ports should have dedicated net repair facilities, with 500 m2 allo- cated in artisanal ports and 1,000 m2 of part-covered areas for coastal and offshore fishing ports (Sciortino, 2010). Reg- ulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 8/PER- MEN-KP/2012 on Fishing Ports34 specifies the facilities to be provided by a fishing port to support fishing operations, which Figure 30: Gear repair activities found in PPN include “places for the maintenance of vessels and fishing Ternate (top) and PPS Kendari (bottom). gear, such as places for repairing nets” (article 4, clause 3.d). However, few of the fishing ports sampled during this study had designated repair areas. Some did have informal open ar- eas in or adjacent to the ports that are used by fishers and fish- ing companies to lay out and repair trawl and purse seine nets, which are the largest single items requiring flat, open spaces, clear of obstructions or debris for repair. There is often a com- promise between available open space to facilitate the work and shelter for net repairers (Figure 30). Details of the gear storage and repair facilities and infrastructure observed during field surveys are presented in Section 4.3. 33 https://kkp.go.id/artikel/32504-kkp-gelar-pelatihan-camilan-olahan-ikan-dan-perbaikan-jaring-bagi-pelaku-utama-di-34-provinsi 34 https://jdih.kkp.go.id/peraturan/per-08-men-2012.pdf Fishing gear waste collection When damaged or end-of-life fishing gears are returned to port, it needs to be managed responsibly. Waste collection and storage infrastructure and facilities represent the first step in a waste management pathway for waste fishing gears. The installation, maintenance and management of fit-for-purpose waste collection facilities at fishing ports makes the process of disposing of waste fishing gears easy, saving fishers time and money, and thus incentivizing best practice for disposal. Ag- gregation of waste at designated collection and storage facilities also enables more efficient waste sorting, supporting the reuse, repair or recycling of waste fishing gears into new products. Ministerial Regulation 26/PERMEP-KP/2021 requires all fish- Figure 31. Waste warp ropes from Danish seine ing vessels to land and report damaged and unrepairable (cantrang) fishing gear in PPN Brondong. fishing gears and equipment at fishing ports. However, few 076 ports have waste facilities that address the unique demands of waste fishing gear disposal, including the large volumes of In contrast, the high weights of plastics used by purse seine waste generated by some fishing gears and the need to sort and drifting gillnet fleets make them ideal candidates for fur- materials if waste pathways are to feed into a circular econ- ther investigation for recycling. Based on typical fishing pat- omy. Details of the fishing gear waste collection facilities and terns for these fleets, gear loss is likely to be relatively low and infrastructure observed at ports during field surveys are pre- much of the 13,800 tonnes of end-of-life material that is re- sented in Section 4. In most cases waste fishing gears are plenished annually is re-purposed (e.g., as agricultural fencing) mixed with general waste, and details of general port waste or disposed of in general waste. Purse seine and gillnets are management facilities are presented under Other Waste Is- also reported to have the highest rates of reuse and recycling sues below. (Section 4.5). This may correspond to the fact that both gears are usually made of PA (Nylon) which is considered to be a Some ports host fleets with specific gear types, which in turn medium value material. These high rates, however, are loca- create specific waste management challenges. For example, tion dependent. For example, similarly high rates of reuse and while Danish seine (cantrang) fisheries do not pose a high recycling are not found for Danish seines (cantrang) despite ALDFG risk (Section 5.4), in-port management of EOLFG is still being made from the same materials. Danish seine fisheries required, particularly for warp ropes that are constructed from are predominantly found in Sulawesi, and the low reuse and wrapped nylon Figure 31. recycling rates may be due to the low number of collectors and recyclers in this locality. EOLFG recycling Recycling of EOLFG provides opportunities to extract addition- In most sampled ports, however, the collection of EOLFG by al value from materials, while helping to reduce rates of ALDFG re-users and recyclers does not occur. Contributing factors in- generation. However, the development of recycling initiatives clude: (i) mixing of various gear and material types; (ii) mixing must consider the characteristics of different gear and mate- of EOLFG with and other types of waste; (iii) contamination rial types. with sludge, fish waste, plastic and other materials; and (iv) lack of adequate waste fishing gear storage facilities to allow Data presented in Section 4.6 (particularly Table 15) indicates enough weight to accumulate to make collection economically that almost 100 percent of hook-and-line gears and 25 percent viable. As a consequence, waste fishing gear enter the general of traps eventually become ALDFG. With these gears being solid waste stream and are disposed in landfill. relatively cheap, fishers have little incentive to invest time or effort into preserving or recovering gear. While a high propor- Some regional collection of waste fishing gears may occur tion of these gears contribute to ALDFG and its associated when enough similar materials can be collected and where impacts, the volumes of plastic involved in their construction there are adequate storage facilities. For example, a pilot ini- are low. Consequently, recycling opportunities for these gears tiative was launched in Pekalongan in December 2019 which may be limited, and other preventative measures are likely to is still ongoing at the time of publication, and where net man- be more effective. ufacturers in Indonesia purchase used nets from fisher co- operatives to recycle into new nets. Fishers sell the nets to PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS middlemen, who then sell the nets to various companies in Interviews conducted during this study revealed that practices Pekalongan and throughout Java, Sumatra and Kalimantan. introduced under earlier projects or initiatives have not been Limited availability of and accessibility to markets for waste sustained, and that several port reception facilities are not op- plastic materials contributes to the low rate of waste fishing erational. This highlights the need to ensure the upkeep and gear collection and recycling. It is estimated that there are less operation of facilities are integrated into the port waste man- than ten plastic recycling businesses in Indonesia. The main agement plans. Public-private partnerships (P3) have potential fishing net recycling centers are in Cirebon, Tegal, Tangerang, to deliver the investment, expertise, and services to develop, Bekasi and Kalimantan. PP and PE are the main materials maintain and operate waste infrastructure over the long-term. recycled in the general waste stream, but in terms of fishing waste, nylon is dominant. Polyester cannot be recycled but P3s are long-term contracts where the private sector designs, can be used by braiding into rope. builds, finances and operates an infrastructure project. This process may or may not involve a Private Finance Initiative Developing markets for EOLFG (PFI) process. P3s are being increasingly used by countries The development of markets for EOLFG can create the incen- to invest in long-term, large-scale infrastructure development, tive structures that drive behavior change, leading to greater especially in solid waste management. The rationale behind 077 volumes of EOLFG entering waste pathways to be reused, re- this approach is the ability of the private sector to often de- cycled, or disposed of properly. Policy and regulatory frame- liver projects and services in a more timely and cost-effective works have an important role to play in shaping the develop- manner than the public sector, to spread a project’s cost over ment of these markets. a more extended period, and thus free up public funds for in- vestment in sectors where private investment is impossible or Section 4 provides details about the EOLFG recycling initia- inappropriate. The use of PFI and P3s include (Nishimura & tives encountered during this study. Many of these initiatives Asahi, 2014): are at a nascent stage, and the continued development of EOLFG markets in Indonesia will require greater stakeholder • Lower life cycle costs, especially if long-term operation knowledge and awareness about their potential, and the need and maintenance (O&M) is included in the initial P3 part- for collectors to perceive clear economic benefits from collect- ner selection process. ing waste fishing gear compared to other plastic waste, which • Better design, as the public partners can set strict design is plentiful and has more economic value. In their current form, specifications, and private sector partners can bring in fishing gear recycling initiatives in Indonesia appear to offer specialist experience and knowledge to meet these spec- only marginal profitability, and are potentially loss-making ifications. once the capital costs of machinery are accounted for (Table • Improved quality of operations and maintenance ser- 14). Policy and regulatory frameworks that promote price sta- vices, especially if longer-term O&M contacts are agreed. bility, market stability and market accessibility can establish This helps quality targets to be set and met, as well as the enabling conditions for market development, while great- increased scope for operators to gain experience over the er economies of scale, increased supply (and hence lower longer duration of the contract. cost) of raw materials, and/or cheaper processing costs can • Efficient procurement. Under traditional methods, goods enhance the profitability of net recycling enterprises. The in- and services are often purchased in small batches, so stallation, maintenance and management of fit-for-purpose that small producers and providers are able to compete waste collection facilities at fishing ports can contribute to en- with large companies. While this has benefits for small hancing raw material supply and reducing costs by aggregat- businesses as a way of enhancing social welfare, it of- ing dispersed sources of waste, aiding the sorting of different ten does not provide an efficient or effective solution. P3s gear and material types, and facilitating cleaning processes to can allow a number of different elements of procurement minimize contamination. e.g., design, construction, O&M all to be tendered in a sin- gle package. P3s are gaining momentum in Indonesia35 due to the GOI: • Establishing and communicating a P3 legal framework that is now exceptionally strong and in line with global best practices, and with an emerging pipeline of P3s that have utilized the various tools and institutions that form the framework; 35 https://blogs.worldbank.org/ppps/ppps-indonesia-are-gaining-momentum-these-5-steps-were-key • Establishing a high-level de-bottlenecking committee in may highlight the need for significant investment that may be the form of the Committee for the Acceleration of Priority more suited to P3, e.g., in the expansion of recycling and man- Infrastructure (KPPIP); ufacturing facilities. • Establish financing support for P3s, including the Indone- sia Infrastructure Guarantee Facility (IIGF) and a finance OTHER WASTE ISSUES facility; The current study focuses on ALDFG and fishing gear waste, • Creating a dedicated P3 unit within the Ministry of Fi- rather than general port waste issues. However, there is cur- nance; and rently an overlap between waste fishing gear disposal and gen- • Working with all development partners to participate and eral waste disposal. The following information on port waste support the GOI vision. management is derived from information obtained during the field surveys, and is reported due to its relevance to fishing There are, however, potential risks with P3s. It is important that gear waste management. these are carefully identified in advance, and that an appropri- ate risk allocation agreement is made between the public and Port waste management private partners. Most importantly, projects should be careful- Waste reception facilities and collection procedures in Indo- ly reviewed to ensure that P3s do indeed offer an effective and nesia’s ports are often inadequate. Waste disposal facilities 078 efficient solution. are not always provided throughout the port area, leading to the accumulation of general waste unless regular clean-up ini- The scale and dispersed nature of investments envisaged for tiatives are implemented (Figure 32). While much of the waste ALDFG and EOLFG do not show an obvious fit for infrastruc- is general and from land-based sources, waste fishing gear ture-related P3. However, there is a need to engage with the makes a significant contribution. Expanded polystyrene (EPS) private sector in developing the market for recycled plastic from disused FADs, floats and fish boxes is particularly evident material from fishing and aquaculture gear. That engagement in some areas (Figure 32, bottom). Figure 32: Fishing gear waste and general waste in PPN Pelabuhan Ratu (top) & PPS Bitung (bottom) Some of the ports sampled during this study did have separate waste collection and storage facilities (Figure 33). However, these facilities are often inadequate. Storage facilities may be too small to accommodate the volumes of waste received and the frequency of waste collection. In addition, waste may spill from open skips due to the effects of wind or scavengers. At PPN Pelabuhan Ratu 38 small solid waste bins are distrib- uted throughout the port area. The volume of these waste bins varies from 0.3 to 0.6 m3. Waste is collected from these bins 6-7 times per day by three carts attached to motorcycles. This waste is transferred to intermediate storage facilities consist- ing of open skips with a capacity of 8 m3. Trucks empty these skips 2-3 times per week and transport the waste to a landfill facility in Cibadak, 50 km away. 079 PPN Ternate has an 8-person team of janitors operating dump trucks (2 units), a crane truck (1 unit), forklifts (2 units), rubbish bins, and one intermediate storage skip of 12.9 m3 capacity. Solid waste in PPN Pekalongan is managed by the Port Au- thority. The Port Authority does not collect any data on the na- ture or volume of waste handled by the port, and environmen- tal management is not currently certified to any international standard. However, there is an intention to obtain ISO 14,001 Environmental Management accreditation. Up to 50 tonnes of Figure 33: Intermediate waste storage facilities at PPN waste per week is collected from the temporary waste storage Pelabuhan Ratu (top) and PPN Ternate (bottom) area in PPN Pekalongan. This is simply an open area without any liner, although a concrete facility is planned. Waste man- agement facilities include 30 hard plastic waste bins, 2 drum composters for organic waste, 1 dump truck, 2 hand-carts and 2 moto-tricycles. The construction of additional waste man- agement facilities in the port area is complicated because the land is owned by the state-owned enterprise Perum Perikanan Indonesia (PERINDO). PPN Pekalongan conducts sorting of plastic and non-plastic waste in all port areas: • Organic waste is collected on a daily basis for compost- ing, however this process is currently not operational be- cause the officers have not been trained to operate the facility, and organic waste is currently sent to landfill to- gether with the general waste; • Plastic waste is collected and sold to private sector waste collectors; and • Unsold waste is sent to landfill. A flat fee of IDR 50,000 (USD 3.40) per month is incurred. In PPS Bitung and PPS Kendari storage facilities were built for plastic recycling (Figure 33), but these are not operational. It was also suggested that the replacement of plastic bottles used to be managed and recycled, but this is no longer the case. Plastic waste is therefore transported to landfill. Figure 34: Plastic recycler unit in PPS Kendari (top) and the existing condition (bottom). In 2013 and 2014 MMAF and Agence Francaise de Develop- ment developed a project to conceptualize the notion of an ecofishing port and to apply this concept to a shortlist of In- donesian ports for a total budget of USD 107 million. The main issues to be addressed by the Ecofishing Port Project were to: • Improve the efficiency of port operations by ensuring that physical flows and technical design support coherent port activities; • Enhance environmentally friendly standards and ap- proaches; • Apply the principle of forward flow to prevent cross-con- tamination of products and preserve the products’ initial quality; and • Facilitate the monitoring of product unloading and trace- ability, and the improvement of production conditions. 080 Launch of the Ecofishing Ports Project was postponed until 2020, with three fishing ports (PPS Bitung, PPS Kendari and PPS Belawan) selected by MMAF for implementation of the project. In several ports it was reported that a waste-manifest program for the fishing fleet was implemented in 2019/2020, but it ap- pears that this program is no longer operating. In the initial phase, the waste-manifest program provided trash bags and Figure 35: Unloading fish at the landing center of PPP Bajomulyo (top) and collection of waste required all fishers to bring back all of the waste onboard to the plastic used by the cantrang fishers (bottom). fishing port after each fishing trip. PPS Kendari is one of the few ports where this program continues to be operational with Some ports do have active arrangements to collect some of over six tonnes of trash collected from participating vessels the plastic packaging waste used in fisheries, e.g., the plastic and taken to landfill since July 2020. bags used to preserve demersal catch such as snapper in the Danish seine (cantrang) fishery (Figure 35). This occurs where Port Authorities are required to monitor port waste and report there are sufficient quantities of similar waste types. These are issues as part of their monthly Security, Neatness, Cleanliness, then delivered to collection points in villages outside the port Beauty, and Work Safety (K5, Keamanan, Ketertiban, Kebersi- area for onward sorting and treatment. In the case of PPP Ba- han, Keindahan, dan Keselamatan Kerja) report. This initiative jomulyo, the waste bags go to a collection point in Rembang could be expanded to include the management of EOLFG and village and then on to a plastics recycler in Surabaya (PT Prad- potentially ALDFG gathered as part of a ‘Fishing for Litter’ ha Karya Perkasa). scheme that encourages fishers to bring ashore solid waste encountered while fishing. The above examples illustrate some of the common issues facing fishing ports in Indonesia. There is either a complete lack of or inadequate waste reception facilities. Where facil- ities have been provided, they are often not operational be- cause the training or manpower to maintain these facilities is lacking. 081 082 Recommendations This chapter presents recommendations (Table 17) for enhancing the prevention, mitigation and curing of ALDFG in Indonesia. Recommendations have been informed by the gear-specific assessment of risks of ecological impact (Section 5), existing initiatives to address ALDFG and EOLFG in Indonesia (Section 6), and global experience and best practices (Annex 8). For each recommended intervention, an indication is present- Benefit-cost refers to the estimated cost of implementation 083 ed of its feasibility to be implemented successfully in Indone- relative to estimated impact on ALDFG reduction. A high ben- sia. Based on expert judgement, a score of high, medium or efit-cost rating is awarded if the proposed intervention is likely low was awarded to each recommendation for its relevance, to deliver a significant reduction in ALDFG while implementa- acceptability, enforceability and benefit-cost (rationale for the tion costs are low. awarded scores are presented in Annex 11). Most recommendations are highly relevant to Indonesia, but Relevance refers to the degree to which the proposed inter- some present challenges for implementation. For example, vention is appropriate for the context and needs in Indonesia. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes for fishing A high relevance rating is awarded to proposed interventions gear are being developed in some countries, but are complex that address issues and needs that have been explicitly identi- and costly to develop and are most suited to consistent trad- fied by the Government of Indonesia. ing standards across a large trading block like the European Union rather than in individual countries where much of the Acceptability refers to the degree to which the proposed in- gear may be imported. tervention is likely to meet the needs of and be accepted by Government of Indonesia and other key stakeholders. A high Prioritization of each recommendation was informed by expert acceptability rating is awarded if the proposed intervention judgement on its feasibility and urgency. Each recommenda- aligns with existing government strategic targets and/or reg- tion was awarded a score of 1 (high priority) or 2 (low priority). ulatory frameworks, or if there is evidence of similar interven- The resulting long list of recommendations, together with fea- tions having been implemented. sibility and prioritization scores, represent the expert judge- ments of the team involved in this study. To inform the devel- Enforceability refers to the degree to which stakeholder up- opment of a Fisheries and Aquaculture Plastic Action Plan, take of the proposed intervention can be adequately moni- these recommendations should be reviewed via a wider expert tored and enforced. A high enforceability rating is awarded if solicitation exercise involving local experts, decision-makers there is an existing institution with an appropriate mandate, if and other stakeholders. In particular, consideration should be an existing legal framework exists or could be adapted, and given to efficient and effective sequencing of interventions. if there are few logistical constraints for adequate monitoring and enforcement of relevant stakeholder behaviors. Table 17: Recommended actions to enhance ALDFG prevention, mitigation, retrieval and circular economy in Indonesia, with an indication of feasibility and priority. ALDFG PREVENTION FEASIBILITY SCORE Relevance Enforceability Awareness Raising HIGH MEDIUM Acceptability Benefit-cost HIGH HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 ALDFG awareness campaign Targeted awareness campaigns on ALDFG as an extension to and integrated with GOI actions on plastic marine debris. Focus on fishers and fishing com- munities. Linked to ‘fishing for litter’ and improved collection facilities and sys- tems in ports. FEASIBILITY SCORE 084 ALDFG PREVENTION Relevance Enforceability Marine spatial planning HIGH MEDIUM Acceptability Benefit-cost HIGH HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 2 MSP is already well established and being actively implemented in Indonesia, which will help to reduce gear conflict that is beneficial in ALDFG prevention. FEASIBILITY SCORE ALDFG PREVENTION Relevance Enforceability Vessel design MEDIUM HIGH Acceptability Benefit-cost MEDIUM LOW PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 2 The inclusion of effective gear storage and loss-prevention should be included in the future design specifications for vessels over 30GT as part of future reg- ulatory revisions. FEASIBILITY SCORE ALDFG MITIGATION Relevance Enforceability Fishing gear design HIGH LOW Acceptability Benefit-cost MEDIUM MEDIUM PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 2 There is potential to regulate and incentivize the use of recycled material in fishing gear, but first there is a need to develop recycling infrastructure and markets before setting requirements and targets for use of recycled materials. Alternatives such as biodegradable materials are as yet unproven as effective alternatives to plastic, focus on encouraging repairability and recyclability off equipment placed on the market. FEASIBILITY SCORE ALDFG MITIGATION Relevance Enforceability Gear marking HIGH LOW Acceptability Benefit-cost LOW LOW PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 2 The GGGI/FAO gear-marking project with Indonesian small-scale gillnet fishers highlighted the challenges of implementing gear marking to the extent pro- posed by the FAO gear marking guidelines. Gear marking requirements should be made more prominent and consistent in legislation (e.g., related to MSP). Existing informal approaches and limited enforceability mean that formal gear marking requirements through regulation are not proposed as a priority in the short-term. FEASIBILITY SCORE EOLFG-ALDFG MITIGATION Relevance Enforceability Integrate ALDFG into HIGH LOW Acceptability Benefit-cost fisheries management LOW HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS The integration of ALDFG into fisheries management should be progressed as 2 part of future regulatory revisions when reporting and collection systems are established. Acceptability could be increased through an effective communi- cations strategy and engagement of stakeholders. 085 FEASIBILITY SCORE EOLFG-ALDFG RETRIEVAL Relevance Enforceability ALDFG reporting HIGH HIGH Acceptability Benefit-cost programs MEDIUM MEDIUM PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 ALDFG Reporting Improved reporting of ALDFG is identified as a priority to better manage ALDFG and detailed proposals are provided in Section 6.4. FEASIBILITY SCORE EOLFG-ALDFG RETRIEVAL Relevance Enforceability ALDFG Recovery HIGH HIGH Acceptability Benefit-cost Programs HIGH HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 Ghost Gear Retrieval Task Force Task Force providing direct logistics support to local fisher, community and dive groups under a national programme of coastal and offshore retrieval. In- tensive retrieval activities result in higher volume of waste in a short space of time to make collection and transport to recyclers more viable. Target ALDFG hotspots determined by volume, risk and impact. Fishing for Litter Scheme Introduce ‘fishing for litter’ schemes incentivizing fishers at ports with signifi- cant trawl fisheries to participate, providing on-board bags and waste collec- tion facilities in ports for marine litter, including ALDFG. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Circular Design HIGH MEDIUM Acceptability Benefit-cost MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 Circular Fishing Gear Development R&D of a fishing / aquaculture gear product that can use EOLFG and/or post-consumer waste from recycled material, which can itself be recycled. E.g., plastic from net waste molded into durable fishing floats / weights that can replace the use of waste drinks bottles that are often lost and contribute to marine debris. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Buy-back scheme HIGH MEDIUM Acceptability Benefit-cost MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 Gear Supplier Buy-back Scheme Develop an EOLFG buy-back scheme in association with Indonesian fishing gear providers with incentives to encourage discounts on new gear for fishers returning their own EOLFG to them. [Note: this differs from the ‘fishing for litter’ scheme to tackle marine litter including ALDFG] FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Recycling and HIGH HIGH Acceptability Benefit-cost treatment markets 086 MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 EOLFG Recycling & Treatment Incentives Prices quoted by the few recyclers currently receiving fishing net waste, indi- cate marginal profitability. Provide incentives for recyclers to receive material from the operators and ports associated with the main EOLFG volumes, facil- itated by improved gear separation, cleaning & delivery to reduce overheads. Build demand for recycled EOLFG material to improve prices. This could be linked with buy-back scheme and with R&D circular design of fishing gear to develop an appropriate end-use for the resulting recycled mate- rial, e.g. production of durable floats and weights out of for fishing and aquacul- ture gear to replace the plastic bottles used currently. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Waste Reception HIGH LOW Acceptability Benefit-cost Facilities LOW HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 EOLFG reception facilities Port Reception Facilities are being progressed by GOI as part of MARPOL Annex V implementation. There is an associated need for separate, dedicat- ed collection EOLFG facilities in and around key fishing ports with significant volumes of EOLFG. These facilities will enable the development of an EOLFG supply chain by being linked to an EOLFG collection system. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Engagement with HIGH N/A Acceptability Benefit-cost waste operators HIGH HIGH PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 Development of an EOLFG supply chain Engagement with waste operators, including financial incentives to develop linkages between the informal waste collectors, recyclers and plastics man- ufacturers to create an EOLFG value chain. Currently EoLFG collectors are neither organized nor registered. Engagement should result in organization of waste collectors e.g. under cooperation scheme with local authority; linked to introduction of waste reception facilities & incentive scheme to encourage col- lection as part of EOLFG supply chain. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Engagement with other HIGH N/A Acceptability Benefit-cost stakeholders HIGH MEDIUM PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1 The variety in volumes and plastic types of ALDFG and EOLFG material mean that it is important to integrate with the wider circular economy wherever pos- sible to increase viability and interest in fishing gear waste. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Enabling gear repair MEDIUM MEDIUM Acceptability Benefit-cost activities MEDIUM LOW 087 PRIORITY SPECIFIC ACTIONS 2 Gear repair occurs irrespective of ideal facilities being available. Training fisher to enable them to repair, as has been carried out by GOI is a greater priority. Gear repair facilities incorporated as part of fishing port development & regeneration. FEASIBILITY SCORE CIRCULAR ECONOMY Relevance Enforceability Extended Producer HIGH LOW Acceptability Benefit-cost Responsiblitiy (EPR) LOW LOW scheme SPECIFIC ACTIONS EPR schemes are proven to be very effective in certain sectors, but the fishing gear sector creates challenges for EPR, which does not appear PRIORITY feasible in the short-term until ALDFG is better monitored, collection sys- 2 tems and recycling markets are developed. 088 References Aida, K.N., Agustang, A., Arlin, A. & Agustang, A.D.M. (2020). The patron-client relationship patterns in Siwa Lima fishermen 089 community, Aru Islands district Maluku, Indonesia. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(2), 74-77. Andréfouët, S., Thomas, Y. & Lo, C. (2014). Amount and type of derelict gear from the declining black pearl oyster aquaculture in Ahe atoll lagoon, French Polynesia. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 83(1): 224-230. Antonelis, K., Huppert, D., Velasquez, D. & June, J. (2011). Dungeness crab mortality due to lost traps and a cost-benefit analysis of trap removal in Washington State waters of the Salish Sea. North Am. J. Fish. Manag., 31 (5): 880–893. doi: 10.1080/02755947.2011.590113 APEC (2004). Derelict Fishing Gear and related marine debris: An educational outreach seminar among APEC partners. Fisheries Working Group APEC/GGGI (2021) Managing Abandoned, Lost or Discarded Fishing Gear and Aquaculture Equipment in the APEC Region. MMAF, Indonesia questionnaire response. Ayaz, A., Acarli, D., Altinagac, U., Ozekinci, U., Kara, A. & Ozen, O. (2006). Ghost fishing by monofilament and multifilament gillnets in Izmir Bay, Turkey. Fish. Res., 79: 267–271. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2006.03.029 Baeta, F., Jose Costa, M., & Cabral, H. (2009). Trammel nets ghost fishing off the Portuguese central coast. Fish. Res. 98: 33–39. doi: 10.1016/j. fishres.2009.03.009 Barclay, K., McClean, N., Adhuri, D.S., Sulu, R. & Fabinyi, M. (2020). Gender in tuna value chains: Case studies from Indonesia and Solomon Islands. SPC-The Pacific Community-Women in Fisheries. Information Bulletin, 31(9). Barnes, D.K., Galgani, F., Thompson, R.C. & Barlaz, M. (2009). Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364(1526): 1985-1998. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0205 Bendell, L.I. (2015). Favored use of anti-predator netting (APN) applied for the farming of clams leads to little benefits to industry while increasing nearshore impacts and plastics pollution. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 91(1): 22-28. Boren, L.J., Morrissey, M., Muller, C.G. & Gemmell, N.J. (2006). Entanglement of New Zealand fur seals in man-made debris at Kaikoura, New Zealand. Mar Pollut Bull 52(4): 442-446. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.12.003 BPS (2019). Statistics of Fishing Ports 2018. Badan Pusat Statistik (Central Bureau of Statistics), Government of Indonesia. Brown, J., Macfadyen, G., Huntington, T., M.J. \& Tumilty, J. (2005). Ghost Fishing by Lost Fishing Gear. Final Report to DG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs of the European Commission (Fish/2004/20). Institute for European Environmental Policy \& Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd. Butler, C.B., Gutzler, B.C. & Matthews, T.R. (2018). Sublethal and lethal effects of confinement of Caribbean spiny lobsters, Panulirus argus, in ghost traps. Bull. Mar. Sci. 94(3): 1153-1169. doi: 10.5343/bms.2017.1137 CBD - Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel— GEF (2012). Impacts of Marine Debris on Biodiversity: Current Status and Potential Solutions, Montreal, Technical Series No. 67, 61 pp. Charter, M. & Carruthers, R. (2022). Products from waste fishing nets: accessories, clothing, footwear, home ware and recreation. Centre for Sustainable Design (CfSD) Chen, W.-Q., Ciacci, L., Sun, N.-N., & Yoshioka, T. (2020). Sustainable cycles and management of plastics: A brief review of RCR publications in 2019 and early 2020. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 159; 104822. doi:10.1016/j. resconrec.2020.104822 Cho, D.-O. (2009). The incentive program for fishermen to collect marine debris in Korea. Mar Pollut Bull 58(3): 415-417. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.10.004 090 Consoli, P., Romeo, T., Angiolillo, M., Canese, S., Esposito, V., Salvati, E., Scotti, G., Andaloro, F. & Tunesi, L. (2019). Marine litter from fishery activities in the Western Mediterranean Sea: The impact of entanglement on marine animal forests. Environ Pollut 249: 472-481. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.072 Consoli, P., Sinopoli, M., Deidun, A., Canese, S., Berti, C., Andaloro, F. & Romeo, T. (2020). The impact of marine litter from fish aggregation devices on vulnerable marine benthic habitats of the central Mediterranean Sea. Mar Pollut Bull, 152, 110928. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.110928 Dameron, O.J., Parke, M., Albins, M.A. & Brainard, R. (2007). Marine debris accumulation in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands: an examination of rates and processes. Mar Pollut Bull, 54(4), 423-433. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2006.11.019 De Alessi, M. (2014). Archipelago of Gear: The Political Economy of Fisheries Management and Private Sustainable Fisheries Initiatives in Indonesia. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 1(3), 576-589. doi:10.1002/app5.40 DelBene, J.A., Bilkovic, D.M. & Scheld, A.M. (2019) Examining derelict pot impacts on harvest in a commercial blue crab Callinectes sapidus fishery. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 139, pp. 150-156. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.12.014 Derraik, J.G.B. (2002). The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44:9, 842-852. doi: 10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00220-5 Dixon, C., Satria, F., Wudianto, Nurdin, E., Utama, A.A., Mahiswara, Toole, J., He, P. (2018). Gear Marking Pilot Study in Indonesian Small-Scale Gillnet Fisheries with Reference to FAO’s Draft Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No.T632. Rome, FAO. 2018. 31 pp + appendices Donohue, M.J., Boland, R.C., Sramek, C.M. & Antonelis, G.A. (2001). Derelict fishing gear in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands: diving surveys and debris removal in 1999 confirm threat to coral reef ecosystems. Mar Pollut Bull, 42(12), 1301-1312. doi:10.1016/s0025-326x(01)00139-4 Drinkwin, J. 2022. Reporting and retrieval of lost fishing gear: recommendations for developing effective programmes. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and International Maritime Organization of the United Nations. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb8067en EIA. (2022). Convention on Plastic Pollution. Essential Elements: Fishing Gear. Environmental Investigation Agency. English, E., Wagner, C. & Holmes, J. (2019). The Effects of Marine Debris on Beach Recreation and Regional Economies in Four Coastal Communities: A Regional Pilot Study. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, USA. Enrichetti, F., Bavestrello, G., Betti, F., Rindi, F., Tregrosso, A. & Bo, M. (2021). Fate of lost fishing gears: Experimental evidence of biofouling colonization patterns from the northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Environ Pollut 268: 115746. doi:10.1016/j. envpol.2020.115746 Eunomia (2016). Plastics in the Marine Environment. Eunomia Research and Consulting, Bristol, UK FAO (1978). FAO catalogue of fishing gear designs. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. FAO (1982). Netting Materials for Fishing Gear. Gerhard Klust, Fishing News Books. Ltd. FAO (1990) Fisherman’s Workbook. Fisheries Department of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. FAO (2016a). Abandoned, lost and discarded gillnets and trammel nets: methods to estimate ghost fishing mortality, and the status of regional monitoring and management> Written by Eric Gilman, Francis Chopin, Petri Suuronen and Blaise Kuemlangan. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 600. Rome. Italy. 79 pp. ISBN 978-92-5-108917-0. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5051e.pdf 091 FAO (2016b). Report of the Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear, Rome, Italy, 4–7 April 2016. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 1157. Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5729e.pdf FAO (2019b). Report of the Thirty-third Session of the Committee on Fisheries, Rome, Italy 9–13 July 2018. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture, Report No. 1249. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. FAO (2019b). Voluntary guidelines on the marking of fishing gear. Rome. 88 pp. License: CC BY‐NC‐SA 3.0 IGO. http://www.fao. org/3/ca3546t/ca3546t.pdf Foley, C.J., Feiner, Z.S., Malinich, T.D. & Höök, T.O. (2018). A meta-analysis of the effects of exposure to microplastics on fish and aquatic invertebrates. Sci Total Environ 631-632: 550-559. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.046 Franson, J.C., Hansen, S.P., Creekmore, T.E., Brand, C.J., Evers, D.C., Duerr, A.E. & DeStefano, S. (2003). Lead Fishing Weights and Other Fishing Tackle in Selected Waterbirds. Waterbirds 26(3): 345-352. doi:10.1675/1524-4695(2003)026[0345:lfwaof]2.0.co;2 GESAMP (2015). Sources, fate and effects of microplastics in the marine environment: a global assessment. Rep. Stud. GESAMP No. 90. IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/UNIDO/WMO/IAEA/UN/UNEP/UNDP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection, pp. 96. GESAMP (2021). Sea-based sources of marine litter – a review of current knowledge and assessment of data gaps (second interim report of GESAMP Working Group 43, 4 June 2020). 110 pp. http://www.fao.org/3/cb0724en/cb0724en.pdf Gilardi, K. V., Carlson-Bremer, D., June, J. A., Antonelis, K., Broadhurst, G., & Cowan, T. (2010). Marine species mortality in derelict fishing nets in Puget Sound, WA and the cost/benefits of derelict net removal. Mar Poll Bull 60: 376–382. doi: 10.1016/j. marpolbul.2009.10.016 Gilman, E. (2015). Status of international monitoring and management of abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear and ghost fishing. Mar Policy 60: 225-239. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.016 Gilman, E., Bigler, B., Muller, B., Moreno, G., Largacha, E., Hall, M., Poisson, F., Toole, J., He, P. & Chaing, W. (2018). Stakeholder Views on Methods to Identify Ownership and Track the Position of Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices Used by Tuna Purse Seine Fisheries with Reference to FAO’s Draft Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear. FAO Fisheries Circular 1163, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome Gilman, E., Humberstone, J., Wilson, J.R., Chassot, E., Jackson, A. & Suuronen, P. (2022). Matching fishery-specific drivers of abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear to relevant interventions. Mar Policy 141, 105097. doi:10.1016/j. marpol.2022.105097 Gilman, E., Musyl, M., Suuronen, P., Chaloupka, M., Gorgin, S., Wilson, J. & Kuczenski, B. (2021). Highest risk abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear. Nature Scientific Reports 11: 7195 . doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-86123-3 Glaser, M., Breckwoldt, A., Deswandi, R., Radjawali, I., Baitoningsih, W. & Ferse, S.C.A. (2015). Of exploited reefs and fishers – A holistic view on participatory coastal and marine management in an Indonesian archipelago. Ocean & Coastal Management, 116, 193-213. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.07.022 Global Ghost Gear Initiative (2021). Best Practice Framework for the Management of Fishing Gear. Prepared by Huntington, T. of Poseidon Aquatic Resources Management Ltd. for GGGI. 95 pp. plus appendices. https://www.ghostgear.org/s/GGGI- Best-Practice-Framework-for-the-Management-of-Fishing-Gear-C-BPF-2021-Update-FINAL.pdf Good, T.P., June, J.A., Etnier, M.A. & Broadhurst, G. (2009). Ghosts of the Salish Sea: threats to marine birds in Puget Sound and the Northwest Straits from derelict fishing gear. Mar Ornithol 37: 67-76. Good, T.P., June, J.A., Etnier, M.A. & Broadhurst, G. (2010). Derelict fishing nets in Puget Sound and the Northwest Straits: patterns and threats to marine fauna. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 39-50. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2009.09.005 092 Goodman, A.J., McIntyre, J., Smith, A., Fulton, L., Walker, T.R. \& Brown, C.J. (2021). Retrieval of abandoned, lost, and discarded fishing gear in Southwest Nova Scotia, Canada: Preliminary environmental and economic impacts to the commercial lobster industry. Mar Pollut Bull 171: 112766. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112766. Gregory, M.R. (2009). Environmental implications of plastic debris in marine settings--entanglement, ingestion, smothering, hangers-on, hitch-hiking and alien invasions. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci, 364(1526), 2013-2025. doi:10.1098/ rstb.2008.0265 Gude, L., Pangemanan, J.F. & Lumenta, V. (2017). Analisis Peranan Perempuan pada Rantai Nilai Pemasaran Tuna Cakalang di Tempat Pelelangan iIkan (TPI) Aertembaga Kota Bitung. AKULTURASI (Jurnal Ilmiah Agrobisnis Perikanan), 5(9). doi:10.35800/akulturasi.5.9.2017.16988 Gündoğdu, S., Çevik, C. & Karaca, S. (2017). Fouling assemblage of benthic plastic debris collected from Mersin Bay, NE Levantine coast of Turkey. Mar Pollut Bull, 124(1), 147-154. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.07.023 Halpern, B.S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K.A., Kappel, C.V., Micheli, F., D’Agrosa, C. Bruno, J.F., Casey, K.S., Ebert, C., Fox, H.E., Fujita, R., Heinemann, D., Lenihan, H.S., Madin, E.M. P., Perry, M.T., Selig, E.R., Spalding, M., Steneck, R., Watson, R. (2008). A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems. Science: 319:5865, 948-952. doi: 10.1126/science.1149345 Hanni, K.D. & Pyle, P. (2000). Entanglement of Pinnipeds in Synthetic Materials at South-east Farallon Island, California, 1976-- 1998. Mar Pollut Bull 40(12): 1076-1081. doi:10.1016/s0025-326x(00)00050-3 Hanni, K.D., Long, D.J., Jones, R.E., Pyle, P., Morgan, L.E., 1997. Sightings and strandings of Guadalupe fur seals in Central and Northern California, 1988–1995. Journal of Mammalogy 78 (2), 684–690. Harrison, J.P., Sapp, M., Schratzberger, M. & Osborn, A.M. (2011). Interactions Between Microorganisms and Marine Microplastics: A Call for Research. Mar Tech Soc J, 45(2), 12-20. doi:10.4031/mtsj.45.2.2 He, P. & Suuronen, P. (2018). Technologies for the marking of fishing gear to identify gear components entangled on marine animals and to reduce abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear. Mar Pollut Bull 129: 253-261. doi:10.1016/j. marpolbul.2018.02.033 He, P., Chopin, F., Suuronen, P., Ferro, R.S.T and Lansley, J. 2021. Classification and illustrated definition of fishing gears. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 672. Rome, FAO. doi: 10.4060/cb4966en Hong, S., Lee, J. & Lim, S. (2017). Navigational threats by derelict fishing gear to navy ships in the Korean seas. Mar Pollut Bull 119(2): 100-105. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.04.006 Huntington, T (2019). Marine Litter and Aquaculture Gear –White Paper. Report produced by Poseidon Aquatic Resources Management Ltd for the Aquaculture Stewardship Council. 20 pp. https://www.asc-aqua.org/what-we-do/programme- improvements/gear-management/#marine-litter-and-aquaculture-gear-asc-white-paper Huntington, T (2020). Best Practice Framework for the Management of Fishing Gear: September 2020 Update. Report produced by Poseidon Aquatic Resources Management Ltd for GGGI. 82 pp plus appendices. In press. ICPC (2021). Fish Aggregation Devices: Risks to Submarine Cable Deployment and Operations: An Annex to Government Best Practices for Protecting and Promoting Resilience of Submarine Telecommunications Cables. International Cable Protection Committee, Portsmouth, UK. IMO (2018) Action Plan to Address Marine Litter from Ships, Resolution MEPC.310(73), 26 October 2018. International Maritime Organization Marine Environmental Protection Committee. http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/marinelitter/ Documents/IMO%20marine%20litter%20action%20plan%20MEPC%2073–19-Add-1.pdf Jambeck, J.R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T.R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., Narayan, R. & Law, K.L. (2015). Plastic waste inputs 093 from land into the ocean. Science, 347(6223), 768-771. doi:10.1126/science.1260352 Jang, Y.C., Lee, J., Hong, S., Mok, J.Y., Kim, K.S., Lee, Y.J., Choi, H.W., Kang, H. & Lee, S. (2014). Estimation of the annual flow and stock of marine debris in South Korea for management purposes. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 86(1): 505-511. Juan, R., Domínguez, C., Robledo, N., Paredes, B., Galera, S., \& García-Muñoz, R. A. (2021). Challenges and Opportunities for Recycled Polyethylene Fishing Nets: Towards a Circular Economy. Polymers 13(18): 3155. doi:10.3390/polym13183155 Jumadi, I.S., Pangemanan, J.F. & Tambani, G.O. (2017). Analisis Peran Perempuan dalam Rantai Nilai Ikan Kaleng Produk Tuna Cakalang di PT. Delta Pasific Indotuna di Kota Bitung Provinsi Sulawesi Utara. AKULTURASI (Jurnal Ilmiah Agrobisnis Perikanan), 5(9). doi:10.35800/akulturasi.5.9.2017.16986 Kaiser, M., Bullimore, B., Newman, P., Lock, K., Gilbert, S. (1996) Catches in ‘ghost fishing’ set nets. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 145, 11- 16. doi:10.3354/meps145011 Kroodsma, D.A., Mayorga, J., Hochberg, T., Miller, N.A., Boerder, K., Ferretti, F., Wilson, A., Bergman, B., White, T.D., Block, B.A., Woods, P., Sullivan, B., Costello, C. & Worm, B. (2018). Tracking the global footprint of fisheries. Science 359:6378, 904- 908. doi:10.1126/science.aao5646 Kuczenski, B., Vargas, C., Gilman, E., Musyl, M., Geyer, R. & Wilson, J. (2021). Plastic gear loss estimates from remote observation of industrial fishing activity. Fish., 23: 22-33. doi: 10.1111/faf.12596 Laist, D.W. (1996). Marine debris entanglement and ghost fishing: a cryptic and significant type of bycatch. Proceedings from Solving Bycatch: Considerations for Today and Tomorrow, September 25-27, 1995, Seattle, Washington. Laist, D.W., 1997. Impacts of marine debris: entanglement of marine life in marine debris including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records. In: Coe, J.M., Rogers, D.R. (Eds.), Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts and Solutions, 99–139. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY Lau, W.W.Y., Shiran, Y., Bailey, R.M., Cook, E., Stuchtey, M.R., Koskella, J., Velis, C.A., Godfrey, L., Boucher, J., Murphy, M.B., Thompson, R.C., Jankowska, E., Castillo, A., Pilditch, T.D., Dixon, B., Koerselman, L., Kosior, E., Favoino, E., Gutberlet, J., Baulch, S., Atreya, M.E., Fischer, D., He, K.K., Petit, M.M., Sumaila, U.R., Neil, E., Bernhofen, M.V., Lawrence, K. & Palardy, J.E. (2020). Evaluating scenarios toward zero plastic pollution. Science, 369(6510), 1455-1461. doi:10.1126/science.aba9475 Lee, J., Lee, J.S., Jang, Y.C., Hong, S.Y., Shim, W.J., Song, Y.K., Hong, S.H., Jang, M., Han, G.M., Kang, D. & Hong, S. (2015). Distribution and size relationships of plastic marine debris on beaches in South Korea. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 69(3): 288-298 Levin, L.A., Ekau, W., Gooday, A.J., Jorissen, F., Middelburg, J.J., Naqvi, S.W.A., Neira, C., Rabalais, N.N. & Zhang, J. (2009). Effects of natural and human-induced hypoxia on coastal benthos. Biogeosciences, 6(10), 2063-2098. doi:10.5194/bg-6-2063- 2009 Lusher, A.L., Hollman, P.C.H., Mendoza-Hill, J.J. (2017). Microplastics in fisheries and aquaculture: status of knowledge on their occurrence and implications for aquatic organisms and food safety. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 615. Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7677e.pdf Macfadyen, G., Huntington, T., and Cappell, R. (2009). Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies, No. 185; FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper, No. 523. ISBN 978–92-5–106196-1. United Nations Environment Programme and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Nairobi and Rome. MacMullen, P., Hareide, N., Furevik, D.M., Larsson, P., Tschernij, V., Dunlin, G., Revill, A., Pawson, M., Puente, E. & Uriarte, A. (2003). Study to Identify, Quantify and Ameliorate the Impacts of Static Gear Lost at Sea: EU Study Contract FAIR CT98-4338 Final Report. Prepared for the Commission of the European Communities by Sea Fish Industry Authority, Hull, UK. 094 Mariñoa, M., A. Breckwoldt, M. Teichberg, A. Kasec & H. Reuter (2019). Livelihood aspects of seaweed farming in Rote Island, Indonesia. Marine Policy 107 (2019) 103600 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103600 Matthews, T. and R. Glazer (2010). Assessing Opinions on Abandoned, Lost, or Discarded Fishing Gear in the Caribbean. GCFI: 62 (2010) In Proc. 62nd Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute Nov 2 - 6, 2009 Cumana, Venezuela McCauley, S., Bjorndal, K. (1999) Conservation implications of dietary dilution from debris ingestion: sublethal effects in post- hatchling loggerhead sea turtles. Conserv. Biol., 13(4): 925-929. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.98264.x Miralles, L., Gomez-Agenjo, M., Rayon-Viña, F., Gyraitė, G. & Garcia-Vazquez, E. (2018). Alert calling in port areas: Marine litter as possible secondary dispersal vector for hitchhiking invasive species. Journal for Nature Conservation, 42, 12-18. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2018.01.005 MMAF (2018). Marine and Fisheries in Figures 2018. Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Government of Indonesia. MoEF (2020) National Plastic Waste Reduction Strategic Actions for Indonesia. Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/32898/NPWRSI.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Moore, M.J., van der Hoop, J., Barco, S.G., Costidis, A.M., Gulland, F.M., Jepson, P.D., Moore, K.T., Raverty, S. & McLellan, W.A. (2013). Criteria and case definitions for serious injury and death of pinnipeds and cetaceans caused by anthropogenic trauma. Dis Aquat Org 103(3): 229-264. doi:10.3354/dao02566 MSC (2021). Fisheries Standard Review. Supporting the Prevention of Gear Loss and Ghost Fishing. Impact Assessment Report. By McLennan, S., Cappell, R., Huntington, T. Marine Stewardship Council, London. Muawanah, U., Arthatiani, F.Y., Soedjarwo, P.A., Kurniasari, N., Sari, Y.D., Zulham, A., Koeshenderajana, S. & Hikmah, H. (2021). Small scale tuna fisheries profiles in the Indonesia archipelagic waters. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 869(1), 012017. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/869/1/012017 Neish, I.C. (2013). Social and economic dimensions of carrageenan seaweed farming in Indonesia. In D. Valderrama, J. Cai, N. Hishamunda & N. Ridler, eds. Social and economic dimensions of carrageenan seaweed farming, pp. 61–89. Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 580. Rome, FAO. 204 pp . Nishimura & Asahi (2014). Vietnam: Capacity Building Program for Promoting Private Sector Participation. Report to the Public- Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF). May 2014. https://ppiaf.org/documents/3660/download NOAA (2015). Report on the Impacts of “Ghost Fishing” Via Derelict Fishing Gear. NOAA Marine Debris Program, Silver Spring, MD NOAA (2016). Report on Marine Debris Impacts on Coastal and Benthic Habitats. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Debris Program, Silver Spring, MD OECD (2021). Towards G7 Action to Combat Ghost Fishing Gear. OECD ENVIRONMENT POLICY PAPER NO. 25. 55 pp. Orós, J., Montesdeoca, N., Camacho, M., Arencibia, A. & Calabuig, P. (2016). Causes of Stranding and Mortality, and Final Disposition of Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta) Admitted to a Wildlife Rehabilitation Center in Gran Canaria Island, Spain (1998-2014): A Long-Term Retrospective Study. PLOS ONE 11(2): e0149398. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0149398 OSPAR. 2020. OSPAR Scoping Study on Best Practices for the Design and Recycling of Fishing Gear as a Means to Reduce Quantities of Fishing Gear Found as Marine Litter in the North-East Atlantic. OSPAR Commission, London. Proctor, C., Natsir, M., Mahiswara, Widodo, A., Utama, A, Wudianto, Satria, F., Hargiyatno, I., Sedana, I., Cooper, S., Sadiyah, L., Nurdin, E., Anggawangsa, R., Susanto, K. (2019) A Characterisation of FAD-Based Tuna Fisheries in Indonesian Waters. ACIAR Project FIS/2009/059, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra. ISBN: 978-0-646-80326-5 095 Purwasih, J.D., Wibowo, B.A. & Triarso, I. (2016). Analisis perbandingan pendapatan nelayan pukat cincin (purse seine) dan pancing tonda (troll line) di PPP Tamperan Pacitan, Jawa Timur. Journal of Fisheries Resources Utilization Management and Technology, 5(1), 37-46. Rech, S., Borrell, Y. & García-Vazquez, E. (2016). Marine litter as a vector for non-native species: What we need to know. Mar Pollut Bull, 113(1-2), 40-43. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.08.032 Richardson, K, Hardesty, B.D., Wilcox, C. (2019). Estimates of fishing gear loss rates at a global scale: a literature review and meta‐analysis. Fish and Fisheries 20:6, pp. 1218-1231. doi: 10.1111/faf.12407 Richardson, K., Gunn, R., Wilcox, C., Hardesty, B.D. (2018) Understanding causes of gear loss provides a sound basis for fisheries management. Mar. Policy, 96, pp. 278-284 doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2018.02.021 Richardson, K., Hardesty, B., Vince, J., Wilcox, C. (2021) Global causes, drivers, and prevention measures for lost fishing gear. Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 690447. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2021.6900447 Richardson, K., Haynes, D., Talouli, A., & Donoghue, M. (2017). Marine pollution originating from purse seine and longline fishing vessel operations in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, 2003–2015. Ambio, 46, 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13280‐016‐0811‐8 Richardson, K., Wilcox, C., Vince, J., & Hardesty, B. D. (2021). Challenges and misperceptions around global fishing gear loss estimates. Marine Policy 129: 104522. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104522 Rochman, C.M. (2015). The Complex Mixture, Fate and Toxicity of Chemicals Associated with Plastic Debris in the Marine Environment. In M. Bergmann, L. Gutow,\& M. Klages (Eds.), Marine Anthropogenic Litter (pp. 117-140). Springer International Publishing, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_5 Rodrigues, F. L., Lourenço, R., Secchi, E. R., Kessler, F., & Proietti, M. C. (2019). Plastics in sea surface waters round the Antarctic Peninsula. Scientific Reports (Nature Publisher Group), 9(1). Sancho, G., E. Puente, A. Bilbao, E. Gomez, & L. Arregi (2003). Catch rates of monkfish (Lophius spp.) by lost tangle nets in the Cantabrian Sea (northern Spain). Fisheries Research, 64: 129–139. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/ pii/S0165783603002121 Satria, A. (2015). Pengantar sosiologi masyarakat pesisir. Jakarta, Indonesia: Bogor Agricultural Institute. Scheld, A.M., D.M. Bilkovic, and K.J. Havens, K.J. (2016). The Dilemma of Derelict Gear. Scientific Reports 6, Article Number 19671. 7 pp.. http://www.nature.com/articles/srep19671 Sciortino, J.A. (2010). Fishing Harbour Planning, Construction and Management. Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 539. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Simberloff, D., Martin, J.L., Genovesi, P., Maris, V., Wardle, D.A., Aronson, J., Courchamp, F., Galil, B., García-Berthou, E., Pascal, M., Pyšek, P., Sousa, R., Tabacchi, E. & Vilà, M. (2013). Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol Evol, 28(1), 58-66. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013 Sinaga, H., Widiono, S. & Irnad, I. (2015). Pola Hubungan Patron-Klien Pada Komunitas Nelayan Di Kelurahan Malabro Kecamatan Teluk Segara Kota Bengkulu. Jurnal AGRISEP: Kajian Masalah Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian dan Agribisnis, 14(2), 167-176 Sinopoli, M., Cillari, T., Andaloro, F., Berti, C., Consoli, P., Galgani, F., Romeo, T. (2020). Are FADs a significant source of marine litter? Assessment of released debris and mitigation strategy in the Mediterranean Sea. J. Environ. Manag., 253, 109749. 096 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109749 Stelfox, M., Hudgins, J. & Sweet, M. (2016). A review of ghost gear entanglement amongst marine mammals, reptiles and elasmobranchs. Mar Pollut Bull, 111(1-2), 6-17. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.06.034 Stevens, B. (2021). The ups and downs of traps: environmental impacts, entanglement, mitigation and the future of trap fishing for crustaceans and fish. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 78, 584-596. doi: 10.1093/icesjms/fsaa135 Sumiono, B. (1997). Fishing activities in relation to commercial and small-scale fisheries in Indonesia. Proceedings from Regional Workshop on Responsible Fishing, Bangkok, Thailand, 24-27 June 1997. Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center Syarif, L.M. (2009). Promotion and Management of Marine Fisheries in Indonesia. In G. Winter (Ed.), Towards Sustainable Fisheries Law. A Comparative Analysis (p. 340). IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. The Pew Charitable Trusts & SYSTEMIQ (2020). Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of Pathways Towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution. https://www.pewtrusts.org/-/media/assets/2020/07/breakingtheplasticwave_report.pdf UNEA (2014). Resolution 1/6 Marine plastic debris and microplastics. Resolutions and decisions adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly of the United Nations Environment Programme at its first session on 27 June 2014, Nairobi, Kenya. http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/17285/K1402364.pdf UNEA (2016). Resolution 2/11 Marine litter and microplastics. Resolutions and decisions adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly of the United Nations Environment Programme at its second session on 23-27 May 2016, Nairobi, Kenya. http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/11186/K1607228_UNEPEA2_RES11E.pdf UNEA (2018). Resolution 3/7 Marine litter and microplastics. Resolutions and decisions adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly of the United Nations Environment Programme at its third session on 4-16 December 2017, Nairobi, Kenya. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/22773/K1800210%20-%20UNEP-EA-3- RES-7%20-%20Advance.pdf UNSDG (2018). Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. Targets and Indicators of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. https:// sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg14 USAID (2017) Value Chain Assessment: Bitung Indonesia. USAID Oceans and Fisheries Partnership. van der Hoop, J.M., Moore, M.J., Barco, S.G., Cole, T.V.N., Daoust, P., Henry, A.G., Mcalpine, D.F., Mclellan, W.A., Wimmer, T. \& Solow, A.R. (2013). Assessment of Management to Mitigate Anthropogenic Effects on Large Whales. Conserv Biol 27(1): 121-133. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01934.x Weißbach, G., Gerke, G., Stolte, A., & Schneider, F. (2022). Material studies for the recycling of abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG). Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy 40(7): 1039-1046. doi:10.1177/0734242x211052850 Werner, S., Budziak, A., Franeker, J.V., Galgani, F., Hanke, G., Maes, T., Matiddi, M., Nilsson, P., Oosterbaan, L., Priestland, E., Thompson, R., Veiga, J. & Vlachogianni, T. (2016). Harm caused by Marine Litter: MSFD GES TG Marine Litter - Thematic Report. JRC Technical report, EUR 28317 EN, 89. doi:10.2788/690366 Widodo, S. Suparman, S. (2013). Katalog alat penangkapan ikan Indonesia (Indonesian catalogue of fishing gears). DG Capture Fisheries, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Indonesia Wilcox, C., Mallos, N.J., Leonard, G.H., Rodriguez, A. \& Hardesty, B.D. (2016). Using expert elicitation to estimate the impacts of 097 plastic pollution on marine wildlife. Mar Policy 65: 107-114. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.10.014 World Bank (2018). Indonesia Marine Debris Hotspot Rapid Assessment: Synthesis Report. World Bank Group and Coordinating Ministry of Marine Affairs, Government of Indonesia. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/983771527663689822/pdf/Indonesia-Marine-debris-hotspot-rapid-assessment-synthesis-report.pdf World Bank (2022). Pre-Feasibility Study on the Management, Retrieval and Recycling of Used and Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear, and Inventory of Plastic Use and Loss from Aquaculture. World Bank, Jakarta Zabka, T.S., Haulena, M., Puschner, B., Gulland, F.M.D., Conrad, P.A. \& Lowenstine, L.J. (2006). Acute Lead Toxicosis in a Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina richardsi) Consequent to Ingestion of a Lead Fishing Sinker. J Wildl Dis 42(3): 651-657. doi:10.7589/0090-3558-42.3.651 098 ANNEX ANNEX 1 Methodology MEN-KP/2021 together with supplementary information from DEFINITIONS AND CLASSIFICATIONS the ISSFG. Specific fishing gear design details were obtained 099 USED IN THIS STUDY from the Indonesian Catalogue of Fishing Gear Designs (Wido- do & Suparman, 2013), and this information was used to derive ALDFG terminology estimates of the weights of fishing gears deployed. To develop working terms to serve the needs of this study, and to establish a common understanding of key terminology to support the ongoing development of measures to manage and Fishing vessel typology address ALDFG in Indonesia, a review of the global literature Data published by MMAF and the Central Bureau of Statistics on ALDFG was conducted to identify key terms. Definitions (BPS, Badan Pusat Statistik) were used to provide details on were developed, drawing particularly on information present- the composition of the Indonesian fishing fleet by vessel num- ed in the Voluntary Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear ber and size class. Unpublished data obtained from MMAF’s (FAO, 2019b) that were developed via Expert and Technical Satu Data information system were used to disaggregate the Consultations in which Indonesia participated and adopted by fleet by size class and gear type. Minor discrepancies were the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations at noted in the total numbers of vessels obtained from Satu Data the 33rd session of the Committee on Fisheries in July 2018. compared to those reported in published reports (e.g., Kelau- Terms and definitions were translated into Bahasa Indonesia, tan Dan Perikanan Dalam Angka Tahun 2018), and minor ad- consulted with stakeholders, and revised where necessary justments were made to the number of vessels in each gear to enhance clarity and comprehension. The compatibility of class to ensure consistency. terms and definitions with existing laws and regulations in In- donesia was reviewed. Fishing port typology Indonesian has a well-established system for classifying its Fishing gear typology ports, outlined in Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs The International Standard Statistical Classification of Fishing and Fisheries 8/PERMEN-KP/2012 on Fishing Ports. This clas- Gear36 (ISSFG) was adopted by the FAO Coordinating Work- sification system was used to categorize ports for the purpose ing Party (CWP) on Fisheries Statistics at the 25th Session of of this study, and published data—particularly the publication CWP in Rome in 2016. Indonesia has a well-established sys- Statistics of Fishing Ports 2018 (BPS, 2019)—were used to de- tem for the classification of fishing gears that is modelled on termine the distribution of fishing ports across Indonesia and the ISSFG. The classification system is broadly structured into the characteristics of their fishing fleets and catches. ten major gear categories with over 50 subcategories based on fishing gear configuration and mode of operation. A de- tailed description of the gear types used in Indonesia’s fisher- ies is provided in Regulation of the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 18/PERMEN-KP/2021 on Deployment of Fishing Gears and Fishing Aids in the Fishery Management Areas of Indonesia and the High Seas. The fishing gear typology used in in this study is based on Ministerial Regulation 18/PER- 36 http://www.fao.org/cwp-on-fishery-statistics/handbook/capture-fisheries-statistics/fishing-gear-classification/en/ FIELD SURVEYS Field surveys were carried out in selected ports to obtain pri- ports were selected to include a range of different port typol- mary data, stakeholder perceptions and observations about ogies and, where appropriate, to encompass fisheries that are EOLFG and ALDFG rates, mechanisms and drivers. economically significant and/ or have been identified as pri- ority fisheries by MMAF. Candidate ports were reviewed with Port selection MMAF, and 10 target fishing ports selected for field surveys Ports were selected for field surveys from the list of all fish- (Table 19). ing ports in Indonesia. Several factors were considered to inform the selection of fishing ports (Table 18). Furthermore, Table 18: Criteria considered in the selection of the ten ports where field surveys were conducted. SURVEY OBJECTIVE CONSIDERATIONS Assessment of fishing gear • Numbers and sizes of boats using the port on a permanent basis. quantity and diversity • Availability of support services for gear and vessel repair. 100 • Number of fishing companies and/or boat operators within communities adjacent to the port. • Degree to which the fleets utilizing the port could be considered as representative of fleets in other ports. • Availability of detailed data on port operations and vessel operations, including availability of disaggregated data on fleets and fishing gears. • Accessibility for surveying. • Preference was given to ports where the size of fishing gears operated and the polymer content therein is very large (i.e., purse seine, trawls, large scale drift net); • Preference was given to ports dominated by fishing boats >100 GT. Assessment of ALDFG • Availability of detailed data on fishing ports, port operations, vessel retrieval and ghost fishing: operations, disaggregated data on fleets and fishing gears; • Presence of fishing fleets using the port on a permanent basis, with fleets resident year round; • Presence of large numbers of boats operating bottom fishing gears (bottom gill nets, traps); • Presence of local fishing associations that are well organized and provide a range of support services to their members; • Availability of support services for gear and vessel repair; • Availability of any evidence that fishers have expressed concerns over ghost fishing; • Accessibility for surveying; • Preference was given to fishing port in close proximity to the fishing grounds, with well-defined fishing grounds less than 200m deep, and with fishing grounds within or near to areas of ecological importance; • Preference was given to ports dominated by fishing boats 10-30 GT. Assessment of small-scale • Availability of detailed data on fishing ports, port operations, vessel retrieval and ghost fishing: operations, disaggregated data on fleets and fishing gears; • Presence of fishing fleets using the port on a permanent basis, with fleets resident year round; • Presence of large numbers of boats 20GT operating bottom fishing gears (bottom gill nets, traps); • Presence of local fishing associations that are well organized and that provide a range of support services to their members; • Availability of support services for gear and vessel repair; • Availability of any evidence that communities are broadly supportive of conservation and management approaches; • Accessibility for surveying; • Preference was given to fishing ports in close proximity to the fishing grounds, with well-defined fishing grounds that are less than 30m deep, and with fishing grounds adjacent to MPAs or areas of ecological importance; and • Preference was given to ports dominated by fishing boats 2-10 GT. Table 19: Target ports selected for EOLFG and ALDFG field surveys. PORT PROVINCE CATEGORY NOTES PPS Bitung Sulawesi Utara A Ocean Fishing Ports are the largest ports and form the main gateways to the international export markets. Seven are currently operational. These ports have the capacity to shelter at least 100 fishing units over 60 GRT daily, mostly those operating in international or EEZ waters. The fish landing capacity is 200 t/day or 18,000-120,000 t/year. OFPs house general port facilities but also processing and cold storage facilities. Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is avail- able. However, its merits compared to other Cat. A ports or Cat B ports in the Lautra area is not clear. PPN Pekalongan Jawa Tengah B Archipelagic Port are able to support 75 fishing vessels of 15-60 GT daily, that fish in archipelagic and EEZ waters. Daily fish landing capacity is around 40/50 t or 8,000-15,000 t on an annual basis. Currently, 16 of these ports exist which focus on local and export markets. Good choice if PPN quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available 101 PPN Ambon Maluku B Archipelagic Port Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available PPN Ternate Maluku Utara B Archipelagic Port Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available PPN Tual Maluku B Archipelagic Port Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available PPN Kupang NTT B Archipelagic Port Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available PPN Bacan Maluku C Coastal Fishing Ports (CFP) Can berth 50 vessels ranging from 5-15 GT daily for vessels that operate in coast- al waters and archipelagic waters. At the moment there are 43 CFPs, which have a fish landing capacity of 15-20 t/day or 3,000-4,000 t/year. Landings mainly serve the domestic market. CFPs provide general port facilities. In some cases, processors located far away from the islands where these ports are located own mini plants close to these ports where they can freeze the landed fish and send it to larger factories in e.g., Java for further processing. However, in many cases there is a lack of infrastructure at these ports to ensure the cold chain. PPN Sorong Papua Barat C Coastal Port Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available PPI Daeo Majiko Maluku Utara D Fish landing base Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is available PP Merauke Papua Outer Ring Fishing Port (ORFP) located on the border between Indonesia and Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Australia has a strategic position and role in the development of capture fisheries in eastern Indonesia especially WPP RI – 718 Good choice if PPS quarterly reports and database on port/boat/gear is avail- able. However, port is small and infrastructure may be lacking for any repair, recycle, and retrieval related work. Stakeholder mapping and interviews An initial stakeholder mapping was conducted for each port, • Fishers (e.g., informal classes of fishers by fishing meth- in consultation with the local marine and fisheries service and od, scale or other informal grouping); harbormaster. The stakeholder mapping aimed to identify • Formal fisher groups / cooperatives; the key public sector stakeholders involved in fisheries, port, • Fishing companies; waste and environmental management, as well to determine • Middle men; the number of, and relationships between private sector stake- • Buyers / Processors; holders including: • Plastic waste collectors & recyclers; and • Local fishing gear manufacturers; • NGOs involved in marine litter management. • Main fishing gear sales outlets; During field surveys, semi-structured interviews (Annex 2) were conducted with stakeholders representing: • Fishers (individuals and associations / cooperatives); • Fishing gear manufacturers and gear sellers. • Collectors /Disposal / recycling businesses / organiza- tions / informal sector; and • Public sector organizations involved in fishing gear recov- ery, recycling and disposal PLASTIC WEIGHT ESTIMATIONS Selection of fishing gear sub-categories for weight estimations The fishing gear subcategories selected for weight estima- tions met one or more of the following criteria: • The gear category has been identified as one generat- ing high quantities of end-of-life fishing plastic materials (e.g., surrounding gear, trawls, seines, lift nets, longlines, 102 gill and entangling nets); • The number of fishing vessels in the subcategory ex- Netting Weight NW ceeds 200 (0.1% of the national fleet); • The combined weight of synthetic fishing gear materials used by a single vessel was expected to exceed 10kg; and • Information was available on the materials used by ves- sels in a subcategory. Where such information was miss- Where: ing, the following procedure was followed: Mw1 number of meshes across top of panel a. Gears similar in design were assigned to another sub- Mw2 number of meshes across bottom of panel category (e.g., subcategories 08.4.01-08.4.05 were as- number of meshes deep MD signed to subcategory 08.0.3); stretched mesh length (mm) a b. Gears listed as “Not Specified” were given a nominal Ø twine diameter mm 10kg weight; and TR twine runnage (m/kg) c. Dredges were omitted. Applying these criteria, 3,228 of Indonesia’s 171,733 inboard mo- torized fishing vessels (1.8%) were excluded from the analysis. Figure 36: Formula for the calculation of netting weighting. Weight of plastics in deployed fishing gears (Ambon, Brondong, Kejawanan Cirebon, Pelabuhan Ratu, Ter- Estimates of the weight of fishing gears used by individual ves- nate, Bajomulyo, Muncar, Bitung, Cilacap and Kendari) con- sels were informed by data available from the Indonesian Cat- tained only 19 of the more than 50 subcategories of fishing alogue of Fishing Gear Designs (Widodo & Suparman, 2013) gear, including several from vessels without inboard engines. supplemented by information from manufacturers, technical As a result, the 10 target ports were considered to not be repre- references and field surveys. Data were compiled on the di- sentative of the entire Indonesian fishing fleet and these data mensions and weights of individual fishing components used were not extrapolated. Instead, published information on fish- at the vessel level. In two cases (Bouke ami and midwater ing gear designs were used together with statistics on vessel trawl), data on fishing gear dimensions were obtained from the numbers (e.g., BPS, 2019) to estimate the weight of deployed FAO Catalogue of Fishing Gear Designs (FAO, 1978). gears for the Indonesian fishing fleet. Additionally, since no reliable disaggregated data were available on the numbers of Netting weights were derived by rearranging formulae de- outboard motorboats using different gear types, these were scribed in FAO’s Fisherman’s Workbook (FAO, 1990). The omitted from the estimate of weights. material characteristics (twine diameter and runnage) were then used to convert netting areas into weights (Figure 36). A Weight of plastics of replenished annually similar approach was used to calculate the weights of ropes The annual replenishment weight of materials provides a and twines used in fishing gear construction. Weights of floats gross estimate (Figure 37) of the (i) weight of fishing gear dis- were obtained from fishing gear manufacturer’s catalogues. posed of ashore; and (ii) weights of fishing gears abandoned, It was initially hoped that estimates of the weight of deployed lost or discarded at sea. Replenishment weights of plastic fish- fishing gears derived from surveys in the ten target ports could ing gear materials are a function of the fishing method, fishing be extrapolated to estimate the weight of fishing gears across ground condition and boat operator behavior. Interviews were all fishing ports in Indonesia. However, the ten ports surveyed conducted with boat operators to obtain information about the quantity of new fishing gear and fishing gear components purchased annually to replace gears that had been damaged or disposed of through operation. This information was com- bined was technical advice on specific replenishment rates obtained from fishing experts in Indonesia. Where: WFGR Weight of fishing gear replenished WFGL Weight of end of life fishing gear landed WALDFG Weight of fishing gear left at sea WFG Weight of fishing gear plastics WFGR Weight of rope & twine WFGN Weight of netting WFGF Weight of floats 103 RR Replenishment Rate % WFGR Weight of Fishing gear replenished annually Figure 37: Formulae used to derive weights of fishing gear plastics and the proxy value for ALDFG. ASSESSMENT OF GEAR-SPECIFIC ALDFG RISK IN INDONESIA A risk assessment was carried out for each fishing gear based ated. Within each dimension, contributing variables were iden- on its relative vulnerability to damage or loss, its relative mag- tified and scored from 1 (low) to 5 (high). nitude (i.e., the quantity of gear replenished annually), and its ecological impacts. The following assumptions guided the de- Vulnerability to damage and loss velopment of the risk assessment: Fourteen variables were identified that directly contribute • EOLFG generation for a specific gear type and fleet is a to wear, tear and subsequent damage and/ or loss of fishing function of: gears, leading to EOLFG and ALDFG (Box 2). In addition, two a. the numbers of vessels in the fleet; and exogenous factors that are imposed on all fleets (severe b. the weights of fishing gear deployed by all vessels weather and fleet separation, within the fleet. • The annual weight of fishing gear replenished for a fleet Box 3) were also considered due to their influence on ALDFG is a function of: generation. Each variable was scored from 1-5 for likelihood of a. the EOLFG generated by the fishing fleet and landed occurrence and 1-5 for severity of impact, with the vulnerability ashore in a year; and of a fishing gear to a given variable indicated by the product of b. the ALDFG generated by the fishing fleet and disposed the likelihood x the severity (Table 20). The overall score of the of or left at sea. vulnerability of a fishing gear to loss and damage was calculat- • The likelihood and severity of fishing gear damage and/or ed as the average vulnerability across all variables. gear loss within a fleet is a function of: c. the characteristics of fishing vessel operations for the fleet; d. the intrinsic characteristics of the fishing gear operat- ed by a fleet, and e. the likelihood of the fishing gear from a fleet encoun- tering the fishing gear of another. Each fishing gear was assessed across three dimensions: (i) vulnerability to damage, abandonment, loss or discard, based on desk-based analysis; (ii) likelihood of impacts on commer- cial and vulnerable species and habitats, based on desk-based analysis; and (iii) quantity of end-of-life plastic material gener- Severity* Likelihood* 1 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2 1 *Likelihood: 1. Unlikely. Unlikely to occur during regular fishing operations. 2. Remote. Unlikely, though possible, during regular fishing operations. 3. Occasional. Likely to occur occasionally during regular operations. 4. Probable. Will occur at a given time during fishing operations. 5. Frequent. Likely to occur / to be expected. 104 *Severity: 1. Negligible. No serious damage or loss of fishing gear. 2. Marginal. Minor fishing gear damage requiring on board repair completed without loss of fishing time. Minor scraps of netting and ropes generated. 3. Moderate. Serious damage to components and or partial loss of fishing gear. Significant pieces of netting missing or damaged beyond repair. On board repairs result in loss of fishing time to complete. Partial replacement of materials / components to replace damaged ones. Old net is repaired and re- used, but major scrap pieces generated. 4. Critical. Major fishing equipment damage and loss. Damaged gear is replaced for repair ashore or for salvaging useable components. New gear installed. 5. Catastrophic. Total loss of fishing gear. COmplete new gear installed. Old gear is damaged beyond repair. Table 20: 5 x 5 risk matrix for the likelihood and severity of damage and loss. Box 2: Operational variables contributing to fishing Box 3: Exogenous variables contributing to gear vulnerability to ALDFG fishing gear vulnerability to ALDFG The likelihood and severity of fourteen operational Fleet separation and two exogenous variables were evaluated to as- This study did not identify any fisheries where zoning sess the vulnerability of each fishing gear to ALDFG. is employed. The absence of fleet separation allows These variables were: passive and active vessels of different size and pow- • Wear & Tear from mechanical systems er to set their gears in the same fishing grounds with • Wear and tear from towing over seabed the prospect of mobile fishing gears running over • Wear, tear, damage from unintended contact with anchored fishing gears such as pots, gillnets and set seabed longlines. The likelihood and severity of such encoun- • Contact with seabed obstructions ters is increased when fishing gears are poorly marked • Deployed fishing gear not retrieved and/ or the passive fishing gear vessel is not attending • Loss or damage resulting from other fleets on their gear. fishing grounds • Fishing gear lost overboard Extreme weather events • One or more fishing gear units cannot be located Generally larger vessels with access to weather infor- at sea (lost) mation can take precautionary avoidance action in- • Poor handling and stowage of fishing gears cluding retrieval of fishing gear and moving to a safe • Fishing gear material strength severely dimin- distance from approaching weather systems. On the ished other hand, small-scale fisheries in remote areas may • Poor seamanship and navigation not be able to retrieve gear and store it safely ashore. • Noncompliance with Regulations Post Disaster Needs Assessment reports often identi- • Fishing equipment poorly maintained fy small-scale coastal fishing communities in the front • Crew poorly trained in gear maintenance line of damage from severe weather and incurring sig- • Overcrowding of fishing grounds nificant losses. • Severe weather events Likelihood of ecological impacts DATA LIMITATIONS AND CAVEATS The four commonly accepted ecological impacts of ALDFG There is limited availability of disaggregated data on the num- are: (i) ghost fishing; (ii) entanglement of marine life; (iii) raft- bers of vessels, size of vessels and the types of fishing gear ing of invasive species; and (iv) smothering of habitats. In the carried by each vessel for the 570 PPS, PPN, PPI and PPP absence of available data on the ecological impacts of ALDFG ports distributed across Indonesia. The absence of such in- in Indonesia’s fisheries, the likelihood of these impacts was formation prevents identification of those ports considered as scored from 1 (low) to 5 (high) based on a reviewed of pub- high risk for EOLFG and ALDFG generation. lished literature from comparable fisheries worldwide. Similarly, the paucity of data on ALDFG, ALDAG, ghost fishing Quantity of end-of-life plastic material gen- and ghost fishing related ecological impacts has constrained erated risk assessments. Assessments of the likelihood of ecological The quantities of fishing gear netting, floats and ropes derived impacts in this study are derived from published literature on from the plastic weight estimations described previously were comparable fisheries, rather than from primary data on Indo- used to score each gear from low (1) to high (5) quantities of nesia’s fisheries. plastic material generated. This study has focused on larger-scale fisheries, in part due 105 Overall risk rating to the limited availability of gear-disaggregated data on the The overall relative risk rating (RR) was calculated for each small-scale components of the fleet. Targeting larger-scale gear type following the approach described by Gilman et al. fishing fleets is likely to be an efficient approach for initial (2021) and using the formula ALDFG pilot project, due to the advantages associated with large numbers of vessels and large volumes of fishing gear waste being concentrated into defined locations (see Annex 10). While the contribution of individual small-scale vessels to RR = Q x V + 2E ALDFG is undoubtably small, the large numbers of small-scale vessels operating in Indonesia mean that cumulative impacts Where: are likely to be large. Further study into the dynamics of ALDFG Q Quantity risk index; and EOLFG generation within Indonesia’s small-scale fisheries V Vulnerability risk index; and remains an urgent area for research. E Ecological risk index. Ecological risk was assigned a weight of 2 to empha- size the adverse outcomes term and so reduce the likelihood of false negatives where gears with high relative risk are assigned low RR scores due to gear quantity underestimates. ANNEX 2 Interview Questionnaires FISHERS f. Place gear in storage for repair later 106 Main gear type used g. Return to fishing port for throw away • Record (i) main and (ii) secondary (if present) gear h. Other types*. 3. Which parts of the gear need to be replaced most often? • Describe typical gear unit e.g., number of net panels, d. Netting mesh size, amount of head and foot ropes (m & e. Ropes diameter, number and distance between buoys, f. Floats weights, (this should be recorded separately, not in the g. Other spreadsheet) • Where is gear is bought from – manufacturers & sellers Gear Turn over and replacement 1. How long does a new fishing gear last? Main fishing ground b. One trip 1. Location (WPP / sea area)* c. One season 2. Distance & direction from port (nautical miles / km from d. one year, port e.g., between 50 – 80 nm north of the port. e. Other 3. Water depth*: see Annex A: Lists 2. How much money do you spend on replacement fishing 4. Substrate type*: see Annex A: Lists gear a year? 3. If your gear is damaged, who does the repairs? Fishing patterns 4. Roughly how much money do you spend on repairing 1. Number of trips per year*: Annex A: Lists) fishing gear a year? 2. Duration of trip* (days) 5. What % is materials 3. Peak fishing season (month to month) 6. What % is labor 4. Low fishing season (month to month) 7. How many replacement gear units / components do you 5. Non-fishing season (month to month) buy a year? 8. Where do you buy them from? Gear Damage 9. Would you be prepared to spend more on new fishing 1. What types of fishing gear damage are most common gear if it lasted longer? during a fishing season? b. Damage from bad weather Gear disposal c. Damage from seabed 1. Where do you dispose of old fishing gear netting, ropes d. Damage due to equipment failure and floats and how much does it cost? e. Damage from big catch b. Ashore in landfill f. Gear is not damaged, just worn out and needs to be c. Ashore in port replaced d. Ashore at home e.g., via municipal solid waste g. Other facilities 2. What do you do when gear is damaged? e. At sea discard c. Throw in the sea f. At sea burning d. Repair damage at sea and keep using g. sell it to a gear recycling agent, or any other? e. Change to new fishing gear at sea h. Use at home for other purpose i. If used for other purpose, please specify 2. In making the decisions above, what influences your FISHING GEAR MANUFACTURERS 107 choice e.g., cost, easiness, operational factors. Other? AND SELLERS 3. How do you make the decision to replace gear rather than Try to visit the main fishing gear manufacturers and those repair it? selling or repairing fishing gear. 4. Who pays for waste gear collection and treatment/ disposal – what are the fees? General Information 1. General profile of the business e.g., year when started, Gear management number of employees, number and location of main 1. Do you mark your gear? If so, how (e.g., mechanism, branches, any public sector investment / involvement in material, ID information included) the business. 2. How do you prevent gear conflict e.g., other boats / 2. Do they offer ‘end of life’ recycling of products they sell? fishers damaging your gear? What is their view on their responsibility for collecting 3. Do you reduce soak times specifically to reduce the and disposing of old fishing gear responsibly? How might risk of gear loss and how e.g., in bad weather / strong this work for them and what are the barriers to buy-back currents, other? schemes? Gear loss / abandonment / discarding Fishing gear characterization (at point of sale) 1. In what circumstances / for what reasons do you lose Ask for brochures / technical specifications & pricing for all fishing gear? key fishing gear components e.g. 2. If you lose it, do you try to recover it? If so, how 1. Gillnet panels / sheets: filament / twine thickness, successful are you? material, weight (kg / m2), mesh size, standard panel 3. In what circumstances / for what reasons would you dimensions (e.g., no. of meshes high / deep or in meters, abandon fishing gear e.g., fishing without the right permit floatation needed (e.g., no. of floats per net panel), no. of / permissions, logistical problems, etc.? panels used for a single complete gear unit), price sheets, 4. In what circumstances / for what reasons would you meters of different sheeting types sold per year. permanently discard fishing gear e.g., not enough storage 2. Seine net material: filament / twine thickness, material space, damaged too much, cheaper than disposing on weight (kg / m2, mesh size, standard seine dimensions land, easier than disposing on land, or other? (e.g., no. of meshes high / deep or in meters, floatation 5. What are the key factors that would encourage you needed (e.g., no. of floats per net panel), no. of panels to land damaged / old gear and to get it recycled or used for a single complete gear unit), prices, no. of units responsibly disposed of? sold per year. Please take photographs of vessels, gear storage units, gear 3. Longlines: mainline thickness (mm), material type, branch disposal facilities in port. line thickness (mm), material type, floatation needed (e.g., no. of floats per xx meters of main line), length of main line and number (and length) of branch lines used for a single complete gear unit), price sheets, meters of each line type sold a year. 4. Ropes: different diameters, materials used, process, no. of each sold a year. 5. Buoys: sizes, weights, material types, prices, no. of each sold a year. If possible, use this to fill in the following two tables (we can do this if we have the information above): 1. Using Table 15 overleaf, obtain the main characteristics and volumes of the fishing gears sold. Focus on gillnets, purse seines, ring nets, longlines and FADs. Only fill in the relevant tables for the fishing gear types made / sold by the manufacturer / sales outlet. 2. Using Table 16, obtain the quantity (in meters or number) of different gear components sold per year. GILLNETS 108 Gear type / Length of No. Netting Head rope Mesh Size Meshes Meshes No. of Price per Units sold component one net floats Material dia (mm) (mm) in one net in one net panels that unit (IDR) per year panel (m) runnage (width) (depth) make a full m/kg or gear set diameter (mm) Multi-filament gillnet Gillnet (Monofilament} Trammel net panels (x3) If necessary, add new rows e.g., for different sizes of net type PURSE NETS Gear type / Length of Depth of Mesh Size Netting Meshes in Meshes in # panels # panels No. Floats Price per Units sold component seine (m) Seine (m) mm Material one panel one panel wide deep unit (IDR) per year runnage (width) (width) m/kg or diameter mm Purse Seine Lampara SEINE NETS Gear type / Length of Length of No. Mesh Size Netting Codend Codend Length of No. Floats Price per Units sold component Head rope footrope meshes in main Material netting dia netting Seine (m) unit (IDR) per year (m) (m) around part of net runnage (mm) mesh size body mm m/kg or (mm) diameter mm Boat seine (towed) FADS Gear type / Weight of Is netting Netting Drifting Length of Twine No. FADs No. Floats Type of Price per Units sold component netting new or Material FAD / main rope diameter per boat floats unit (IDR) per year used (kg) recycled? runnage Anchored (m) (mm) (Y or N) m/kg or FAD? diameter mm FAD (anchored) buoy FAD (drift) buoy) LONG LINES Gear type / Length of Mainline No. Floats Buoy line Buoy line Price per Units sold component mainline dia (mm) material length (m) unit (IDR) per year Longline (main line) Longline (branch line) 109 LIFT NETS Gear type / Length of Rope dia Mesh Size in Netting No. mesh- Depth of No. meshes No. Floats Price per Units sold component Head rope (mm) main part of Material es around net (m) around unit (IDR) per year (m) net mm runnage m/kg or diameter mm Lift Nets SET NETS Gear type / Boat GT Length Width of Depth of Netting Mesh size No. Floats Water depth No. Price per Units sold component Range of set net set net set net Material anchors unit (IDR) per year (m) (m) (m) runnage m/kg or diameter mm Set Nets H. POTS & TRAPS Gear type / Boat GT No. traps Is trap Buoy line Mesh size Netting No. Floats Water depth No. Price per Units sold component Range per boat using dia Material (m) anchors unit (IDR) per year synthetic runnage netting m/kg or (Y N)? diameter mm Set Nets COMPONENT SALES PER YEAR MAIN PLASTIC TYPES MAIN BRANDS (meters / number) Rope (>50 mm) Rope (21 – 50 mm) Rope (10 – 20 mm) Rope (<10 mm) Buoys Other (describe) Other (describe) Other (describe) FISHING GEAR COLLECTORS / DISPOSAL / recycling, e.g.: RECYCLING BUSINESSES / ORGANISATIONS a. Fleet size / INFORMAL SECTOR b. Gear type Fishing Gear Repair c. other 1. How many fishing gear repair businesses 7. What criteria, if any, do you have to accept fishing gear for 2. For each of these, record: recycling? (e.g., how clean, separated, only certain types?) a. Type of repairer (business, public agency, informal 8. What prices are paid or charged for accepting the waste sector/individuals) fishing gear? (differences between cleaned / dismantled / b. Size of net repair yard (m2) graded & whole) c. Estimated volumes repaired / year (kg) by gear type 9. Who cleans and dismantles the gear (e.g., fisher, d. Charging / pricing system middleman or recycler) e. Main clients 10. What plastic types or gear types cannot be recycled, 3. For each, record the main issues they have when (nylon, PP, PE), steel, lead in the raw material including operating: impurities (contaminant)? d. Available space? 11. What happens to fishing gear components that cannot be 110 e. Arrangements with fishers –informal or regular recycled? (e.g., landfill, incineration) arrangements and agreements in place? 12. What prices do you get for the recycled material (buyers, f. Economics of repair vs replacement e.g., point where prices, description of downward supply chain) repair becomes uneconomic (for different gear types / 13. What is the recycled gear used for? Is there any re- components / materials) purposing (e.g., cleaned nets used for other purposes) or g. If uneconomic, where is the gear disposed of? plastic pellets sold on to plastic manufacturers? h. If disposed of, is the gear cleaned / disassembled / 14. What is the yield: How much recycled plastic do you get graded? per weight of fishing gear? i. Other? 15. What are the main constraints / issues for your operation: Please take photographs of repair yards / facilities. a. Available space? b. Mixture of different components / plastics Fishing Gear Recycling c. Bio-fouling and contamination of gear components This is for anyone that is currently receiving damaged / end d. Securing sufficient supply of raw material of life / recovered fishing gear. e. Seasonality of supply of raw material 1. Number of recycling operators (which are businesses, f. Technical issues in the recycling process (if possible, single operators / informal sector?) pinpoint issue to specific gear types / components) 2. Typical routes for recycling e.g., from fisher / port to first g. Sufficient market for recycled products buyers of recycled material (network diagram showing h. Ensuing the business remains profitable. different routes and indicating relative volumes). i. Other? 3. Typical financial flows Please take photographs of recycling facilities, inc. raw a. Is the raw material (fishing gear) purchased, provided material stores and recycled products. free of charge or do the suppliers (e.g., fishermen / port authorities / others) pay for it to be recycled? From the answers, produce a recycling process flow diagram Please give as much detail here as possible. describing the stages from collection to sale of recycled b. Do they have any costs of the recycling process for material, showing the different likely routes in waste gear different types of fishing gear and its initial condition? treatment. Again, please provide as much detail as possible. 4. Source and volume of material recycled in 2016, 2017, Plastic recyclers 2018 & 2019 (not currently taking fishing gear) e. Please provide total volume of fishing gear for each of This option is for anyone that does recycling but do not these years (even if zero) currently use plastic waste materials from the fishing and f. Please provide an estimate of the percentage aquaculture sectors. composition of this by gear type. If this can be done 1. Why do you currently not accept waste fishing / by year even better, but otherwise get this for 2019 aquaculture gear? Possible reasons might include and ask if there is any trend in the raw material supply not economic to do so, supply rates are too low or pattern. irregular, the gears are too complex (e.g., mixed 5. Costs of (i) collection, (ii) transport (iii) cleaning, (iv) polymers, need to be broken down into constituent dismantling, (v) treatment (grinding etc.) and other costs? parts), the gear is to dirty / contaminated, the recycled 6. Where are the opportunities to increase fishing gear materials are not in demand, technical issues, not in sufficient quantity etc., etc. 2. What would be needed to encourage you to start accepting plastic waste from the fishing sector, especially end of life / recovered fishing gear? PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED IN FISHING GEAR RECOVERY, RECYCLING AND DISPOSAL 1. What are the current roles in fishing gear collection, retrieval and disposal? 2. What roles should (i) the private sector (ii) the public sector be taking in fishing gear 111 ANNEX 3 Gear-specific quantities and annual replenishment 112 weights FISHING VESSEL AND FISHING GEAR CHARACTERISTICS % Weight Wt. of plastics Wt. of plastics Weight of Weight of % of total % of total of plastics replenished replenished Quantity of No. of plastics plastics Wt. of netting Wt. of floats Wt. of ropes FISIHING GEAR CLASSIFICATION Notes Indonesian Indonesian GT Size deployed by annualy - wear annually - FG Replen- vessels deployed kg deployed per deployed t deployed t deployed t fleet fleet Indonesian & tear by annualized by ished per vessel fleet (t) fleet fleet t fleet t Indonesian Code Fishing Gear Name (Indonesia) Acronym English Name Notes 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Purse Seines 01.1.1.1. Pukat Cincin Pelagis Kecil dengan Satu Kapal PS1-K One Boat Operated Purse Seine* 1 3883 2.3% <30 4,701 34,253 40.8% 30,236 2,794 1,217 01.1.1.2 Pukat Cincin Pelagis Besar dengan Satu Kapal PS1-B One Boat Operated Purse Seine* 1 1428 0.8% 01.1.1.2.2 Pukat Cincin Grup Pelagis Besar PS2-B Two Boats Operated Purse Seines* 1 498 0.3% 4.8% 7,081 13,824 VH 01.1.2.1 Pukat Cincin Grup Pelagis Kecil PS2-K Two Boats Operated Purse Seines* 1 1874 1.1% >30 13,222 12,959 15.5% 11,466 1,058 433 01.2 Jaring Lingkar Tanpa Tali Kerut LA Sorrounding Net Without Purse Line 1 582 0.3% Beach Seines 02.1 Pukat Tarik Pantai SB Beach Seine 2 1433 0.8% 0.8% <5 44 63 0.1% 25 7 31 3 - Boat Seines 02.2.1 Dogot SV-SDN Danish Seine 2 2304 1.3% <5 63 147 0.2% 96 1 50 29 35 02.2.2 Pair Seines SV-SPR Boat Seine* 2 250 0.1% - - - - - - - - - L 02.2.3 Payang SV-PYG Boat Seine* 2 3911 2.3% 5.19% <30 89 347 0.4% 317 - 31 35 42 02.2.4 Cantrang SV-CTG Boat Seine* 2 1255 0.7% <20 72 122 0.1% 73 17 32 3 4 02.2.5 Lampara Dasar SV-LDS Boat Seine* 2 1016 0.6% <20 114 116 0.1% 73 18 25 23 28 Trawls 03.11 Pukat Hela Dasar Berpalang TBB Beam Trawl 3 13 0.0% - - - - - - - - - - 03.12 Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan OTB Single Boat Bottom Otter Trawl 3 1058 0.6% <30 142 206 0.2% 177 18 11 51 69 VL 03.12.1 Pukat Helas Dasar Udang, Pukat Udang OTB-PU Single Boat Bottom Otter Trawl* 3 959 0.6% 1.6% 03.15 Pukat Hela Dasar Dua Kapal PTB Botton Pair Trawl 3 25 0.0% - - - - - - - - - - 03.2.3 Pukat Hela Pertengahan Udang TMS Shrimp Trawls 3 220 0.1% <5 108 22 0.03% 22 1 1 6 7 VL 03.21 Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan, Pukat Ikan OTM Single Boat Midwater Otter Trawl 4 526 0.3% <5 73 39 0.05% 32 3 4 10 12 VL Beach Seines 04.1 Penggaruk Berkapal DRB Towed Dredge 17 1135 0.7% - - - - - - - - - - 0.8% 04.2 Penggaruk Tanpa Kapal DRH Hand Dredge 17 293 0.2% - - - - - - - - - - 113 FISHING VESSEL AND FISHING GEAR CHARACTERISTICS % Weight Wt. of plastics Wt. of plastics Weight of Weight of replenished % of total % of total of plastics replenished Quantity of No. of plastics plastics Wt. of netting Wt. of floats Wt. of ropes FISIHING GEAR CLASSIFICATION Notes vessels Indonesian Indonesian GT Size deployed kg deployed per deployed by deployed t deployed t deployed t annualy - wear annually - FG Replen- fleet fleet Indonesian & tear by annualized by ished per vessel fleet (t) fleet fleet t fleet t Indonesian Code Fishing Gear Name (Indonesia) Acronym English Name Notes 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Lift Nets 05.1 Anco LNP Portable lift net 18 49 0.0% - 2 0.2 - - - - - - VL 05.2.1 Bagan Berperahu LNB-BP Boat operated lift net* 18 5019 2.9% <5 175 896 1.1% 823 26 47 90 105 L 4.8% 05.2.2 Bouke Ami LNB-BA Boat operated lift net* 18 673 0.4% <30 227 218 0.3% 155 0 62 22 25 VL 05.3 Bagan Tangkap LNS Shore-operated stationary lift net 18 2500 1.5% <20 45 112 0.1% 92 0 20 11 13 VL Falling Gear 06.1 Jala Jatuh Berkapal FCN Cast net 19 73 0.0% <30 161 20 0.02% 17 0 3 2.0 2.4 VL 0.6% 06.9 Jala Tebar FG Fallinh gear not specified 19 955 0.6% - - - - - - - - - - Gill and entangling nets 07.1 Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <600m GNS Set gillnet anchored <5 53 737 0.9% 106 133 498 221 295 M 6 15207 0.6% 07.1 Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <2500m GNS Set gillnet anchored 5-30 1,006 4,864 5.8% 2,978 261 1,625 1,459 1,946 H 07.2 Jaring Insang Hanyut <600m GND Drift gillnet <5 241 13,617 16.2% 6,139 340 7,138 4,085 5,447 H 7.2 Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <2500m GND Drift gillnet 7 33259 19.4% 5-30 1,296 7,812 9.3% 3,325 621 3,866 2,344 3,125 H 7.2 Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <5000m GND Drift gillnet >30 1,281 753 0.9% 339 19 395 226 301 M 31.1% 07.3 Jaring Insang Lingkar GNC Encircling gillnet 8 3414 2.0% - - - - - - - - - - 07.4 Jaring Insang Berpancang GNF Fixed Fillnet (on stakes) 744 0.4% - - - - - - - - - - 07.5 Jaring Insang Berlapis, Jaring Klitil <600m GTR Trammel net 9 7684 4.5% <5 64 962 1.1% 150 271 541 289 385 M 07.6 Jaring Insang Kombinasi dengan Trammel Net <600m GTN Combining gillnet-trammel net 9 7340 4.3% 7 Jaring Insang 67648 31.1% - - 28,746 34.3% 13,039 1,645 14,062 8,624 11,498 VH Pots and traps 08.1.1 Stationary Uncovered Pound Nets, Set Net FPN-SN Stationary uncovered pound net* 10 42 0.0% - - - - - - - - - - 08.2 Bubu FPO Pot 11 15244 4.3% <5 1,006 4,864 5.8% 2,978 261 1,625 1,459 1,946 M 08.3.0 Bubu Bersayap FYK Fyke net 20 420 0.2% 08.4.1 Pukat Labuh FSN-PL Long bag set net 20 59 0.0% 08.4.2 Togo FSN-TG Stow net* 20 388 0.2% 08.4.3 Ambal FSN-AB Stow net* 20 575 0.3% 6.2% See below for combined weights of these sub categories 08.4.4 Jermal FSN-JM Stow net* 20 1119 0.7% 08.4.5 Pengerih FSN-PG Stow net* 20 162 0.1% 08.5 Barriers, Fences, Weirs, Sero FWR Barrier, fence, weir 20 524 0.3% - - - - - - - - - - 08.6 Perangkap Ikan Peloncat FAR Aerial trap - 0 0.0% - - - - - - - - - - 08.30, 08.0.01- Bubu Bersayap, Pukat Labuh, Togo, KOM FYK, FSN-PL, FSN-TG, AB, JM, PG 18532 6.2% <5 46 123 0.1% 113 3 834 18 28 VL 08.4.05 Ambai, Pengerih 114 FISHING VESSEL AND FISHING GEAR CHARACTERISTICS % Weight Wt. of plastics Wt. of plastics Weight of Weight of replenished % of total % of total of plastics replenished Quantity of No. of plastics plastics Wt. of netting Wt. of floats Wt. of ropes annualy - wear FISIHING GEAR CLASSIFICATION Notes Indonesian Indonesian GT Size deployed by annually - FG Replen- vessels deployed kg deployed per deployed t deployed t deployed t & tear by fleet fleet Indonesian annualized by ished per vessel fleet (t) fleet t fleet fleet t Indonesian Code Fishing Gear Name (Indonesia) Acronym English Name Notes 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Hook and lines 09.1.1 Pancing Ulur (nontuna) LHP-PUNT Headline and hand operated polehand-line* 12 49 14.4% 09.1.2 Pancing Ulur (tuna) LHP-PUT Headline and hand operated polehand-line* 12 5019 0.0% 09.1.3 Pancing Benjoran LHP-PJ Headline and hand operated polehand-line* 12 673 1.8% 09.1.4 Huhate LHP-PH Headline and hand operated polehand-line* 12 2500 0.7% <5 5.5 173 0.21% 0 0 173 17 20 VL 09.1.5 Squid Angling, Pancing Cumi LHP-SA Squid Angling 12 49 1.1% 09.2.1 Squid Jigging, Pancing Cumi Mekanis LHM-PC Squid Jigging 12 5019 0.2% 09.2.2 Huhate Mekanis LHM-HM Mechanized lines and pole-handline* 12 673 0.0% 09.31 Rawai Dasar <1000 LLS Set longline <5 55.3 295 0 28.2 266.4 26.6 35.5 VL 09.31 Rawai Dasar <2000 LLS Set longline 13 8291 4.8% 30.2% 5-30 111.6 1,107 1.68% 0 15.6 1091.8 109.2 145.6 L 09.31 Rawai Dasar <10.000 LLS Set longline >30 375.3 5 0 0.1 5.3 0.5 0.7 VL 09.32.1 Rawai Hanyut<1000 LLD-RT Drifting longlines* <5 127 132 0 22.9 109.5 10.9 14.6 VL 09.32.1 Rawai Hanyut<2000 LLD-RT Drifting longlines* 14 2501 1.5% 5-30 454 413 2.15% 0 60.0 352.7 35.3 47.0 VL 09.32.1 Rawai Hanyut<10.000 LLD-RT Drifting longlines* >30 454 1,261 0 152.7 1108.2 110.8 147.8 L 9.40 Vertical longlines 21 - - - - - - - - - - 09.4.0.2 Rawai Cucut LLD-RC Drifting longlines* 14 673 0.3% - - - - - - - - - - 09.5 Tonda LTL Trolling line 16 2500 5.2% <5 30 277 0.33% 0 0 276.9 27.7 36.9 VL 09.9.1 Pancing Layang-Layang LX-LY Hooks and lines* 269 0.2% - - - - - - - - - - Miscellaneous gear 10.1 Tombak HAR Harpoon 67 0.0% - - - - - - - - - - 10.2.1 Ladung MHI-LD Miscellaneous gear* 202 0.1% - - - - - - - - - - 10.2.2 Panah MHI-PN Miscellaneous gear* 341 0.2% - - - - - - - - - - 0.7% 10.5 Pukat Dorong MPN Pushnet 344 0.2% <5 9 0.01% 7 0 2 - - VL 10.6 Seser MSP Scoopnet 238 0.1% <5 5.3 6 0.01% 5 0 1 - - VL 10.7 Muro Ami MDR Dive-in net 40 0.0% - - - - - - - - - - 115 ANNEX 4 Gear-specific weights of plastic deployed in Indonesia’s 116 fisheries Category Fishing Gear Vessel Size Vessel No. Netting Ropes Floats Total Code Tonnes Surrounding Nets 01.0.0 Surrounding Gear Jaring Lingkar <500m 01.0.0 GT <30 7,285 30,235,674 1,216,566 2,793,731 34,253 Surrounding Gear Jaring Lingkar <1500m 01.0.0 GT >30 980 11,466,425 433,176 1,058,439 12,959 Seines 02.0.0 Beach Seine Pukat Tarik Pantai 02.1.0 GT <5 1,433 25,083 30,816 7,166 64 Danish Seine Dogol 02.2.1 GT <5 2,312 95,817 49,700 1,156 149 Boat Seine Payang 02.2.0.1 GT <5 3,912 316,903 30,517 0 351 117 Boat Seine Cantrang <5GT 02.2.0.2 GT <5 420 13,524 7,000 4,077 25 Beach Seine Cantrang >5GT 02.2.0.2 GT >5 1,124 59,007 25,120 12,925 98 Boat Seine Lampara Dasar 02.2.0.3 GT <10 1,016 73,241 24,786 17,878 117 Trawls 03.0.2 Single boat bottom otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan<10GT 03.12 GT <10 2,040 175448 10200 17137 205 Single boat bottom otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan>10GT 03.12 GT>10 15 1,948 331 505 3 Shrimp trawls Pukat Helas Pertengahan Udang 03.2.3 GT <5 220 21,622 989 1,099 24 Single boat midwater otter trawl Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan, 03.21 GT <5 526 31,919 4,049 2,629 39 Pukat Lift Nets Portable Lift Net Anco 05.1.0 GT <5 49 245 0 0 0 Boat operated lift net <5GT Bagan Berperahu 05.2.0.1 GT <5 5,122 822,886 47,381 25,611 896 Boat operated lift net Bouke Ami 05.2.0.2 GT <30 959 155,318 61,319 0 218 Shore-operated stationary lift net Bagan Tancap 05.3.0 GT <5 2,500 92,487 19,997 0 112 Falling Gear Cast net Jala Jatuh Berkapal 06.1.0 GT <30 123 16,785 3,085 0 20 Traps 08.0.1 Pot Bubu (600) 08.2.0 GT <5 15,436 858,241 833,544 194,494 1,886 Fyke net 08.3.0, Bubu Bersayap 08.0.01-08.4.05 GT <5 2,723 112,532 6,983 3,050 123 Scoopnet Seser 08.9.02 GT <5 238 5,027 1,263 0 6 Category Fishing Gear Vessel Size Vessel No. Netting Ropes Floats Total Code Tonnes Hook and Lines Handline and hand operated Pancing Ulur 9.1 GT <5 31,398 172,687 0 0 173 Set longline Rawai Dasar <1000 09.3.0 GT <5 5,327 0 266,372 28,235 295 Set longline Rawai Dasar<2000 09.3.0 GT 5-30 2,951 0 1,091,775 76 1,092 Set longline Rawai Dasar<10,000 09.3.0 GT >30 14 0 5,315 76 5 Drifting longlines Rawai Hanyut <1000 09.4.0.1 GT <5 1,042 0 109,462 22,935 132 Drifting longlines 09.4.0.1 GT 5-30 909 0 352,654 59,988 413 118 Rawai Hanyut <2000 Drifting longlines Rawai Hanyut <10,000 09.4.0.1 GT >30 694 0 1,108,200 152,664 1,261 Trolling line 09.6.0.1 - GT<5 9,230 0 276,897 0 277 Tonda/PLL 09.9.01 Miscellaneous 10.0.0 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous 10.0.0 GT <5 610 0 18,291 0 18 Pushnet Pukat Dorong 10.5 GT <5 344 7,269 1,826 0 9 Category Fishing Gear Vessel Size GT<5 GT 5-10 GT 10-20 GT 20-30 GT >30 Code Surrounding Nets 01.0.0 Jaring Jangkar 01.0.0 1706 1782 2030 1766 980 Seines 02.0.0 Beach Seine Pukat Tarik Pantai 02.1.0 1044 380 8 1 0 Danish Seine Dogol 02.2.1 1994 180 63 65 8 Boat Seine Pair Seines 02.2.2 104 78 68 0 0 Boat Seine Payang 02.2.0.1 2869 747 288 8 1 Boat Seine Cantrang 02.2.0.2 317 427 235 272 44 Boat Seine Lampara Dasar 02.2.0.3 369 399 248 0 0 Category Fishing Gear Vessel Size GT<5 GT 5-10 GT 10-20 GT 20-30 GT >30 Code Trawls 03.0.0 Beam trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpalang 03.11 13 0 0 0 0 Single boat bottom otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan 03.12 871 172 15 0 0 Single boat bottom otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Udang, 03.12.1 705 254 0 0 0 Pukat Udang Bottom pair trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Dua Kapal 03.15 14 11 0 0 0 Shrimp trawls Pukat Hela Pertengahan Udang 03.2.3 212 8 0 0 0 119 Single boat midwater otter trawl Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan, 03.21 461 62 1 2 0 Pukat Ikan Pushnet Pukat Dorong 03.9.0.1 220 102 22 0 0 Dredges 04.0.0 Towed dredges Penggaruk Berkapal 04.1.0 929 195 11 0 0 Hand dredges Penggaruk Tanpa Kapal 04.2.0 49 0 0 0 0 Lift Nets 05.0.0 Portable lift net Anco 05.1.0 2481 1536 409 0567 130 Boat operated lift net Bagan Berperahu 05.2.0.1 223 2 0 262 471 Boat operated lift net Bouke Ami 05.2.0.2 2130 348 22 0 0 Shore-operated stationary lift net Bagan Tancap 05.3.0 14 11 0 2 97 Falling Gear 06.0.0 Cast net Jala Jatuh Berkapal 06.1.0 910 43 0 1 2 Falling gear not specified Jala Tebar 06.9 11566 2437 1004 157 65 Gillnets and entangling Nets 07.0.0 Set gillnet anchored Jaring Insang tetap, 07.1 11566 2437 1004 157 65 Jaring Liong Bun Drift gillnet Jarinf Insang Hanyut, 07.2.0 21244 9706 929 871 588 Jaring Gillnet Oseanik Encircling gillnet Jaring Insang Lingkar 07.2.0.1 2258 782 290 80 21 Fixed fillnet (on stakes) Jaring Insang Berlapis, Jaring Klitik 07.3 481 111 98 48 18 Category Fishing Gear Vessel Size GT<5 GT 5-10 GT 10-20 GT 20-30 GT >30 Code Trammel net Jaring Insang Berlapis, Jaring Klitik 07.4 5823 1784 45 32 4 Combined gillnet-trammel net Jaring Insang Kombinasi dengan 07.5 6386 806 142 1 15 Trammel Net Traps 08.0.0 Stationary uncovered pound net Stationary uncovered pound net, 08.1.0 42 0 0 0 0 Set Net Pot Bubu 08.2.0 11815 2771 413 74 364 Fyke net Bubu Bersayap 02.2.2 396 23 0 0 0 120 Long bag set net Pukat Labuh 02.2.0.1 59 0 0 0 0 Stow net Togo 02.2.0.2 386 2 0 0 0 Stow net Ambai 02.2.0.3 468 107 0 0 0 Stow net Jermal 02.1.0 1100 19 0 0 0 Stow net Pengerih 02.2.1 114 48 0 0 0 Barrier, fence, weir Barriers, Fences, Weirs, Sero 02.2.2 495 29 0 0 0 Drive-in net Muro Ami 02.2.0.1 19 21 0 0 0 Scoopnet Seser 08.9.0.2 181 57 0 0 0 Hooks and Lines 09.0.0 Handline and hand operated polehandline 09.1.0.1 19508 3678 1236 257 46 Pancing Ulur (nontuna) Handline and hand operated poleand-line 09.1.0.2 2122 777 85 128 16 Pancing Berjoran Handline and hand operated Huhate 09.1.0.3 40 110 250 774 235 Squid angling Squid Angling, Pancing Cumi 09.1.0.4 1221 538 20 19 37 Squid jigging Pancing Cumi Mekanis 09.0.2.1 246 45 0 0 9 Set longline Rawai Dasar 09.3.0 5327 2488 463 10 5 Drifting longlines Rawai Tuna 09.4.0.1 941 516 97 161 251 Drifting longlines Rawai Cucut 09.4.0.2 102 39 256 126 156 Category Fishing Gear Vessel Size GT<5 GT 5-10 GT 10-20 GT 20-30 GT >30 Code Trolling Line Tonda 09.6.0.1 4798 2229 1037 797 99 Fishing with kite Pancing Layang-Layang 09.9.0.1 259 10 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Gears 10.0.0 Harpoon Tombak 10.1.0 65 2 0 0 0 Ladung Ladung 10.0.0.1 83 114 5 0 0 Panah Panah 10.0.0.2 339 2 0 0 0 121 ANNEX 5 ALDFG Risk Assessment - scoring tables 122 Table 21: Gear-specific scorings for the likelihood of damage and loss. Variables* Code English Name Indonesian Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Likelihood 01 ENCIRCLING NETS 01.1.1 Single vessel purse seine Pukat Cincin Pelagis Kecil Dengan Satu Kapal 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 2 1.7 01.1.2 Group operated purse seines Pukat Cincin Gruo Pelagis Besar 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 2 1.7 02 SEINE NETS 02.1 Beach Seine Pukat Tarik Pantai 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 3 2 1.6 02.2.1 Danish Seine Dogol 3 4 1 2 1 3 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2.4 02.2.3 Boat Seine* Payang 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 1.9 02.2.4 Boat Seine* Cantrang 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2.4 02.2.5 Boat Seine* Lampara Dasar 2 3 3 3 1 2 1 1 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2.2 03 TRAWLS 03.1.2 Demersal otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan 3 3 4 3 1 3 1 1 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 2.6 123 03.2.1 Midwater otter trawl Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan 3 3 4 3 1 2 1 1 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 2.6 03.2.3 Shrimp trawls Pukat Hela Pertengahan Udang 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1.9 05 LIFT NETS 05.1 Portable lift net Anco 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1.1 05.2.1 Boat Oerated lift net* Bagan Berperahu 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 1.6 05.2.2 Boat Oerated lift net* Bouke Ami 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 1.6 05.3 Shore-operated stationary lift net Bagan Tancap 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 1.6 06 FALLING GEAR 06.1 Cast net Jala Jatuh Berkapal 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 1.7 07 GILLNETS AD ENTANGLING NETS 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <600m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <600m 3 4 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3.0 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <2,500m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <2,500m 3 4 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 3.0 07.2 Drift gillnet Jaring Insang Hanyut <600m 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2.2 07.2 Drift gillnet <2,300m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <2,500m 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2.1 07.2 Drift gillnet <5,000m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <5,000m 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2.1 07.5 Trammel net Jaring Insang Berlapis 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 4 3 2 2 3 3 2 2.8 08 POTS AND TRAPS 08.2 Pot Bubu 2 3 1 3 4 4 3 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3.0 09 HOOK AND LINES 09.1.1 Handline and hand operated poleand-line* Pancing Ulur (nontuna) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 2 2.1 09.3 Set longlines <1,000 Rawal Dasar <1,000 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.9 09.3 Set longlines <2,000 Rawal Dasar <2,000 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.9 09.3 Set longlines <10,000 Rawal Dasar <10,000 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.9 09.4 Drift longlines <1,000 Rawal Hanyut <1,000 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.8 09.4 Drift longlines <2,000 Rawal Hanyut <2,000 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.8 09.4 Drift longlines <10,000 Rawal Hanyut <10,000 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.8 09.5 Trolling line Tonda 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.6 10 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR 10.5 Pushnet Pukat Dorong 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.7 10.6 Scoopnet Seser 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.6 * Description of variables: 1. Wear & tear from mechanical systems. 2. Wear and tear from towing over seabed. 3. Wear, tear and damage from unintended contact with seabed. 4. Contact with seabed obstructions. 5. Deployed fishing gear not retrieved. 6. Loss or damage resulting from other fleets on fishing grounds. 7. Fishing gear lost overboard. 8. One or more fishing gear units cannot be located at sea (lost). 9. Poor handling and stowage of fishing gears. 10. Fishing gear material strength severely diminished. 11. Fishing equipment poorly maintained. 12. Crew poorly trained in gear maintenance. 13. Poor seamanship and navigation. 14. Overcrowding of fishing grounds (fleet separation) 15. Non-compliance with regulations. 16. Severe weather events. Table 22: Gear-specific scorings for the severity of damage and loss. Variables* Code English Name Indonesian Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Severity 01 ENCIRCLING NETS 01.1.1 Single vessel purse seine Pukat Cincin Pelagis Kecil Dengan Satu Kapal 2 2 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 1 2.5 01.1.2 Group operated purse seines Pukat Cincin Gruo Pelagis Besar 1 2 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 1 2.4 02 SEINE NETS 02.1 Beach Seine Pukat Tarik Pantai 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 1.6 02.2.1 Danish Seine Dogol 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2.9 02.2.3 Boat Seine* Payang 2 3 5 4 3 3 2 1 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 1.6 02.2.4 Boat Seine* Cantrang 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2.6 02.2.5 Boat Seine* Lampara Dasar 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2.6 03 TRAWLS 03.1.2 Demersal otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan 3 3 4 4 4 3 1 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 1 2.8 124 03.2.1 Midwater otter trawl Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan 3 3 4 3 4 3 1 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 2.6 03.2.3 Shrimp trawls Pukat Hela Pertengahan Udang 3 4 5 4 4 3 1 1 2 3 2 2 4 3 3 1 2.8 05 LIFT NETS 05.1 Portable lift net Anco 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1.1 05.2.1 Boat Oerated lift net* Bagan Berperahu 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 1.7 05.2.2 Boat Oerated lift net* Bouke Ami 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 1.5 05.3 Shore-operated stationary lift net Bagan Tancap 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 1.4 06 FALLING GEAR 06.1 Cast net Jala Jatuh Berkapal 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 1.5 07 GILLNETS AD ENTANGLING NETS 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <600m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <600m 3 2 4 4 4 4 1 5 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 3.2 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <2,500m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <2,500m 3 2 4 4 4 4 1 5 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 3.2 07.2 Drift gillnet Jaring Insang Hanyut <600m 3 1 1 1 3 3 1 5 2 2 3 3 4 2 3 1 2.4 07.2 Drift gillnet <2,300m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <2,500m 3 1 1 1 3 3 1 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 1 2.2 07.2 Drift gillnet <5,000m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <5,000m 3 1 1 1 3 3 1 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 1 2.2 07.5 Trammel net Jaring Insang Berlapis 2 3 3 4 4 5 3 4 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 3.3 08 POTS AND TRAPS 08.2 Pot Bubu 2 3 1 2 5 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 4 3 3.2 09 HOOK AND LINES 09.1.1 Handline and hand operated poleand-line* Pancing Ulur (nontuna) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 4 1 1.9 09.3 Set longlines <1,000 Rawal Dasar <1,000 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 2.3 09.3 Set longlines <2,000 Rawal Dasar <2,000 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 2.2 09.3 Set longlines <10,000 Rawal Dasar <10,000 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 2.2 09.4 Drift longlines <1,000 Rawal Hanyut <1,000 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 2.2 09.4 Drift longlines <2,000 Rawal Hanyut <2,000 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 2.2 09.4 Drift longlines <10,000 Rawal Hanyut <10,000 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 2.2 09.5 Trolling line Tonda 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 3 1 1.3 10 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR 10.5 Pushnet Pukat Dorong 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 3 1 2.1 10.6 Scoopnet Seser 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1.2 * Description of variables: 1. Wear & tear from mechanical systems. 2. Wear and tear from towing over seabed. 3. Wear, tear and damage from unintended contact with seabed. 4. Contact with seabed obstructions. 5. Deployed fishing gear not retrieved. 6. Loss or damage resulting from other fleets on fishing grounds. 7. Fishing gear lost overboard. 8. One or more fishing gear units cannot be located at sea (lost). 9. Poor handling and stowage of fishing gears. 10. Fishing gear material strength severely diminished. 11. Fishing equipment poorly maintained. 12. Crew poorly trained in gear maintenance. 13. Poor seamanship and navigation. 14. Overcrowding of fishing grounds (fleet separation) 15. Non-compliance with regulations. 16. Severe weather events. Table 23: Gear-specific scorings for the overall vulnerability to damage and loss. Variables* Code English Name Indonesian Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Vulnerability 01 ENCIRCLING NETS 01.1.1 Single vessel purse seine Pukat Cincin Pelagis Kecil Dengan Satu Kapal 4 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 9 9 2 6 3 9 2 4.2 01.1.2 Group operated purse seines Pukat Cincin Gruo Pelagis Besar 2 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 9 9 2 6 3 9 2 4.1 02 SEINE NETS 02.1 Beach Seine Pukat Tarik Pantai 1 4 4 2 1 1 2 2 1 4 6 4 1 1 9 2 2.5 02.2.1 Danish Seine Dogol 6 12 4 8 3 9 3 3 9 9 9 9 6 9 9 2 7.0 02.2.3 Boat Seine* Payang 6 3 5 4 3 3 2 1 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 2 5.1 02.2.4 Boat Seine* Cantrang 6 9 9 9 3 6 1 1 6 9 9 9 6 9 9 2 6.2 02.2.5 Boat Seine* Lampara Dasar 4 9 9 9 3 6 1 1 6 6 9 9 6 6 9 2 5.8 03 TRAWLS 03.1.2 Demersal otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan 6 9 16 12 4 9 1 2 9 12 9 6 6 9 9 2 7.2 125 03.2.1 Midwater otter trawl Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan 6 9 16 9 4 6 1 1 9 12 6 6 6 9 9 2 6.6 03.2.3 Shrimp trawls Pukat Hela Pertengahan Udang 6 4 5 4 4 3 1 1 6 9 6 6 8 3 9 2 5.2 05 LIFT NETS 05.1 Portable lift net Anco 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 1.2 05.2.1 Boat Oerated lift net* Bagan Berperahu 4 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 4 2 4 4 4 2 9 2 2.6 05.2.2 Boat Oerated lift net* Bouke Ami 4 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 4 4 4 2 9 2 2.4 05.3 Shore-operated stationary lift net Bagan Tancap 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 2 9 2 2.3 06 FALLING GEAR 06.1 Cast net Jala Jatuh Berkapal 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 6 4 4 2 9 2 2.5 07 GILLNETS AD ENTANGLING NETS 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <600m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <600m 9 8 16 12 12 12 1 15 6 8 9 9 12 12 12 6 9.8 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <2,500m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <2,500m 9 8 16 12 12 2 1 15 6 8 9 9 12 12 12 6 9.8 07.2 Drift gillnet Jaring Insang Hanyut <600m 9 1 1 1 6 6 1 15 6 6 9 9 12 4 9 2 5.3 07.2 Drift gillnet <2,300m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <2,500m 9 1 1 1 6 6 1 9 4 6 9 9 6 4 9 2 4.6 07.2 Drift gillnet <5,000m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <5,000m 9 1 1 1 6 6 1 9 4 6 9 9 6 4 9 2 4.6 07.5 Trammel net Jaring Insang Berlapis 6 9 9 12 12 15 6 12 4 8 9 6 8 12 12 6 9.1 08 POTS AND TRAPS 08.2 Pot Bubu 4 9 1 6 20 16 9 20 12 6 9 9 12 12 12 6 9.6 09 HOOK AND LINES 09.1.1 Handline and hand operated poleand-line* Pancing Ulur (nontuna) 2 1 1 2 4 9 6 1 6 9 6 4 6 1 12 2 4.0 09.3 Set longlines <1,000 Rawal Dasar <1,000 6 1 3 2 6 9 2 3 2 9 9 4 4 3 9 2 4.5 09.3 Set longlines <2,000 Rawal Dasar <2,000 6 1 3 2 3 9 2 3 2 9 9 4 4 3 9 2 4.4 09.3 Set longlines <10,000 Rawal Dasar <10,000 6 1 3 2 3 9 2 3 2 9 9 4 4 3 9 2 4.4 09.4 Drift longlines <1,000 Rawal Hanyut <1,000 6 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 9 9 4 4 1 9 2 3.8 09.4 Drift longlines <2,000 Rawal Hanyut <2,000 6 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 9 9 4 4 1 9 2 3.8 09.4 Drift longlines <10,000 Rawal Hanyut <10,000 6 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 9 9 4 4 1 9 2 3.8 09.5 Trolling line Tonda 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 6 2 2 1 9 2 2.1 10 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR 10.5 Pushnet Pukat Dorong 9 3 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 9 6 4 4 2 9 2 3.6 10.6 Scoopnet Seser 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 9 2 1.9 * Description of variables: 1. Wear & tear from mechanical systems. 2. Wear and tear from towing over seabed. 3. Wear, tear and damage from unintended contact with seabed. 4. Contact with seabed obstructions. 5. Deployed fishing gear not retrieved. 6. Loss or damage resulting from other fleets on fishing grounds. 7. Fishing gear lost overboard. 8. One or more fishing gear units cannot be located at sea (lost). 9. Poor handling and stowage of fishing gears. 10. Fishing gear material strength severely diminished. 11. Fishing equipment poorly maintained. 12. Crew poorly trained in gear maintenance. 13. Poor seamanship and navigation. 14. Overcrowding of fishing grounds (fleet separation) 15. Non-compliance with regulations. 16. Severe weather events. Table 24: Gear-specific scorings for the likelihood of ecological impacts arising from ALDFG. Variables Code English Name Indonesian Name 1 2 3 4 Impact 01 ENCIRCLING NETS 01.1.1 Single vessel purse seine Pukat Cincin Pelagis Kecil Dengan Satu Kapal 1 1 3 3 2.0 01.1.2 Group operated purse seines Pukat Cincin Gruo Pelagis Besar 1 1 3 3 2.0 02 SEINE NETS 02.1 Beach Seine Pukat Tarik Pantai 1 1 1 2 1.2 02.2.1 Danish Seine Dogol 1 1 1 3 1.5 02.2.3 Boat Seine* Payang 1 2 1 3 1.8 02.2.4 Boat Seine* Cantrang 1 2 1 3 1.8 02.2.5 Boat Seine* Lampara Dasar 1 2 2 3 2.0 03 TRAWLS 126 03.1.2 Demersal otter trawl Pukat Hela Dasar Berpapan 1 2 3 3 2.2 03.2.1 Midwater otter trawl Pukat Hela Pertengahan Berpapan 1 2 2 3 2.0 03.2.3 Shrimp trawls Pukat Hela Pertengahan Udang 1 2 2 3 2.0 05 LIFT NETS 05.1 Portable lift net Anco 1 1 1 1 1.0 05.2.1 Boat Oerated lift net* Bagan Berperahu 1 1 1 3 1.5 05.2.2 Boat Oerated lift net* Bouke Ami 1 1 1 3 1.5 05.3 Shore-operated stationary lift net Bagan Tancap 1 1 1 2 1.2 06 FALLING GEAR 06.1 Cast net Jala Jatuh Berkapal 1 1 1 2 1.2 07 GILLNETS AD ENTANGLING NETS 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <600m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <600m 5 5 2 3 3.8 07.1 Set gillnet anchored <2,500m Jaring Insang Tetap, Jaring Liong Bun <2,500m 5 5 2 3 3.8 07.2 Drift gillnet Jaring Insang Hanyut <600m 4 5 2 2 3.2 07.2 Drift gillnet <2,300m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <2,500m 4 5 2 2 3.2 07.2 Drift gillnet <5,000m Jaring Gillnet Oseanik <5,000m 4 5 2 2 3.2 07.5 Trammel net Jaring Insang Berlapis 5 5 2 2 3.5 08 POTS AND TRAPS 08.2 Pot Bubu 5 2 3 1 2.8 09 HOOK AND LINES 09.1.1 Handline and hand operated poleand-line* Pancing Ulur (nontuna) 1 1 1 1 1.0 09.3 Set longlines <1,000 Rawal Dasar <1,000 1 3 1 1 1.5 09.3 Set longlines <2,000 Rawal Dasar <2,000 1 3 1 1 1.5 09.3 Set longlines <10,000 Rawal Dasar <10,000 1 3 1 1 1.5 09.4 Drift longlines <1,000 Rawal Hanyut <1,000 1 3 2 1 1.8 09.4 Drift longlines <2,000 Rawal Hanyut <2,000 1 3 2 1 1.8 09.4 Drift longlines <10,000 Rawal Hanyut <10,000 1 3 2 1 1.8 09.5 Trolling line Tonda 1 1 1 1 1.0 10 MISCELLANEOUS OTHER GEAR 10.5 Pushnet Pukat Dorong 1 1 2 3 1.8 10.6 Scoopnet Seser 1 1 1 1 1.0 * Description of variables: 1. Gosht fishing 2. Entanglement of marine life 3. Rafting of invasive species 4. Smothering of habitats 127 ANNEX 6 ALDFG Risk Assessment - rationale and explanatory notes 128 EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR LIKELIHOOD AND SEVERITY OF GEAR BECOMING ALDFG Potential for EOLFG and ALDFG Generation Fishing Gear Classification Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Indonesian Fishing Gear Code Name Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is not towed over seabed. May occur when setting in shallow May occur when setting in shallow Not applicable. Vessel always May occur when setting on rumpon, Not applicable to this gear type High weight of fishing gear make Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under Lower section may be hauled across water. Increased abrasion in lower water. Increased abrasion in lower attached to fishing gear anchored FADs, ocean buoys and Likelihood =1 this type of loss unlikely Likelihood =0 high load can lead to mesh abrasion seabed when setting in shallow sections of net leading to weakened sections. High strain on ropes when Likelihood =0 wrecks. High strain on ropes when Severity = 1 Likelihood =0 and weakened mesh breaking water. Increased abrasion in lower mesh braking strength and rope hauling may lead to major structural hauling may lead to major structural strength., float damage and rope sections of net leading to weakened fatigue. damage to netting and ropes. damage to netting and ropes. fatigue. mesh braking strength and rope Likelihood =1 Likelihood =2 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =2 fatigue. Severity = 3 Severity = 3 Severity = 3 Severity = 2 Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events Surrounding fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) 01 gear Wind and current may push net into Onboard mechanized hauling Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Fishing gear well monitored and Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor leading to net and systems can lead to high abrasion and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to gear is damage / loss from other vessels improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage. propulsion system damage. resistance. safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working likely to occur or to increased risk of unlikely. Setting and retrieval time is Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =3 Incorrrect hauling of seine can lead Likelihood =2 inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can low. Purse seiners are often implies higher levels of disposal Severity = 1 to high strain on netting and net Severity = 3 lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural equipped with sophisticated than for lighter gear types. burst. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to damage. navigation equipment which reduce Likelihood =4 Likelihood =2 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Likelihood =1-2 likelihood of encounters with other Severity =3 Severity = 3 Likelihood =2 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 3 vessels. Severity = 3 However, high level of investment Likelihood =1 usually results in well trained crews Severity = 3 being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 3 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Handhauled systems unlikely to Gear is towed over seabed. Mesh May occur if setting is in an area May occur if setting is in an area Gear is typically set in areas where Not applicable to this gear type. Beach seines operate in isolation of May occur during setting. But since Not applicable to this gear type exceed breaking strains of netting and rope abrasion in lower sections where seabed topography is where seabed topography is retrieval is highly likely. Likelihood =0 other gear tyes. gear is set in shallow water and to Likelihood =0 materials. of net can lead to weakened mesh unknown. unknown. Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 shore, gear can be retrieved. Likelihood =1-2 braking strength and rope fatigue. Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =2 Severity = 1-2 However, mets usually set on clean Severity = 2-3 Severity = 3 Severity = 1 ground. Likelihood =4 Severity = 1-2 Beach Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events 02.1 seines fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Minimal impacts associated with Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Beach seines operate in isolation Beach seines operate in isolation of Absence of enforcement can lead to Not applicable. Gear usually stored this variable. abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for and in relatively shallow water. . other gear tyes. Loss / damage from improper disposal of plastics at sea. after use. Likelihood =2 Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Loss / damage from from poor overcrowding unlikely for gear type Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =0 Severity = 1 abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). seamanship navigation is unlikely. Likelihood =1 implies higher levels of disposal breaking strength. lead to net and rope failure. Failure to inspect and detect high Likelihood =1 Severity =1 than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 levels of wear and tear can lead to Severity = 1 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 Severity = 1 premature damage and Severity = 2 replenishment of worn components. However, high level of investment usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Boat Seines Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is towed over seabed. Gear is designed to operate in Danish seines are designed for Not applicable. Vessel always Likely event if seabed topography is Poorly marked passive gears such 129 Seine is attached tp vessel at all Dhan marker disconnecting from net place nets, ropes and floats under Relatively high rates of wear and seabed contact. PE material has relative smooth seabed and lighter attached to fishing gear. not kown. Can occur due to setting as pots and gillnets (and associated times. This type of loss is highly is unlikely event. high load can lead to mesh abrasion tear anticipated especially in lower high abrasion resistance to materials are used. Nets are not Likelihood =0 on wrecks with major structual anchors) may be encountered. Size unlikely. Extreme weather may Likelihood =1 Severity = 1-2 Beach Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events 02.1 seines fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Minimal impacts associated with Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Beach seines operate in isolation Beach seines operate in isolation of Absence of enforcement can lead to Not applicable. Gear usually stored this variable. abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for and in relatively shallow water. . other gear tyes. Loss / damage from improper disposal of plastics at sea. after use. Likelihood =2 Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Loss / damage from from poor overcrowding unlikely for gear type Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =0 Severity = 1 abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). seamanship navigation is unlikely. Likelihood =1 implies higher levels of disposal breaking strength. lead to net and rope failure. Failure to inspect and detect high Likelihood =1 Severity =1 than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 levels of wear and tear can lead to Severity = 1 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 Severity = 1 premature damage and Severity = 2 replenishment of worn components. However, high level of investment usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Boat Seines Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is towed over seabed. Gear is designed to operate in Danish seines are designed for Not applicable. Vessel always Likely event if seabed topography is Poorly marked passive gears such Seine is attached tp vessel at all Dhan marker disconnecting from net place nets, ropes and floats under Relatively high rates of wear and seabed contact. PE material has relative smooth seabed and lighter attached to fishing gear. not kown. Can occur due to setting as pots and gillnets (and associated times. This type of loss is highly is unlikely event. high load can lead to mesh abrasion tear anticipated especially in lower high abrasion resistance to materials are used. Nets are not Likelihood =0 on wrecks with major structual anchors) may be encountered. Size unlikely. Extreme weather may Likelihood =1 and weakened mesh breaking sections of net. Mesh abrasion and accommodate regular contact. designed to absorb load from contat damage likely. Vessels equipped and weight of seine usualy results in events may result in gear loss Severity = 4 strength., float damage and rope weakened mesh breaking strength Likelihood =2 with seabed obstructions. Minor - with instrumentation to detect type low-moderate damage to seine. overboard if not properly stowed. fatigue. lead to higher rate of replacement Severity = 4 major structural damage can occur of seabed and GPS/chart plotter can Likelihood =4 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =2 and early onset damage to netting. to net dues to contact with miniimize occurrence. Severity = 2 Severity = 2 Severity = 3 Likelihood =5 obstructions. Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Severity = 4 Danish 02.2.1 seines Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Poorly maintained hauling systems Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Lack of zoning for active (trawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting can lead to excessive abrasion of and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to gear is seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage. leading to net and propulsion netting and ropes and reduced mesh safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working likely to occur or to increase risk of gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =0 system damage. breaking strength. inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can numbers of gear encounters. Level implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 Likelihood =2 lead to unexpected net and rope Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural of damage / lossepends on the size than for lighter gear types. Severity = 1 Severity = 3 failure and increased levels of net levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear / type of gear, material properties Likelihood =5 and rope damage. premature damage and Likelihood =2 etc. Severity = 2 Likelihood =2 replenishment of worn components. Severity =3 Likelihood =4 Severity = 3 However, high level of investment Severity = 2 usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 3 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) See above. Pelagic seines are Gear is not designed to towed on Catastrophic damage to gear likely. Catastrophic damage to gear likely. Not applicable. Vessel always Likely event if seabed topography is Fishing gear is typically operated off Seine is attached tp vessel at all Not applicable to this gear type. typically comprised of PA. Material seabed. Major structual damage to Contact with seabed is avoided. Contact with seabed obstructions attached to fishing gear not kown. Can occur due to setting the seabed and minimal encounter times. This type of loss is highly Likelihood =0 is relatively light. Wear and tear net likely when gear is in contact Likelihood =2 are avoided. Likelihood =0 on wrecks, ocean buoys Rumpon with other gears is anticipated. unlikely. Extreme weather may reduce knot strength and mesh with seabed. Severity = 5 Likelihood =1 with major structual damage likely. Likelihood =2 events may result in gear loss strength. High wear and tear can Likelihood =2 Severity = 5 Vessels equipped with Severity = 3 overboard if not properly stowed. PA lead to mesh abrasion and Severity = 4 instrumentation to detect type of netting may result in gear sinking weakened mesh breaking strength., seabed and GPS/chart plotter can rather than drifting. float damage and rope fatigue. miniimize occurrence. Likelihood =0 Likelihood =4 Likelihood =1 Severity = 3 Severity = 5 Pelagic 02.2.3 seines Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Lack of zoning for active (tawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to gear is seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working likely to occur or to increase risk of gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials system damage. abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can numbers of gear encounters. implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 breaking strength. lead to unexpected net and rope Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural However, since net is used than for lighter gear types. Severity = 2 Likelihood =1 failure and increased levels of net levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear pelagically, likelihood of encounter Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 and rope damage. premature damage and Likelihood =1 and subsequent damage is reduced. Severity = 2 Likelihood =2 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 2 Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 However, high level of investment Severity = 1 usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Cantrang seines are typically Gear is towed over smooth seabed. May occur if setting is in an area Danish seines are designed for Not applicable. Vessel always Likely event if seabed topography is Poorly marked passive gears such Seine is attached tp vessel at all Not applicable to this gear type. comprised of PE knotted netting Relatively high rates of wear and where seabed topography is relative smooth seabed and lighter attached to fishing gear not kown. Can occur due to setting as pots and gillnets (and associated times. This type of loss is highly (floating). Material is relatively light tear anticipated especially in lower unknown. High levels of damage materials are used. Nets are not Likelihood =0 on wrecks, ocean buoys Rumpon anchors) may be encountered. Size unlikely. Extreme weather may but designed to operate on smooth sections of net. Mesh abrasion and expected if seabed is not smooth. designed to absorb load from contat with major structual damage likely. and weight of seine usualy results in events may result in gear loss seabeds. Wear and tear reduce knot weakened mesh breaking strength Potential for unintended contact can with seabed obstructions. Minor - Vessels equipped with low-moderate damage to seine. overboard if not properly stowed. PA strength and mesh strength. High lead to higher rate of replacement be reduced by use of major structural damage can occur instrumentation to detect type of Vessels towing nets may actively netting may result in gear sinking wear and tear can lead to mesh and early onset damage to netting. instrumentation. to net dues to contact with seabed and GPS/chart plotter can avoid santrang to reduce likelihood rather than drifting. abrasion and weakened mesh Likelihood =5 Likelihood =3 obstructions. miniimize occurrence. of collision. Likelihood =0 breaking strength., float damage and Severity = 2 Severity = 3 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =3 rope fatigue. Severity = 3 Severity = 4 Severity = 3 Likelihood =2 130 02.2.4 Cantrang Severity = 3 Pelagic 02.2.3 seines Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Lack of zoning for active (tawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to gear is seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working likely to occur or to increase risk of gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials system damage. abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can numbers of gear encounters. implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 breaking strength. lead to unexpected net and rope Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural However, since net is used than for lighter gear types. Severity = 2 Likelihood =1 failure and increased levels of net levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear pelagically, likelihood of encounter Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 and rope damage. premature damage and Likelihood =1 and subsequent damage is reduced. Severity = 2 Likelihood =2 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 2 Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 However, high level of investment Severity = 1 usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Cantrang seines are typically Gear is towed over smooth seabed. May occur if setting is in an area Danish seines are designed for Not applicable. Vessel always Likely event if seabed topography is Poorly marked passive gears such Seine is attached tp vessel at all Not applicable to this gear type. comprised of PE knotted netting Relatively high rates of wear and where seabed topography is relative smooth seabed and lighter attached to fishing gear not kown. Can occur due to setting as pots and gillnets (and associated times. This type of loss is highly (floating). Material is relatively light tear anticipated especially in lower unknown. High levels of damage materials are used. Nets are not Likelihood =0 on wrecks, ocean buoys Rumpon anchors) may be encountered. Size unlikely. Extreme weather may but designed to operate on smooth sections of net. Mesh abrasion and expected if seabed is not smooth. designed to absorb load from contat with major structual damage likely. and weight of seine usualy results in events may result in gear loss seabeds. Wear and tear reduce knot weakened mesh breaking strength Potential for unintended contact can with seabed obstructions. Minor - Vessels equipped with low-moderate damage to seine. overboard if not properly stowed. PA strength and mesh strength. High lead to higher rate of replacement be reduced by use of major structural damage can occur instrumentation to detect type of Vessels towing nets may actively netting may result in gear sinking wear and tear can lead to mesh and early onset damage to netting. instrumentation. to net dues to contact with seabed and GPS/chart plotter can avoid santrang to reduce likelihood rather than drifting. abrasion and weakened mesh Likelihood =5 Likelihood =3 obstructions. miniimize occurrence. of collision. Likelihood =0 breaking strength., float damage and Severity = 2 Severity = 3 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =3 rope fatigue. Severity = 3 Severity = 4 Severity = 3 Likelihood =2 02.2.4 Cantrang Severity = 3 Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Lack of zoning for active (tawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to gear is seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working likely to occur or to increase risk of gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood=0 system damage. abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can numbers of gear encounters. Level implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 breaking strength. lead to unexpected net and rope Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural of damage / lossepends on the size than for lighter gear types. Severity = 2 Likelihood =5 failure and increased levels of net levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear / type of gear, material properties Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 and rope damage. premature damage and Likelihood =1 etc. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 2 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 However, high level of investment Severity = 2 usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Mini trawl is a relatively small net Gear is towed over smooth seabed May occur if setting is in an area May occur if setting is in an area May ocdcur when gear held fast on Likely event if seabed topography is Poorly marked passive gears such Lampara dasar is attached tp vessel Not applicable to this gear type. used close to shore in shallow water. at relatively slow speed. Moderate where seabed topography is where seabed topography is seabed. not kown. Can occur due to setting as pots and gillnets (and associated at all times. This type of loss is Although small in size, wear and tear rates of wear and tear anticipated unknown. Minor to major structural unknown. However, slow speed of Likelihood =1 on rough seabed with major anchors) may be encountered. highly unlikely. Extreme weather may from mechanical hauling can result especially in lower sections of net. damage can occur. towing may limit the level of Severity = 4 structual damage likely. Likelihood =3 events may result in gear loss in wear and tear leading to mesh Mesh abrasion and weakened mesh Likelihood =2 damage. Likelihood =1 Severity = 3 overboard if not properly stowed. abrasion and weakened mesh breaking strength lead to higher rate Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 3 Likelihood =1 breaking strength., float damage and of replacement and early onset Severity = 2 Severity = 2 rope fatigue. damage to netting. Likelihood =2 Likelihood =5 Severity =2 Severity = 2 02.2.5 Lampara Dasar (mini trawl) Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing May ocdcur when gear held fast on Lack of zoning for active (tawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for seabed. seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Likelihood =1 gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials system damage. abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). Severity = 4 numbers of gear encounters. Level implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 breaking strength. Low towing lead to unexpected net and rope Failure to inspect and detect high of damage / lossepends on the size than for lighter gear types. Severity = 3 speed may limit type of damage failure and increased levels of net levels of wear and tear can lead to / type of gear, material properties Likelihood =4 encountered. and rope damage. premature damage and etc. Severity = 2 Likelihood =5 Likelihood =2 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 Severity = 2 However, high level of investment Severity = 2 usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Trawls Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is towed over a range of Unintended setting of net on seabed Some trawls are specifically Not applicable. Vessel always Some trawls are specifically designed Poorly marked passive gears such Trawl is attached to vessel at all Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under seabeds at relatively high speed. obstructions can result in structural designed for such types of set. attached to fishing gear. for such types of set. However, high as pots and gillnets (and associated times. This type of loss is highly high load can lead to mesh abrasion Moderate-high rates of wear and damage. However, some trawls are Likelihood =3 Catastrophic loss may occur when levels of wear and tear and early onset anchors) may be encountered. unlikely. Extreme weather may and weakened mesh breaking tear anticipated especially in lower specifically designed for such types Severity = 3 setting in deepwater on seamounts. of reduce knot and mesh breaking Power of vessel and strength of events may result in gear loss strength and rope fatigue. sections of net. Mesh abrasion and of set. Likelihood =1 strength expected. Major structural netting materials may reduce overboard if not properly stowed. Likelihood =2 weakened mesh breaking strength Likelihood =3 Severity = 3 damage is possible with some fishers damage to own gear. Major damage Likelihood =0 Severity = 2 lead to higher rate of replacement Severity = 3 balancing risk (high damage) and and loss may occur to encountered and early onset damage to netting. reward (high catch) for such sets. gears. Likelihood =5 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =3 131 Severity =3 Severity = 3 Severity = 3 02.2.5 Lampara Dasar (mini trawl) Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Hauling over seabed will lead to Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing May ocdcur when gear held fast on Lack of zoning for active (tawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting abrasion of netting and ropes. and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for seabed. seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion Knotted netting may result in knot safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Likelihood =1 gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials system damage. abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). Severity = 4 numbers of gear encounters. Level implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 breaking strength. Low towing lead to unexpected net and rope Failure to inspect and detect high of damage / lossepends on the size than for lighter gear types. Severity = 3 speed may limit type of damage failure and increased levels of net levels of wear and tear can lead to / type of gear, material properties Likelihood =4 encountered. and rope damage. premature damage and etc. Severity = 2 Likelihood =5 Likelihood =2 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 Severity = 2 However, high level of investment Severity = 2 usually results in well trained crews being employed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Trawls Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is towed over a range of Unintended setting of net on seabed Some trawls are specifically Not applicable. Vessel always Some trawls are specifically designed Poorly marked passive gears such Trawl is attached to vessel at all Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under seabeds at relatively high speed. obstructions can result in structural designed for such types of set. attached to fishing gear. for such types of set. However, high as pots and gillnets (and associated times. This type of loss is highly high load can lead to mesh abrasion Moderate-high rates of wear and damage. However, some trawls are Likelihood =3 Catastrophic loss may occur when levels of wear and tear and early onset anchors) may be encountered. unlikely. Extreme weather may and weakened mesh breaking tear anticipated especially in lower specifically designed for such types Severity = 3 setting in deepwater on seamounts. of reduce knot and mesh breaking Power of vessel and strength of events may result in gear loss strength and rope fatigue. sections of net. Mesh abrasion and of set. Likelihood =1 strength expected. Major structural netting materials may reduce overboard if not properly stowed. Likelihood =2 weakened mesh breaking strength Likelihood =3 Severity = 3 damage is possible with some fishers damage to own gear. Major damage Likelihood =0 Severity = 2 lead to higher rate of replacement Severity = 3 balancing risk (high damage) and and loss may occur to encountered and early onset damage to netting. reward (high catch) for such sets. gears. Likelihood =5 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =3 Severity =3 Severity = 3 Severity = 3 Single '03.2 boat bottom otter trawl Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into Hauling over any type of seabed will Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Lack of zoning for active (tawls, Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting lead to abrasion of netting and and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to other seines) and passive fleets (set improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion ropes. Knotted netting may result in safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working vessel gear is likely to occur or to gillnets, pots ) can lead to high Large weight of fishing materials system damage. knot abrasion and reduced mesh inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can numbers of gear encounters. Level implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =2 breaking strength. High levels of lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural of damage / loss depends on the than for lighter gear types. Severity = 3 wear and tear generated when levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear. Relatively size / type of gear, material Likelihood =4 fishing on rough ground leading to accelerate such proceses. premature damage and high towing speeds increase severity properties etc. However, Severity = 2 early onset damage to netting and Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. of damages. catastrophic loss to gillnets and ropes. Severity = 3 However, high level of investment Likelihood =1 pots can occur when encountered. Likelihood =5 usually results in well trained crews Severity = 3 Likelihood =3 Severity = 3 being employed. Severity = 3 Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is not designed to towed on Gear is not designed to towed on Gear is not designed to towed on Not applicable for most types of Gear is not designed to towed over Fishing gear is typically operated off Trawl is attached tp vessel at all Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under seabed. Major structual damage to seabed. Major structual damage to seabed. Major structual damage to trawling. Vessel always attached to solid structures. Major structual the seabed and minimal encounter times. This type of loss is highly high load can lead to mesh abrasion net likely when gear is in contact net likely when gear is in contact net likely when gear is in contact fishing gear. Catastrophic loss may damage to net likely when gear is in with other gears is anticipated. unlikely. Extreme weather may and weakened mesh breaking with seabed. with seabed. Midwater trawlers are with seabed. Midwater trawlers are occur when setting in deepwater on contact with seabed. Midwater Midwater trawlers are often events may result in gear loss strength and rope fatigue. Likelihood =1 often equipped with sophisticated often equipped with sophisticated seamounts. trawlers are often equipped with equipped with sophisticated overboard if not properly stowed. Likelihood =2 Severity = 5 navigation and seabed detection navigation and seabed detection Likelihood =1 sophisticated navigation and seabed navigation equipment which reduce Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 equipment which reduce likelihood equipment which reduce likelihood Severity = 3 detection equipment which reduce likelihood of encounters. Severity = 3 of such events. of such events. likelihood of such events. Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 Severity = 5 Severity = 5 Severity = 5 Single boat '03.3 midwater otter trawl Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may push net into UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship can lead to setting Fishing gear well monitored and Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions propellor during hauling or shooting and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for in areas where damage to other damage / loss from other vessels improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage leading to net and propulsion inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working vessel gear is likely to occur or to unlikely. Setting and retrieval time is Large weight of fishing materials system damage. degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can low. Midwater trawlers are often implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =1 minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural equipped with sophisticated than for lighter gear types. Severity = 3 Likelihood =2 levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear. Relatively navigation equipment which reduce Likelihood =4 Severity = 3 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and high towing speeds increase severity likelihood of encounters. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. of damages. Likelihood =1 Severity = 3 However, high level of investment Likelihood =1 Severity = 5 usually results in well trained crews Severity = 3 being employed. Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 Lift Nets Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Systems often hand operated. Wear Not applicable to this gear type. Minimal likelihood and minimal Minimal likelihood and minimal Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. and tear can be effectively Likelihood =0 consequences consequences Likelihood =1 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 managed. Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 0 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 05.1 Anco Poor handling and stowage of 132 Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) system damage. degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). self inflicted damages. Damage can low. Midwater trawlers are often implies higher levels of disposal Likelihood =1 minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high range from minor to major structural equipped with sophisticated than for lighter gear types. Severity = 3 Likelihood =2 levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to damage of fishing gear. Relatively navigation equipment which reduce Likelihood =4 Severity = 3 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and high towing speeds increase severity likelihood of encounters. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. of damages. Likelihood =1 Severity = 3 However, high level of investment Likelihood =1 Severity = 5 usually results in well trained crews Severity = 3 being employed. Likelihood =1 Severity = 2 Lift Nets Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Systems often hand operated. Wear Not applicable to this gear type. Minimal likelihood and minimal Minimal likelihood and minimal Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. and tear can be effectively Likelihood =0 consequences consequences Likelihood =1 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 managed. Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 0 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 05.1 Anco Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Likelihood =1 UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Not applicable. Gear usually stored Severity = 1 and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 improper disposal of plastics at sea. after use inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Large weight of fishing materials degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). implies higher levels of disposal minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. Failure to inspect and detect high than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 premature damage and Severity = 1 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =1 Severity = 1 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Low levels of mechanized hauling. Not applicable to this gear type. Minimal likelihood and minimal Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations. Highly unlikey in regular operations. Not applicable to this gear type. Low rates of wear and tear Likelihood =0 consequences Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Vessels operate in isolation using Likelihood =1 anticipated. Likelihood =1 Severity =1 Severity =1 Severity =1 light to aid in attraction. Severity =1 Likelihood =1 Severity =1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 1 Severity =1 Bagan 05.2.1 Berperahu Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased UV can reduce strength of netting UV can reduce strength of netting Extending the working life of fishing Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions wear and tear during hauling. and ropes over time. Failure to and ropes over time. Failure to gear requires regular inspection for improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Damage from minor to moderate. inspect, detect and replace worn / inspect, detect and replace worn / wear and tear of working Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =1 degraded materials can lead to degraded materials can lead to components (netting, ropes etc). implies higher levels of disposal Severity =2 minor-moderate gear damage. minor-moderate gear damage. Failure to inspect and detect high than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =2 Likelihood =3 levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity =3 Severity =2 premature damage and Severity = 1 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =3 Severity =2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations. Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Vessels operate in isolation using Likelihood =0 high load can lead to mesh abrasion light to aid in attraction. and weakened mesh breaking Likelihood =0 strength., float damage and rope fatigue Likelihood =1 Severity =2 05.2.2 Bouke Ami Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing High level of investment usually Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions wear and tear during hauling. and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for results in well trained crews being Likelihood =0 improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Damage from minor to moderate. inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working employed. Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =1 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). Likelihood =1 implies higher levels of disposal Severity =2 minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high Severity =2 than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity =2 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Severity = 1 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. Severity =2 Likelihood =2 Severity =2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Low levels of mechanized hauling. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations. Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. Low rates of wear and tear Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Vessels operate in isolation using Likelihood =0 anticipated. light to aid in attraction. Likelihood =2 133 Likelihood =1 Severity =1 Severity = 1 Highly mechanized hauling systems Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey in regular operations. Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Vessels operate in isolation using Likelihood =0 high load can lead to mesh abrasion light to aid in attraction. and weakened mesh breaking Likelihood =0 strength., float damage and rope fatigue Likelihood =1 Severity =2 05.2.2 Bouke Ami Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing High level of investment usually Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions wear and tear during hauling. and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for results in well trained crews being Likelihood =0 improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Damage from minor to moderate. inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working employed. Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =1 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). Likelihood =1 implies higher levels of disposal Severity =2 minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high Severity =2 than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity =2 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Severity = 1 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. Severity =2 Likelihood =2 Severity =2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Low levels of mechanized hauling. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations. Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. Low rates of wear and tear Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Vessels operate in isolation using Likelihood =0 anticipated. light to aid in attraction. Likelihood =2 Likelihood =1 Severity =1 Severity = 1 05.3 Bagan Tancap Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased UV can reduce strength of netting UV can reduce strength of netting Extending the working life of fishing Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Possible structural damage to wear and tear during hauling. and ropes over time. Failure to and ropes over time. Failure to gear requires regular inspection for improper disposal of plastics at sea. anchored structure. Nets can be Likelihood =1 inspect, detect and replace worn / inspect, detect and replace worn / wear and tear of working Large weight of fishing materials battended down to reduce risk of Severity =1 degraded materials can lead to degraded materials can lead to components (netting, ropes etc). implies higher levels of disposal damage. minor-moderate gear damage. minor-moderate gear damage. Failure to inspect and detect high than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =3 levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity =1 Severity =2 premature damage and Severity = 1 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =2 Severity =1 Falling gear Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations. Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. place nets, ropes and floats under Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Vessels operate in isolation using Likelihood =1 high load can lead to mesh abrasion light to aid in attraction. Severity = 1 and weakened mesh breaking Likelihood =1 strength., float damage and rope Severity = 1 fatigue Likelihood =4 Severity =1 Jala Jatuh 06.1 Berkapal Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing High level of investment usually Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions of net loss and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for results in well trained crews being Likelihood =0 improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Likelihood =1 inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working employed. Large weight of fishing materials Severity = 2 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). Likelihood =1 implies higher levels of disposal minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high Severity = 2 than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Severity = 1 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Gill and entangling nets Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Nets operate through stealth are are Gear is not designed to be towed Low breaking strain of netting and Low breaking strain of netting and Fishing gear operates without Major loss can occur when setting Fishing gear operates without May occur due to bad weather and May occur due to bad weather and made of very light materials. Highly over seabed. Footrope and lower rope materials likely from rope materials likely from attendance of vessel. Major loss on man made structures. Reasons attendance of vessel. Major loss when anchor lines are too short when anchor lines are too short mechanized hauling systems place meshes may be abraided through unintended contact with seabed. unintended contact with seabed. can occur due to poor navigation, for setting may include; poor and damage can result from when setting in areas with high tides when setting in areas with high tides nets, ropes and floats under high seabed contact durting retrieval. Severity of problem increases with Major structural damage can occur king tides, incorrect length navigation, and risk taking. deploying nets where other vessels and strong currents. and strong currents. May also occur load can lead to mesh abrasion and Increased abrasion in lower sections seabed roughness, Footrope and when nets are in contact rocky adjustment of bouy lines. Major Likelihood =3 are operating (eg senes, trawls, pot). Likelihood =3 due to poor navigation, other vessel weakened mesh breaking strength., of net leading to weakened mesh lower meshes may be abraided seabeds. Increased abrasion in loss can also occur due to other Severity = 4 Type of loss can be minor to Severity = 4 colliding with gear or vandalism. float damage and rope fatigue. braking strength and rope fatigue through seabed contact durting lower sections of net leading to vessels colliding with gear, setting catastrophic. Risk of loss can be Likelihood =4 Mesh damage through excessive are likely. Severity of problem retrieval. Major structural damage weakened mesh braking strength on rough ground. reduced when gear is highly visible Severity = 4 loading, abrasion can result in early increases with net let length. can occur when nets are in contact and rope fatigue are likely. Severity Likelihood =4 (marked) onset wear and tear. Likelihood =5 rocky seabeds. Increased abrasion of problem increases with net let Severity = 5 Likelihood =5 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 in lower sections of net leading to length. Catastrophic loss can occur Severity = 4 Severity = 4 weakened mesh braking strength when set on rough grounds. and rope fatigue are likely. Severity Likelihood =4 07.1 Set anchored 134 of problem increases with net let length. Catastrophic loss can occur Severity =5 gillnets when set on rough grounds. Jala Jatuh 06.1 Berkapal Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing High level of investment usually Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions of net loss and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for results in well trained crews being Likelihood =0 improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Likelihood =1 inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working employed. Large weight of fishing materials Severity = 2 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). Likelihood =1 implies higher levels of disposal minor-moderate gear damage. lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high Severity = 2 than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =4 levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Severity = 1 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Gill and entangling nets Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Nets operate through stealth are are Gear is not designed to be towed Low breaking strain of netting and Low breaking strain of netting and Fishing gear operates without Major loss can occur when setting Fishing gear operates without May occur due to bad weather and May occur due to bad weather and made of very light materials. Highly over seabed. Footrope and lower rope materials likely from rope materials likely from attendance of vessel. Major loss on man made structures. Reasons attendance of vessel. Major loss when anchor lines are too short when anchor lines are too short mechanized hauling systems place meshes may be abraided through unintended contact with seabed. unintended contact with seabed. can occur due to poor navigation, for setting may include; poor and damage can result from when setting in areas with high tides when setting in areas with high tides nets, ropes and floats under high seabed contact durting retrieval. Severity of problem increases with Major structural damage can occur king tides, incorrect length navigation, and risk taking. deploying nets where other vessels and strong currents. and strong currents. May also occur load can lead to mesh abrasion and Increased abrasion in lower sections seabed roughness, Footrope and when nets are in contact rocky adjustment of bouy lines. Major Likelihood =3 are operating (eg senes, trawls, pot). Likelihood =3 due to poor navigation, other vessel weakened mesh breaking strength., of net leading to weakened mesh lower meshes may be abraided seabeds. Increased abrasion in loss can also occur due to other Severity = 4 Type of loss can be minor to Severity = 4 colliding with gear or vandalism. float damage and rope fatigue. braking strength and rope fatigue through seabed contact durting lower sections of net leading to vessels colliding with gear, setting catastrophic. Risk of loss can be Likelihood =4 Mesh damage through excessive are likely. Severity of problem retrieval. Major structural damage weakened mesh braking strength on rough ground. reduced when gear is highly visible Severity = 4 loading, abrasion can result in early increases with net let length. can occur when nets are in contact and rope fatigue are likely. Severity Likelihood =4 (marked) onset wear and tear. Likelihood =5 rocky seabeds. Increased abrasion of problem increases with net let Severity = 5 Likelihood =5 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 in lower sections of net leading to length. Catastrophic loss can occur Severity = 4 Severity = 4 weakened mesh braking strength when set on rough grounds. Set and rope fatigue are likely. Severity Likelihood =4 anchored of problem increases with net let Severity =5 07.1 gillnets length. Catastrophic loss can occur when set on rough grounds. Likelihood =3 Severity = 4 Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Gillnets and entangling nets are Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Coastal set gillnets highly vulnerable of nets being washed overboard. strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for highly vulnerable to damage. Poor and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. to major damage and total loss. Likelihood =1 time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working seamanship (linked to risk taking) different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials Offshore gillnet vessels can take Severity = 2 replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). can lead to setting in areas where other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal avoidance action. can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high damage to other vessel gear is likely associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to to occur or to self inflicted damages. may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Likelihood =5 accelerate such proceses premature damage and Damage can range from minor to "lose-lose" situations. However, the Severity =4 Severity = 3 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. major structural damage of fishing light materials used in gillnet Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 gear. construction typcailly result in major Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 structural damage to nets. Severity = 2 Likelihood =4 Severity = 5 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Nets operate through stealth are are Nets are typically operated off Nets are typically operated off Nets are typically operated off Fishing gear usually operates with Highly unlikey in regular operations Other vessel encounters are likely. Highly unlikey in regular operations May occur due to extreme weather made of very light materials. Highly seabed. Likelihood of occurrence is seabed. Nets are typically operated seabed. Nets are typically operated attendance of vessel and likelihood of Likelihood =0 Gear marking and radio beacons can Likelihood =0 where load on gear components mechanized hauling systems place low. If contact with rough seabed off seabed. Likelihood of occurrence off seabed. Likelihood of occurrence self inflicted loss is low. Setting ets reduce likelihood of such results in failure (portion of net drifts nets, ropes and floats under high occurs major structural damage and is low. If contact with rough seabed is low. If contact with rough seabed in close proximity to other vessel can encounters. Poor setting practices away) or when other vessels collide load can lead to mesh abrasion and loss of nets can occur. However, occurs major structural damage and occurs major structural damage and result in gear overun and net damage. (against fleet rules for set direction) with gear. weakened mesh breaking strength., fishers typically avoid such loss of nets can occur. However, loss of nets can occur. However, Damage and partial loss of geasr may increase likelihood of crossing float damage and rope fatigue. situations. fishers typically avoid such fishers typically avoid such may occur in severe weather. Relative gears. Mesh damage through excessive Likelihood =1 situations. situations. to anchored set gillnets the likelihood Likelihood =3 loading, abrasion can result in early Severity = 2 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 of damage from encounters with Severity =3 onset wear and tear. Severity = 4 Severity = 4 other vessels or seabed are very low. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =2 07.2 Drift gillnets Severity = 2 Severity = 2 Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Gillnets and entangling nets are Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions of nets being washed overboard. strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for highly vulnerable to damage. Damage and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Likelihood =1 time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working and loss can occur when a vessel different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials Severity = 1 replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). does not set acording to fleet other. Encounters results "lose-lose" implies higher levels of disposal can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high guidelines (direction of set) or when situations. However, the light than for lighter gear types. damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to not maintaining a regular visual or materials used in gillnet Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 accelerate such proceses premature damage and radar watch. Damage can range from construction typcailly result in major Severity =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. minor to major structural damage of structural damage to nets. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 fishing gear. Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Severity = 4 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Nets operate through stealth are are Gear is not designed to be towed Low breaking strain of netting and Reduced breaking strain of netting Fishing gear operates without Major loss can occur when setting Fishing gear operates without May occur due to bad weather and May occur due to bad weather and made of very light materials. Highly over seabed. Footrope and lower rope materials likely from and rope materials likely from attendance of vessel. Major loss on man made structures. Reasons attendance of vessel. Major loss when anchor lines are too short when anchor lines are too short mechanized hauling systems place meshes may be abraided through unintended contact with seabed. unintended contact with seabed. can occur due to poor navigation, for setting may include; poor and damage can result from when setting in areas with high tides when setting in areas with high tides nets, ropes and floats under high seabed contact durting retrieval. Severity of problem increases with Major structural damage can occur king tides, incorrect length navigation, and risk taking. deploying nets where other vessels and strong currents. and strong currents. May also occur load can lead to mesh abrasion and Increased abrasion in lower sections seabed roughness, Footrope and when nets are in contact rocky adjustment of bouy lines. Major Likelihood =3 are operating (eg senes, trawls, pot). Likelihood =1 due to poor navigation, other vessel weakened mesh breaking strength., of net leading to weakened mesh lower meshes may be abraided seabeds. Increased abrasion in loss can also occur die to other Severity = 4 Type of loss can be minor to Severity = 2 colliding with gear or vandalism. float damage and rope fatigue. braking strength and rope fatigue through seabed contact durting lower sections of net can lead to vessels colliding with gear, setting catastrophic. Risk of loss can be Likelihood =3 Mesh damage through excessive are likely. Severity of problem retrieval. Major structural damage reduced mesh breaking strength and on rough ground. reduced when gear is highly visible Severity =3 loading, abrasion can result in early increases with net let length. can occur when nets are in contact rope fatigue. Severity of problem Likelihood =4 (marked) onset wear and tear. Likelihood =4 rocky seabeds. Increased abrasion increases with net let length. Severity = 4 135 Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Severity = 3 in lower sections of net leading to Catastrophic loss can occur when Severity =4 Sea state may lead to increased risk UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Gillnets and entangling nets are Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions of nets being washed overboard. strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for highly vulnerable to damage. Damage and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Likelihood =1 time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working and loss can occur when a vessel different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials Severity = 1 replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). does not set acording to fleet other. Encounters results "lose-lose" implies higher levels of disposal can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high guidelines (direction of set) or when situations. However, the light than for lighter gear types. damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to not maintaining a regular visual or materials used in gillnet Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 accelerate such proceses premature damage and radar watch. Damage can range from construction typcailly result in major Severity =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. minor to major structural damage of structural damage to nets. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 fishing gear. Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Severity = 4 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Nets operate through stealth are are Gear is not designed to be towed Low breaking strain of netting and Reduced breaking strain of netting Fishing gear operates without Major loss can occur when setting Fishing gear operates without May occur due to bad weather and May occur due to bad weather and made of very light materials. Highly over seabed. Footrope and lower rope materials likely from and rope materials likely from attendance of vessel. Major loss on man made structures. Reasons attendance of vessel. Major loss when anchor lines are too short when anchor lines are too short mechanized hauling systems place meshes may be abraided through unintended contact with seabed. unintended contact with seabed. can occur due to poor navigation, for setting may include; poor and damage can result from when setting in areas with high tides when setting in areas with high tides nets, ropes and floats under high seabed contact durting retrieval. Severity of problem increases with Major structural damage can occur king tides, incorrect length navigation, and risk taking. deploying nets where other vessels and strong currents. and strong currents. May also occur load can lead to mesh abrasion and Increased abrasion in lower sections seabed roughness, Footrope and when nets are in contact rocky adjustment of bouy lines. Major Likelihood =3 are operating (eg senes, trawls, pot). Likelihood =1 due to poor navigation, other vessel weakened mesh breaking strength., of net leading to weakened mesh lower meshes may be abraided seabeds. Increased abrasion in loss can also occur die to other Severity = 4 Type of loss can be minor to Severity = 2 colliding with gear or vandalism. float damage and rope fatigue. braking strength and rope fatigue through seabed contact durting lower sections of net can lead to vessels colliding with gear, setting catastrophic. Risk of loss can be Likelihood =3 Mesh damage through excessive are likely. Severity of problem retrieval. Major structural damage reduced mesh breaking strength and on rough ground. reduced when gear is highly visible Severity =3 loading, abrasion can result in early increases with net let length. can occur when nets are in contact rope fatigue. Severity of problem Likelihood =4 (marked) onset wear and tear. Likelihood =4 rocky seabeds. Increased abrasion increases with net let length. Severity = 4 Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Severity = 3 in lower sections of net leading to Catastrophic loss can occur when Severity =4 Severity = 2 weakened mesh braking strength set on rough grounds. and rope fatigue are likely. Severity Likelihood =4 of problem increases with net let Severity = 5 07.5-07.6 Trammel nets length. Catastrophic loss can occur when set on rough grounds. Likelihood =3 Severity = 4 Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Gillnets and entangling nets are Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Coastal set trammel nets highly of nets being washed overboard. strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for highly vulnerable to damage. Poor and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. vulnerable to major damage and Likelihood =1 time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working seamanship (linked to risk taking) different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials total loss. Offshore trammel net Severity = 2 replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). can lead to setting in areas where other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal vessels can take avoidance action. can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high damage to other vessel gear is likely associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to to occur or to self inflicted damages. may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Likelihood =3 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Damage can range from minor to "lose-lose" situations. However, the Severity =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. major structural damage of fishing light materials used in gillnet Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 gear. construction typcailly result in major Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 structural damage to nets. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 4 Pots and traps Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is designed to operate pasively Low breaking strain of pot netting Major structural damage to pots can Fishing gear operates without Major loss can occur when setting Fishing gear operates without May occur due to bad weather and May occur due to bad weather and place nets, ropes and floats under but pots can be towed over seabed and rope materials from hauling occur when pots are in contact with attendance of vessel. Major loss on man made structures. Reasons attendance of vessel. Major loss when anchor lines are too short when anchor lines are too short high load can lead to mesh abrasion during retrieval. Where pot mesh and over seabed can result in material seabed obstructions. Severity of can occur due to poor navigation, for setting may include; poor and damage can result from when setting in areas with high tides when setting in areas with high tides and weakened mesh breaking frames are connstructed from light fatigue and early onset break. . problem increases with number of king tides, incorrect length navigation, and risk taking. Pots deploying nets where other vessels and strong currents. and strong currents. May also occur strength and rope fatigue. Pot ropes plastics, materials may become Severity of problem increases with posts in mainline. Catastrophic loss adjustment of bouy lines. Major made from light construction are operating (eg seines, trawls, Likelihood =1 due to poor navigation, other vessel and anchor lines can be abaided and abrided and weakned. Increased seabed roughness, Major structural can occur when set on rough loss can also occur due to other materials may be particularly pot). Type of loss can be minor to Severity = 2 colliding with gear or vandalism. fatigues and rope breaking strain abrasion leads to early onset wear damage can occur when pots are in grounds. vessels colliding with gear, setting susceptible. Low replacement costs catastrophic. Risk of loss can be Likelihood =4 diminshed during hauling. and tear. Severity of problem contact rocky seabeds. Severity of Likelihood =3 on rough ground. Risk of loss and time required to repair may reduced when gear is highly visible Severity =4 Likelihood =4 increases with numbers of pots on a problem increases with number of Severity = 4 increases with soak time and result in a "throw away and replace" (marked). Low replacement costs Severity = 2 line. posts in mainline. Catastrophic loss number of pots deployed. Pots culture. and time required to repair may Likelihood =3 can occur when set on rough made from light construction Likelihood =1 result in a "throw away and replace" Severity = 2 grounds. materials may be particularly Severity = 4 culture. Likelihood =3 susceptible. to damage. Low Likelihood =3 Severity =4 replacement costs and time required Severity = 4 08.2 Pots to repair may result in a "throw away and replace" culture. Likelihood =5 Severity = 4 Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV can reduce strength of netting Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Pots constructed from light steel Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Coastal pots highly vulnerable to of pots being washed overboard. and ropes over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for and plastic netting are highly and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. major damage and total loss. Likelihood =1 inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working vulnerable to damage. Poor different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials Offshore vessels can take avoidance Severity = 2 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). seamanship (linked to risk taking) other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal action. minor-moderate gear damage. Low lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high can lead to setting in areas where associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =1 replacement costs and time required levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to damage to other vessel gear is likely may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Severity =4 to repair may encourage a "throw accelerate such proceses. Pots premature damage and to occur or to self inflicted damages. "lose-lose" situations. However, the Severity =4 away and replace" culture. designed from steel with high iron replenishment of worn components. Damage can range from minor to light materials used in pot Likelihood =4 content and covered in plastic may Likelihood =3 major structural damage of fishing construction typcailly result in major Severity = 2 hide corrosion problems. Severity = 2 gear. structural damage to nets. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Severity = 4 Severity = 3 Severity = 4 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Hand hauled systems unlikely to Gear is designed to operate pasively Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Fishing gears may fall into disrepair Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey. Gear is set and fixed Highly unlikey in regular operations. exceed breaking strains of netting but in areas of relatively strong and be abandoned by the operator. Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 in the water. Extreme weather events (storm materials. current. Abrasion of lower panels Likelihood =1 Likelihood =0 surges aetc may result in major Likelihood =1 from sand and mud can rresult in Severity = 4 structural damage and loss. Severity = 1 136 abrasion. . Increased abrasion leads to early onset wear and tear. Likelihood =0 Likelihood =5 Severity = 2 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). seamanship (linked to risk taking) other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal action. minor-moderate gear damage. Low lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high can lead to setting in areas where associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =1 replacement costs and time required levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to damage to other vessel gear is likely may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Severity =4 to repair may encourage a "throw accelerate such proceses. Pots premature damage and to occur or to self inflicted damages. "lose-lose" situations. However, the Severity =4 away and replace" culture. designed from steel with high iron replenishment of worn components. Damage can range from minor to light materials used in pot Likelihood =4 content and covered in plastic may Likelihood =3 major structural damage of fishing construction typcailly result in major Severity = 2 hide corrosion problems. Severity = 2 gear. structural damage to nets. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Severity = 4 Severity = 3 Severity = 4 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Hand hauled systems unlikely to Gear is designed to operate pasively Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Fishing gears may fall into disrepair Not applicable to this gear type. Highly unlikey in regular operations Highly unlikey. Gear is set and fixed Highly unlikey in regular operations. exceed breaking strains of netting but in areas of relatively strong and be abandoned by the operator. Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 in the water. Extreme weather events (storm materials. current. Abrasion of lower panels Likelihood =1 Likelihood =0 surges aetc may result in major Likelihood =1 from sand and mud can rresult in Severity = 4 structural damage and loss. Severity = 1 abrasion. . Increased abrasion leads Likelihood =0 to early onset wear and tear. Likelihood =5 Severity = 2 Bubu Bersayap, 08.3.0, Pukat Labuh, Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events 08.0.01-08.4.05 Togo, Ambai, fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Pengerih Highly unlikey in regular operations UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Likelihood =1 Not applicable to this gear type. Absence of enforcement can lead to Coastal fyke and stow nets highly Likelihood =1 strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for Severity = 1 Likelihood =0 improper disposal of plastics at sea. vulnerable to major damage and Severity = 1 time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Large weight of fishing materials total loss. Offshore vessels can take replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). implies higher levels of disposal avoidance action. can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high than for lighter gear types. damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Severity =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Hook and lines Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Hand hauled systems unlikely to Highly unlikey in regular operations Line break Line break Partial loss of line and lures is Partial loss of line and lures is Minimal loss of line Minimal Not applicable to this gear type. exceed breaking strains of lines Likelihood =1 Likelihood =2 Likelihood =1 possible during regular operations possible during regular operations Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Likelihood =3 Likelihood =3 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Handlines 09.1-09.2 mechanized Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events handlines fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Minimal UV and abrasion can reduce Line break Increased rates of wear and tear Minimal loss of line and lures Minimal loss of line and lures Absence of enforcement can lead to Loss of shore based gear and boats Likelihood =1 strength of netting and ropes over Likelihood =1 leading to damage Likelihood =1 Likelihood =4 improper disposal of plastics at sea. (small scale) Severity = 1 time. Failure to inspect, detect and Severity = 1 Likelihood =2 Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =3 replace worn / degraded materials Severity = 1 implies higher levels of disposal Severity = 3 can lead to minor-moderate gear than for lighter gear types. damage. Likelihood =4 Likelihood =5 Severity =4 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Highly mechanized hauling systems Gear is not designed to be towed Gear is not designed to be towed Low breaking strain ofropes and Fishing gear operates without Major loss can occur when setting Fishing gear operates without Absence of enforcement can lead to May occur due to bad weather and place ropes under high load can over seabed. main line and snoods over seabed. main line and snoods twines may break under excessive attendance of vessel. Partial break on man made structures. Reasons attendance of vessel. Major loss improper disposal of plastics at sea. when anchor lines are too short lead to rope fatigue and weakened may be abraided through seabed may be abraided through seabed loading suring hauling. Major occurs often.Major loss can occur for setting may include; poor and damage can result from Large weight of fishing materials when setting in areas with high tides breaking strength. float damage and contact durting retrieval. Increased contact durting retrieval. Increased structural damage can occur when due to poor navigation, king tides, navigation, and risk taking. lines deploying lines where other vessels implies higher levels of disposal and strong currents. May also occur rope fatigue. Monofilament lines are abrasion can lead to weakened abrasion can lead to weakened ropes and twines are in contact incorrect length adjustment of bouy made from monofilament may be are operating (eg seines, trawls, than for lighter gear types. due to poor navigation, other vessel particularly vulnerable to abrasion. braking strength and rope fatigue. braking strength and rope fatigue. rocky seabeds. Increased abrasion lines. Major loss can also occur due particularly susceptible. pot). Type of loss can be minor to Likelihood =4 colliding with gear or vandalism. Likelihood =5 Severity of problem increases with Severity of problem increases with ireduces breaking strength and rope to other vessels colliding with gear Likelihood =3 catastrophic. Risk of loss can be Severity =4 Partial loss is also possible if Severity = 2 rope let length. rope let length. fatiguey. Severity of problem and or setting on rough ground. Risk Severity = 3 reduced when gear is highly visible multiple sets of gear are laid out. Likelihood =5 Likelihood =5 increases withrope length. of loss increases with soak time and (marked). Severity = 2 Severity = 2 Catastrophic loss can occur when length of line deployed. Likelihood =3 set on rough grounds. Likelihood =3 Severity = 3 Likelihood =5 Severity = 2 Severity = 3 09.3 Set longlines Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship (linked to risk Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Coastal set longlines are vulnerable of lines and floats being washed strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for taking) can lead to setting in areas and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. to major damage and total loss. overboard. time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working where damage to other vessel gear is different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials Offshore vessels can take Likelihood =1 replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). likely to occur or to self inflicted other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal avoidance action. Severity = 2 can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high damages. Damage can range from associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =2 damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to minor to major structural damage of may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Severity =4 Likelihood =5 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and fishing gear. "lose-lose" situations. Severity =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =5 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =3 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Severity = 3 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Minimal Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Minimal loss of line 137 Minimal loss of line Loss of lure is a likely event but weight of loss is very minimal fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Sea state may lead to increased risk UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Poor seamanship (linked to risk Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Coastal set longlines are vulnerable of lines and floats being washed strength of netting and ropes over and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for taking) can lead to setting in areas and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. to major damage and total loss. overboard. time. Failure to inspect, detect and safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working where damage to other vessel gear is different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials Offshore vessels can take Likelihood =1 replace worn / degraded materials inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). likely to occur or to self inflicted other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal avoidance action. Severity = 2 can lead to minor-moderate gear lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high damages. Damage can range from associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. Likelihood =2 damage. levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to minor to major structural damage of may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Severity =4 Likelihood =5 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and fishing gear. "lose-lose" situations. Severity =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =5 replenishment of worn components. Likelihood =3 Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Severity = 3 Severity = 2 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Minimal Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Minimal loss of line Minimal loss of line Loss of lure is a likely event but weight of loss is very minimal Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events 09.5 Trolling lines fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Minimal UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Extending the working life of fishing Minimal loss and damage Minimal loss and damage Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions Likelihood =1 strength of lines over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding gear requires regular inspection for Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Severity = 1 inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper wear and tear of working Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Large weight of fishing materials Likelihood =1 degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may components (netting, ropes etc). implies higher levels of disposal Severity = 1 minor-moderate gear damage. But lead to net and rope failure. High Failure to inspect and detect high than for lighter gear types overall impact is minimal levels of mechanization can levels of wear and tear can lead to Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 accelerate such proceses. premature damage and Severity = 1 Severity = 1 Likelihood =1 replenishment of worn components. Severity = 1 Likelihood =1 Severity = 1 Miscellaneous gear Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Mechanized hauling systems place Gear is towed over smooth seabed Gear is designed to operate in May occur when setting in shallow Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. If Minimal Highly unlikey in regular operations Not applicable to this gear type. ropes under high load can lead to at relatively slow speed. Moderate seabed contact. PE material has water. Increased abrasion in lower Likelihood =0 occurs, then major structural Likelihood =1 Likelihood =0 rope fatigue and weakened breaking rates of wear and tear anticipated high abrasion resistance to sections. High strain on ropes when damage and loss of gear is possible. Severity = 1 strength. float damage and rope especially in lower sections of net. accommodate regular contact. hauling may lead to major structural Likelihood =0 fatigue. Mesh abrasion and weakened mesh Likelihood =3 damage to netting and ropes Likelihood =3 breaking strength lead to higher rate Severity =3 Likelihood =2 Severity = 2 of replacement and early onset Severity = 4 damage to netting. Likelihood =4 Severity = 2 10.4 Push net Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light Plastics deteriorate under UV light Poor seamanship (linked to risk Overcrowding of fishing grounds Overcrowding of fishing grounds Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions strength of lines over time. Failure to and from abrasion and exceeding and from abrasion and exceeding taking) can lead to sdrift of lines into and lack of fleet separation leads to and lack of fleet separation leads to improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage inspect, detect and replace worn / safe working loads. Improper safe working loads. Improper areas where other vessels are different fleets encountering each different fleets encountering each Large weight of fishing materials degraded materials can lead to inspection of netting materials may inspection of netting materials may operating. Damage can range from other. other. Encounters and damage / loss implies higher levels of disposal minor-moderate gear damage. But lead to net and rope failure. High lead to net and rope failure. High minor to major structural damage of Likelihood =3 associated with non fishing vessels than for lighter gear types. overall impact is minimal levels of mechanization can levels of mechanization can fishing gear. Severity = 2 may also occur. Encounters results Likelihood =4 Likelihood =2 accelerate such proceses. accelerate such proceses. Likelihood =3 "lose-lose" situations. Severity =4 Severity = 1 Likelihood =4 Likelihood =3 Severity = 2 Likelihood =1 Severity =2 Severity = 2 Severity = 1 Wear & Tear from mechanical Wear and tear from towing on Wear, tear, damage from unintended Contact with seabed obstructions Deployed fishing gear not retrieved Deliberate setting of fishing gear on Loss or damage resulting from other Fishing gear lost overboard One or more fishing gear units cannot systems seabed contact with seabed man made structures fleets on fishing grounds be located at sea (lost) Minimal Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Not applicable to this gear type. Likelihood =1 Not applicable to this gear type. Likelihood =1 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Likelihood =0 Severity =1 Severity = 1 10.6 Scoop net Poor handling and stowage of Fishing gear material strength Fishing equipment poorly maintained Crew poorly trained in gear Poor seamanship and navigation Overcrowding of fishing grounds Non ccompliance with Regulations Extreme weather events fishing gears severely diminished maintenance (cyclone, storm surge) Not applicable to this gear type. UV and abrasion can reduce Plastics deteriorate under UV light . Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Likelihood =1 Absence of enforcement can lead to Vessel can take avoidance actions Likelihood =1 strength of lines over time. Failure to Likelihood =4 Severity =1 Severity =1 Severity =1 improper disposal of plastics at sea. to minimize risk of damage Severity =1 inspect, detect and replace worn / Severity =1 Large weight of fishing materials degraded materials can lead to implies higher levels of disposal minor-moderate gear damage. But than for lighter gear types. overall impact is minimal Likelihood =4 Likelihood =4 Severity =1 Severity =1 138 139 ANNEX 7 Governance context of Indonesia’s fisheries CLASSIFICATION OF FISHING GEARS 140 Fishing Gear Fishing Gear Code Surrounding Nets (Jaring lingkar) 01.0.0 Surrounding net with purse line (Jaring lingkar bertali kerut) 01.1.0 One boat operated purse seines (Pukat cincin dengan satu kapal) 01.1.1 One boat operated purse seines –small (Pukat cincin pelagis kecil dengan satu kapal) 01.1.1.1 One boat operated purse seines –large (Pukat cincin pelagis besar dengan satu kapal) 01.1.1.2 Two boats operated purse seines (Pukat cincin dengan dua kapal) 01.1.2 Ring netter –small (Pukat cincin grup pelagis kecil) 01.1.2.1 Seine Nets (Pukat Terik) 02.0.0 Beach Seines Pukat tarik pantai) 02.1.0 Boat or vessel seines (Pukat tarik berkapal) 02.2.0 Danish Seines (Dogol) 02.2.1 Scottish seines 02.2.2 Pair Seines 02.2.3 Payang 02.2.0.1 Cantrang 02.2.0.2 Lampara dasar 02.2.0.3 Trawls 03.0.0 Bottom trawls (Pukat hela dasar) 03.1.0 Beam trawls (Pukat hela dasar berpalang) 03.1.1 Otter trawls (Pukat hela dasar berpapan) 03.1.2 Shrimp trawls (Pukat hela dasar udang) 03.1.3 Midwater trawls 03.2.0 Single Boat midwater trawls (Pukat hela pertengahan berpapan) 03.2.1 Dredges (Penggaruk) 04.0.0 Boat dredges (Penggaruk berkapal) 04.1.0 Hand dredges (Penggaruk tanpa Kapal) 04.2.0 Lift Nets (Jaring Ingkat) 05.0.0 Portable lift nets 05.1.0 Boat operated lift nets 05.2.0 Bagan berperahu 05.2.0.1 Bouke ami 05.2.0.2 Shore operated stationary lift net 05.3.0 Fishing Gear Fishing Gear Code Falling Gears (Alat Yang Dijatuhkan Atau Ditebarkan) 06.0.0 Cast nets 06.1.0 Gillnets and Entangling Nets (Jaring Insang) 07.0.0 Set gillnets – anchored (Jaring insang tetap) 07.1.0 Jaring liong bun 07.1.0.1 Driftnets 07.2.0 Jaring gillnet oseanik 07.2.0.1 Encircling gillnets (Jaring insang lingkar) 07.3.0 Fixed gillnets on stakes (Jaring insang berpancang) 07.4.0 Trammel nets (Jaring insang berlapis) 07.5.0 Jaring klitik 07.5.0.1 1 41 Combined gillnets-trammel net 07.6.0 Traps (Perangkap) 08.0.0 Stationary uncovered pound nets 08.1.0 Set net 08.1.0.1 Pots (Bubu) 08.2.0 Fyke nets (Bubu bersayap) 08.3.0 Stow nets 08.4.0 Long bag set net (Pukat labuh) 08.4.0.1 Togo 08.4.0.2 Ambai 08.4.0.3 Jermal 08.4.0.4 Pengerih 08.4.0.5 Barriers, fences, weirs 08.5.0 Sero 08.5.0.1 Aerial traps 08.6.0 Muro ami 08.9.0.1 Seser 08.9.0.2 Hooks and Lines 09.0.0 Handlines and pole-lines/hand operated 09.1.0 Pancing ulur 09.0.0.1 Pancing berjoram 09.0.0.2 Huhate 09.0.0.3 Squid angling 09.0.0.4 Handlines and pole-lines/mechanized 09.2.0 Squid jigging 09.2.0.1 Huhate mekanis 09.2.0.2 Set longlines (Rawai desar) 09.3.0 Drifting longlines (Rawai hanyut) 09.4.0 Rawai tuna 09.4.0.1 Rawai cucut 09.4.0.2 Trolling lines (Tonda) 09.6.0 Pancing laying-layang 09.9.0.1 Grappling and wounding (Alat Penjepit Dan Melukai) 10.0.0 Harpoons 10.1.0 Ladung 10.0.0.1 Panah 10.0.0.2 FISHING GEARS PERMITTED IN EACH FISHERY MANAGEMENT AREA AND FISHING ZONE (Note: Original file in Indonesian) 142 143 144 145 146 1 47 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 DISTRIBUTION OF FISHING PORTS ACROSS FISHERY MANAGEMENT AREAS Data source: Marine and Fisheries in Figures 2018 158 159 ANNEX 8 Global experiences and best practices for ALDFG & fishing gear waste management 160 Global experiences and best MONITORING ALDFG Any attempts to manage and address ALDFG will first require practices for ALDFG and fishing an understanding of the scale and sources of ALDFG. The cur- gear waste management are rent study has, by necessity, undertaken ad hoc surveys and data collection to inform the estimates of ALDFG and EOFLG presented in this annex. quantities and types presented in this report. However, ad hoc monitoring is unlikely to be sufficient to provide the informa- tion needed to inform the design of and monitor the effective- ness of ALDFG management strategies. Instead, regular pro- cesses for routine data collection should be developed as a key component of the ALDFG management systems that are developed. A mass-balance approach is one possible strategy for es- timating ALDFG volumes. This requires monitoring of the weight of new gears purchased (e.g., via manufacturer or sup- plier reporting requirements established as a part of extend- ed producer responsibility schemes) and the weight of gears removed from the environment as waste (e.g., via port waste reporting). The difference between these two volumes is the amount of ALDFG entering the environment. Targets to reduce ALDFG can then be set on both sides of the equation, by re- ducing the number of new gears purchased (e.g., by improving gear design, minimizing losses and increasing reuse), and by increasing the collection rates for fishing gear waste. 37 Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj 38 Directive (EU) 2019/883 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on port reception facilities for the delivery of waste from ships, amending Directive 2010/65/EU and repealing Directive 2000/59/EC. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/883/oj 39 European Commission Implementing Decision of 31.5.2021 laying down the format for reporting data and information on fishing gear placed on the market and waste fishing gear collected in Member States and the format for the quality check report in accordance with Articles 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council. https://ec.europa.eu/oceans-and-fisheries/publications/decision-laying-down-format-reporting-data-and- information-fishing-gear-placed-market_en This is the approach adopted by the European Union (EU) to MANAGING PLASTIC WASTE FROM support the implementation of its Single Use Plastics Direc- FISHERIES AT SEA tive (SUP Directive37) and Port Reception Facilities Directive As recognized by Macfadyen et al (2009) and operationalized (PRF Directive38) in relation to fishing gear. The SUP Directive by the GGGI’s best practices for the management of fishing targets the ten single-use plastic products most often found gear (GGGI 2017a, 2017b & 2021a), as a general principle it is on Europe’s beaches and seas, as well as ALDFG due to its more cost-effective to focus first on policies and practices that significant impact on marine life. The PRF Directive is the EU’s prevent plastic waste entering the marine environment before implementation of the IMO’s MARPOL Annex V obligations to looking at its mitigation or recovery. Using GGGI’s Best Practice manage garbage from ships by improving the availability and Framework for the Management of Fishing Gear (C-BPF) as a use of facilities in ports for waste, including fishing gear. The starting point, Table 25 summarizes the main ways in which SUP and PRF Directives complement each other, with the in- ALDFG can be managed by: (i) first preventing ALDFG genera- troduction of extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes tion (i.e., by reducing rates of abandonment, loss and discard); for the financing of waste from fishing gear. The reporting re- (ii) then mitigating the effects of ALDFG on the marine envi- quirements for EU Member States under these directives have ronment; and finally (iii) implementing policy approaches to recently published,39 including guidance on how fishing gear recover ALDFG from marine habitats. Additional details of one placed on the market and waste fishing gear is to be quanti- example of an important preventative measure—gear mark- 161 fied, and with the intention of setting collection targets in the ing—are presented in Box 4. future. Box 4: Requirements in Taiwan fisheries for the marking of gillnets, reporting of lost gillnets, and disposal of EOLFG. The government of Taiwan has taken significant steps to promote gear marking in local fisheries, in particular within their demersal gillnet fishery. This fishery makes up the majority of fishing in Taiwanese waters with 10,186 (7,662 full-time and 2,524 part-time) of the 21,908 registered fishing vessels in the country using various types of gillnets. The Taiwan National Fisheries Agency (https://en.fa.gov.tw) has proposed a requirement for gillnets to be marked with the vessel registration number on marker buoys, demersal floats that hold the gillnet aloft in the water, and on the weights that hold the bottom of the gillnet to the seabed (for demersal gillnets). This additional set of marking guide- lines means that, if a net or piece of net snags or is otherwise lost during fishing operations, there is a high likelihood that it can be identified and traced back to the source fishery and vessel. Taiwan’s fisheries management is divided into local and national regulations, leading to some confusion over which set of rules applies in which area. Four local governments requested that there be a single set of regulations, as it was difficult for fishers to follow different sets of regulations that vary by region. In response, the Taiwan National Fisheries Agency has developed a single national regulation for gear marking and reporting of lost gillnets. These new national regulations came into effect in 2021, following a 6-month implementation period to allow fishers to adapt to the new regulations. Fishers must report any gear losses as a condition of license, and those that willingly report are not penalized. The gear marking requirements is proving extremely important for data gathering and for identifying IUU gear, as well as for identifying which fisher has lost the net. Fishers who do not properly mark their gear, or who do not willingly report lost gears can be subject to fines of up to 150,000 TWD (5,000 USD). Due to the high number of artisanal gillnet fishers in Taiwan, it is anticipated that enforcement will remain challenging, but this is a significant step by the Taiwan National Fisheries Agency to develop solutions to this issue. In addition, the Taiwan National Fisheries Agency has designated storage sites in every port for fishers to deposit their EOLFG. In the past, there was no collection or recycling channel for fishing nets, which were typically sent for in- cineration. The new storage sites have enabled the Ocean Conservation Administration (https://www.oca.gov.tw/en/) to develop a system for collecting EOLFG and recycling it locally, creating a circular solution for this waste material. Table 25: Examples of global policy and management mechanisms to address ALDFG. POLICY MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL REFERENCES AREA MECHANISMS EXAMPLES Prevention: Preventing gear loss to the marine environment Marine spatial Zoning to reduce (i) gear-conflict between Indonesia: Decree of the Minister Richardson et al (2018) planning fishers & (ii) gear interactions from other of Marine Affairs and Fisheries 2/ GGGI (2017b, 2021a) marine users. PERMEN-KP/2015 on the Prohibition of the Usage of Trawl and Seine Nets Communication protocols to warn other sea in Indonesia Fishery Management users of static gear hazards. Area may have reduced gear conflict and loss due to trawler interactions. Third party Encouraging fisheries to undergo third party Global: Friend of the Sea ecolabel FriendoftheSea.org certification certification e.g., MSC, Fairtrade, FoS) or to includes requirements for ALDFG MSC.org for responsible enter Fisheries Improvement Projects (FIPs) avoidance and recovery. The Marine fishing. Stewardship Council is expected to 162 include assessment of Ghost Gear within its revised standard from 2022. Awareness Awareness campaigns to build an US: NOAA/Ocean Conservancy NOAA, US building understanding of the impacts of ALDFG Council “Keep the Coast Clear Ocean Conservancy and how this can be reduced by responsible Campaign”. https://www.noaa.gov/ fishing management. stories/marine-debris-problem-you- can-get-your-arms-around Work with local and gear-based fishing associations & NGOs to develop codes of Global: 2017 International Coastal good practice that minimizes ALDFG. Cleanup. (Ocean Conservancy): https://oceanconservancy.org/ trash-free-seas/international-coastal- cleanup/ Vessel design Ensuring fishing vessels have sufficient Norway: Deep-sea gillnetters FANTARED, 2003 space & equipment to store, deploy, retrieve deliberately discarded hundreds of and stow used fishing gear. kilometers of bottom-set gillnets each year as (i) there was insufficient storage space on board and (ii) the nets they used were easily damaged and cheaply replaced. Mitigation: Reducing the Impact of ALDFG on the marine environment Fishing gear Use of non-entangling gears and FADs. US: Use of “ropeless” gear, “weak” ISSF, 2019; OSPAR, design ropes, sleeves and time tension line 2020; Where appropriate, use of biodegradable cutters (TTLC) to reduce the potential components that reduce ghost fishing & for entanglement with fishing gear, habitat damage. especially from ropes used to mark and haul pots and traps. Gear Mandatory marking and identification of See Box 4 – marking gillnets in Dixon et al, 2018; FAO, marking fishing gear and its components. Taiwan. 2019b; GGGI, 2021a Integrate ALDFG Include details of fishing gear and marking Global: Potential link between IUU GGGI (2021a) management into required in fisheries licensing systems and fishing activities and a heightened licensing & IUU develop non-compliance sanctions systems. risk of ALDFG. A combination of prevention intelligence-based information and Recover ALDFG associated with IUU fishing risk assessment could be used to operations. identify IUU fishing hotspots and to predict where illegally placed gear and gear lost through resulting gear conflict might occur. POLICY MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL REFERENCES AREA MECHANISMS EXAMPLES Recovery: Enabling the removal of ALDFG from the marine environment ALDFG reporting Obligation to report ALDFG EU: Obligation to attempt to recover EC Control Regulation programs and report ALDFG if not successful. 1224/2009 System for reporting, recording and GGGI, 2021 communicating the loss or abandonment of GGGI has developed a Ghost Gear fishing gear. Reporter phone app allowing anyone to report location of ALDFG: https:// www.ghostgear.org/ ALDFG recovery Vessel operators should have the facilities, UK: Fishing for Litter: Europe-wide http://www. programs equipment and training to locate and recover initiative for fishers to bring waste fishingforlitter.org.uk/ lost or abandoned fishing gear where collected in nets back to shore: https:// possible. China: Dive-for-love Diver recovery of chinadialogueocean. 163 ALDFG on reefs net/5843-five-ways-to- Third party (fishery, government or citizen) tackle-ghost-fishing- clean-up operations on beaches or in sub- Korea: fishers are paid $10 for every gear/ sea ALDFG accumulation ‘hotspots. 100litre sack of retrieved waste & Cho, 2009 gear. Considered successful (over DFO, Canada, 2021 66,000t recovered in 10 years), but costly and does not incentivize behavior change. Canada: Ghost Gear Fund supporting retrieval and collection initiatives. RE-USE, RECYCLING AND THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY FOR PLASTICS FROM FISHERIES WASTE Recycle Materials The development of the circular economy offers tremendous RECYCLE potential to address ALDFG. This, in conjunction with optimiz- ing landfill management, will help to substantially reduce the Assemble amount of plastics that end up as marine plastic litter. When “As-new” product implemented in conjunction with measures to strengthen the REMANUFACTURE management of marine-based sources of marine litter, and with cleanup operations, plastic pollution of the oceans may Extend be reduced and eventually prevented (UNIDO 2019). Service Life REPAIR The circular economy represents an alternative, more sustain- able model to the traditional linear economy. In the linear econ- Redistribute used product omy, products follow a path from make, to use, to disposal (Figure 38). In contrast, a circular economy is restorative and REUSE regenerative by design, keeping resources in use for as long as possible, extracting the maximum value from them whilst in use, and then recovering and regenerating products and ma- terials at the end of their service life. In a circular economy the value of products and materials is maintained for as long as possible. As a result, a circular economy offers a way to Circular improve competitiveness and resource efficiency. Product The unique characteristics of plastics enable them to make a major contribution towards the circular economy, and the tran- Figure 38: Production in a circular economy. Source: Oceanwise sition to more sustainable and resource efficient development. At the end of the first life, products should have pathways that A circular economy for plastics requires systems-level thinking can be followed before they become waste. These include re- across multiple sectors and industries—including the fisheries use with or without repairs or refurbishment; recycling for sec- and aquaculture sectors—and collaboration between public ondary materials for the same type of use; up-cycling to higher and private sectors. value uses; or down-cycling to alternative use. Though often overlooked, the informal sector plays an important role in the Policy measures can accelerate the development of the circu- circular economy through the collection and segregation of lar economy by creating incentives for innovation in the design scrap plastic and other materials. Policies that recognize and of existing and new products, and supporting businesses and protect the livelihoods, health and safety of informal waste col- startups in fields related to biodegradable and compostable lectors are essential. plastics. To be effective, policies should aim to foster sup- ply-side motivation for circular product designs as well as de- Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes help to mand-side preference for the resulting products. This includes support the development of products designed for recyclabil- creating new markets for recycled and bio-based plastics; ap- ity, as well as improved collection and consolidation of waste plying differentiated taxes to virgin and recycled plastics; intro- streams to support recycling operations. Easily understood ducing standards for recycled content; improving information labelling schemes help consumers to contribute effectively to 164 about recycled content in products; and enhancing consumer waste management objectives. EPR schemes can also help education and awareness about these issues. to regulate the use of certain materials, in products, including hazardous materials that can contaminate waste and pose an Furthermore, policies that support the development and op- obstacle to reuse and recycling initiatives. eration of infrastructure and facilities for the collection and separation of waste streams, while empowering local authori- It is almost impossible to eliminate all waste from product cy- ties with adequate financial and technical resources for waste cles, and eventually a waste fraction will require final dispos- management, are likely to stimulate product designs that are al. Disposal options include safe landfills or elimination (e.g., easier to recycle (UNIDO, 2019). via controlled incineration of hazardous materials that con- tain plastic fractions). Designing out waste to retain plastics In the production phase, improved management of plastic raw within the economy; regaining the value embodied in plastics materials helps to eliminate material losses into wastewater that have leaked out of the economy as waste; and continuing streams and oceans, which in turn improve manufacturing effi- efforts to recover plastics already in the oceans or accumu- ciency and productivity through the implementation of cleaner lated around beaches, ports and coastal waters emerge as production methods that minimize leakage of plastic raw ma- strategies that deserve consideration on the way to a circular terials and industrial plastic waste into the environment. plastics economy and an end to the global marine plastic litter challenge. In the use phase, suppliers and customers should be led to- wards choices that support circular economy practices, in- Circular Ocean (http://www.circularocean.eu/) is a good ex- cluding by opting out of single-use / short-term use plastic ample of an organization that is developing the circular econo- products, and by supporting waste management systems my within the fisheries sector through their work with commu- that can collect, sort, separate and effectively recycle plastics. nities to manage discarded fishing nets during the phases of Potential mechanisms include enforcing bans and/or levies recovery, recycling, and reuse, and the development of novel on plastic products that are not compatible with the circular and robust business opportunities that are environmentally economy, applying fines or penalties in cases of non-compli- sustainable and enhance income generation (Figure 39). Other ance, and implementing deposit return schemes to reduce sin- global examples of the circular economy within the fisheries gle-use and short-lived plastic product use. sector are presented in Table 26. Collection Cleaning Segregation Re-processing New Products Figure 39: There is potential for robust and environmentally sustainable business opportunities to be developed at multiple stages within the circular economy for discarded fishing nets. Source: Circular Ocean. Table 26: Examples of global policies and measures to support the circular economy within the fishery sector. POLICY GENERAL MEASURES FISHERIES / AQUACULTURE REFERENCES AND AREA SECTOR SPECIFIC EXAMPLES Circular Design Public measures Research and development of low- Global: OSPAR report on • Eco-design standards: Policy cost gear marking, identification, design and recycling of measures setting plastic material and lighting and traceability technologies. fishing gear materials: design standards to improve repair, Pilot projects to demonstrate https://www.ospar.org/ recyclability and minimize overall and improve research outputs for documents?v=42718 environmental footprint subsequent mainstreaming. • Recycling content standards: Requiring UK: Net Tag low-cost a certain level of recycled material Gear design allowing repair and acoustic tags: to be used in plastic applications. replacement of components instead https://www.ncl. Potential incentives or penalties of full replacement. Gear service ac.uk/press/articles/ could be levied on the producers and agreements – repair/replacement archive/2019/04/nettag/ importers of plastic products to meet services for major fishing gear their recycled content levels. components. Europe: Service contracts • Develop alternative materials with trawl & seine net • Product design innovation – e.g., Use of biodegradable plastics in manufacturers to repair/ 165 mono-polymer applications, re-usability fisheries replace damaged and • Removal of non-recyclable plastics EOLFG Gear repair activities – provision of Private measures repair facilities at ports. Korea: eco-friendly buoys • Cross/ inter industry standards: https://www.ajudaily.com/ common standards, for plastics view/20200528084937232 materials and packaging to improve recyclability Korea: financed R&D • Repair/replace contracts and commercial trials on alternative fishing materials. Materials close to 50% durability of plastics. Single Use Public measures Reduced use of SUP in fisheries and Europe: Single Use Plastics (SUPs) • Taxes and levies on SUPs- Taxes and/ aquaculture (e.g., use of plastic bags Plastics Directive and Reducing or levies imposed on manufacturers, for catch preservation in snapper Port Reception Facilities problematic and retailers or consumers for use of fisheries) Directive, including fishing unnecessary SUPs specific types of single-use plastic gear. elements, including; plastic bags, Ensure adequate waste facilities in https://ec.europa. straws, cups and polystyrene food ports (see waste collection below) eu/newsroom/mare/ packaging. items/628060/en • Bans on SUPs - Ban on manufacturing, Awareness-raising to change culture distribution and import of defined of SUP disposal at sea. problematic and unnecessary single- use plastic products and packaging • Ban on primary micro plastics <5mm Private measures • Remove non-recyclable plastics from packaging • Develop alternative materials Extended Producer Public measures Reporting on fishing gear placed on Global: Plastics Policy Responsibility • Packaging material fees the market and waste gear collected Playbook on design (EPR) • Deposit return schemes parameters for a national • Gear buy back Supply chain traceability e.g., level EPR frameworks. • Plastic credits system -Management embedding traceability into ropes https://oceanconservancy. Producers meet their obligations (e.g., via color coding), nets and org/wp-content/ by purchasing recycling certificates buoys, data encoding (ownership / uploads/2019/10/Plastics- issued by accredited re-processors traceability) Policy-Playbook-10.17.19. or recyclers based on the amount of pdf plastic waste recycled Traceability: Manufacturers embed Asia: WWF EPR Plastic traceability into their products by Packaging Waste Private measures marking them with manufacturer proposals in Asia: • Pre-competitive voluntary EPR: Commit name, year of manufacture, type of https://wwf.panda.org/ to bold collection targets for end-of- product and production batch discover/knowledge_hub/ life plastic, Align on the governance all_publications/?356332/ certification cross or inter-industry Extended-Producer- Responsibility-Project POLICY GENERAL MEASURES FISHERIES / AQUACULTURE REFERENCES AND AREA SECTOR SPECIFIC EXAMPLES Malaysia Plastic Pact: http://mpma.org. my/v4/wp-content/ uploads/2019/11/11- Malaysia-Plastics-Pact.pdf https://www.eco-business. com/opinion/waste-not- want-not-malaysia-moves- to-become-a-leader-in- tackling-plastic-waste/ Buy back With the increasing adoption of life Gear buy-back schemes/discounted Korea: https:// schemes cycle analyses by manufacturers and new gear: One simple approach is marinedebris.noaa. their incorporation into corporate and for manufacturers to buy-back old gov/file/2197/ social responsibility initiatives, there is gear (for refurbishment or recycling) download?token=K6JWiyI4 considerable potential for manufacturers and discount this value against the to become more involved in facilitating the purchase of near gear. Investment in 166 responsible use and end of life treatment of sorting and collection systems for old their products. gear and its valuation. Deposit schemes (for some gear types): Some discrete gear components, such as plastic pots and buoys, could attract an end- of-life refund when returned to the manufacturer or their agent. Develop Public measures Development of collection and Global: The Ocean Clean recycling and • Incentives for recycling industry: segregation facilities, recycling and Up- technology-driven treatment Financial instruments such as credits, treatment markets and value chains recovery of marine litter at markets deductions, tax exemptions, as well for end-of-life fishing gear materials the Great Pacific Garbage as shortened depreciation lifetime, are e.g., nylon fishing nets and other types Patch and river collectors designed to stimulate growth of the of nets and ropes (e.g., PP, LDPE) https://theoceancleanup. plastic recycling industry Financial incentives likely needed to com/ • Sustainable conversion and offtake encourage fishing gear recycling as markets: Incentives in the form of not a clean, single plastic high volume UK: Odyssey Innovation subsidies, tax exemptions for intake source for recyclers. https://www. of low-value, non-recyclable plastic to odysseyinnovation.com/ stimulate their sustainable end-of-life Fishing for litter schemes that support Collects and recycles treatment markets. at sea collection and link with port fishing nets from ports to • Preferential procurement collection and onward treatment. produce kayaks which are • Virgin material tax Circular Economy Initiatives can then used for ‘paddle for • Support for Research and Development combine collection, recycling, re-use plastic’ awareness-raising. to identify solutions and awareness, e.g. The Ocean Clean Up and Odyssey Innovation. South America: Bureo Private measures Netplus material from • Invest in recycling capacity: develop recycled fishing nets and scale the recycling industry. https://bureo.co/pages/ netplus Philippines: Net-works system for fisher recovery and recycling into carpet tiles https://net-works.com/ Waste Public measures: Ports Reception Facilities - Disposal North West Pacific: Collection & • Packaging materials free solution for fishing gear when it can Port Reception Facili- management • Deposit return schemes no longer be used or repaired. Public ties in NOWPAP region: • Plastic credits / Packaging recovery sector authorities should work with https://wedocs.unep. note ports authorities and private sector to org/bitstream/han- • Pay as you throw (Polluter Pays build port reception facilities for end- dle/20.500.11822/26213/ Principle) of-life fishing gear and assist the port port_rec_facilities.pdf?se- • Municipal collection points in transporting the recyclable material quence=1&isAllowed=y • Source segregation - Rules to mandate to the recycler. Korea: Floating receptacles or incentivize waste stream separation for marine litter, buy-back at the source of generation. programme includes recep- tion facilities. POLICY GENERAL MEASURES FISHERIES / AQUACULTURE REFERENCES AND AREA SECTOR SPECIFIC EXAMPLES Public/ private measures OSPAR recommendation • Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) on handling plastic garbage • Blended financing instruments in the fishing industry. • Disposal fees Vietnam: Fishing port facilities based on Sciortino (2010) Informal sector Public measures: Engage Informal Sector in Ports S E Asia: Supporting the engagement • Provide occupational cards to waste Waste Management and Recycling Informal Waste Sector in waste collectors systems / End-of-life fishing gear https://pacecircular. collection, • Align with independent waste disposal facilities – for collection, org/sites/default/ sorting and collectors’ associations through public- sorting and segregation. Organizing files/2021-02/FINAL-Infor- segregation private partnerships collection systems (mobilizing mal-Sector-Report_com- • Clarify ownership rights on recyclable fishermen associations, creating pressed.pdf waste collection collection points) for end-of-life gear. • Waste collector livelihood improvement 1. Provide the informal sector Indonesia: Informal plastic programs workforce with information, collection innovation chal- 167 • Provide working capital to waste skills, technology, and equipment lenge https://www.wefo- collector microenterprises through existing support rum.org/agenda/2021/06/ • Provision of land, utilities, equipment organizations; innovators-indone- and primary collection (through e.g., 2. Expand informal sector sia-waste-informal-sector/ drop off points) processing capacity by financing App-based platforms for equipment; and informal waste collection: Private measures 3. Stabilize the prices paid for low- Duitin Indonesia https:// • Waste banks and incentivized value plastics at a level that will duitin.id/ collection of problematic plastic) encourage collection • Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Octopus: an end-to-end funds to NGOs for independent waste recyclable waste logistic collector welfare projects platform, currently operat- • Help entrepreneurs establish a formal ing in six cities in Indonesia banking and tracking system from South Sulawesi, Bali • Non-profit organizations can provide to West Java with more technical support, help establish than 9000 waste collectors collectives and ensure social inclusion. using their app. They pro- vide a solution for recycling industries to acquire their materials Outreach, • Consumer awareness for behavior Develop cross-sectoral awareness- Indonesia: Ocean Plastic education, change – e.g., use of digital platforms building, information, communication Prevention Accelerator capacity • Cross sectoral awareness – and management platforms in both is a social innovation development government/ private sector, fisheries/ government and private sector. ecosystem builder program and stakeholder environment/ pollution control/ waste that fosters a collaborative engagement management, Cross-value chain Target campaigns to high-risk groups network collaboration. (near waterways) and fisheries sector https://www.oppa.id/ • Knowledge repository to improve waste segregation by the • Standard operating procedures for fisheries and aquaculture sectors. Kenya: Ocean Sole collects local governments to reduce the discarded flip-flops to technical capability required produce art, removing marine plastics, giving local employment, raising awareness. https://oceansoleonline. com/ Policy • Development of National Policies National and sub-national Action Indonesia: development -– coherent, integrated, open and Plans and Strategies for Reducing National Action Plan on and adaptable, allocated funding, Marine Debris National Plan of Action. Marine Debris implementation transparent and traceable, data driven, Collective structures established National Action Plan on (governance) circular economy focused by neighboring fishing ports to Plastic Pollution • Enforcement of laws and policies, build economies of scale in waste – see following section • Municipal Unions management activities. ANNEX 9 MARPOL ANNEX V At the international level, the International Maritime Organi- reviewed and, where deficiencies are identified, proposals are zation (IMO) is the United Nations agency with competency presented to find an Indonesian solution that is tailored to the 168 in marine pollution matters. Over the years, the IMO has de- specific needs and existing infrastructure. Three aspects of veloped various instruments to manage pollution from ships. Annex V that relate to plastic pollution from fishing operations One of the key instruments related to the prevention of plastic are considered: pollution from all seagoing vessels is the International Con- 1. the requirements for vessels to carry and fill out a gar- vention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) bage record book (GRB) (Regulation 10.3); Annex V. 2. the landing and disposal of fishing gears considered as garbage40 in port reception facilities (Regulation 8); and MARPOL is the main international convention the addresses 3. the reporting of lost and accidentally discharged fishing the prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships gear (Regulation 10.6). from operational or accidental causes. MARPOL entered into force in 1983 and includes binding regulations that aim to pre- GARBAGE RECORD BOOK vent and minimize pollution from ships, whether accidental or (REGULATION 10.3) arising from routine operations. MARPOL currently consists MARPOL Annex V applies to all vessels flagged under the 156 of six technical Annexes that address various categories of signatory countries that are to the convention, including fish- pollutants. Annex V addresses the pollution by garbage from ing and recreational vessels, irrespective of size or where they ships, and entered into force in 1988. sail. However, the level of reporting detail (if any) differs de- pending on the vessel size. MARPOL Annex V addresses the various types of garbage that are generated by vessels, and prohibits the discharge of all Vessels smaller than 100 GT are not required to have a gar- garbage into the sea, with limited exceptions. MARPOL Annex bage management plan. Vessels between 100 and 400 GT V applies to all vessels flagged under the 156 countries that are required to carry a garbage management plan on board, are signatories to the convention, including fishing and recre- which includes written procedures for minimizing, collecting, ational vessels, irrespective of size or where they sail. A nota- storing, processing and disposing of garbage, including the ble feature of Annex V is the complete ban imposed on the dis- use of the equipment on board. Vessels larger than 400 GT posal into the sea of all forms of plastics, although there are (which may include some fishery supply boats, fish carriers some exceptions relating to fisheries including loss of fishing and bunker boats) or vessels certified to carry 15 or more per- gear which is addressed under Regulation 10.6 and concerns sons engaged in voyages to ports in other MARPOL signatory issues of safety to the vessel and crew. countries, offshore terminals and fixed or floating platforms are required to carry a Garbage Record Book and to record all This section considers whether MARPOL Annex V, in its current disposal and incineration operations. form, is sufficiently robust to provide a framework for reducing the risk of plastics generated by fishing vessels from entering Garbage records must include: (i) a record of the date, time, the marine environment. The efficacy of MARPOL Annex V to and position of the vessel; (ii) a description of the garbage in- manage marine plastic pollution from EOLFG and ALDFG is cinerated or discharged, including estimated amount; and (iii) 40 MARPOL Annex V defines garbage as including all kinds of food, domestic and operational waste, all plastics, cargo residues, incinerator ashes, cooking oil, fishing gear, and animal carcasses generated during the normal operation of the ship and liable to be disposed of continuously or periodically. be signed by the master of the ship. The Garbage Record Book dling facilities at 23 PPN and PPS, and to implement ISO must be kept for a period of two years after the date of the 14001 Environmental Management standards in 67 public 169 last entry. If ship personnel can adequately account for all their ports and 22 PPN/PPS. MMAF, the Ministry of Environment garbage, they are unlikely to be wrongly penalized for discharg- and Forestry (MoEF) and local governments are also obliged ing garbage when they have not done so. MARPOL Annex V to develop Standard Operating Procedures for the operation Appendix 2 provides a standard form for a Garbage Record of ‘eco-friendly fisheries and aquaculture’. While Government Book which includes entries for plastics, including fishing gear Regulation 81/2012 and Presidential Regulation 83/2018 ad- waste. dress some larger ports (including full coverage of Indonesia’s PPS and PPN), there are few waste reception or management Table 6 provides a breakdown of Indonesian fishing fleet by facilities present in most of the smaller PPI and PPP. Given vessel size. In 2016 only 858 of Indonesia’s 171,744 motorized that most of Indonesia’s fishing capacity consists of vessels fishing vessels were larger than 100 GT and hence required smaller than 30 GT, this lack of infrastructure and facilities is to have a garbage management plan. No fishing vessels were a concern. larger than 400 GT and hence required to carry and fill out a garbage record book. In its present form, the requirements to carry and fill out a GRB under MARPOL Annex V Regulation REPORTING OF LOST FISHING GEAR 10.3 do not apply to Indonesia’s 171,744 inboard or 181,178 (REGULATION 10.6) outboard motor vessels. Regulation 10.6 of Annex V requires fishing vessels to report the accidental loss or discharge of fishing gears which pose PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES a significant threat to the marine environment or navigation. (REGULATION 8) However, when initially introduced, Annex V provided insuffi- The effectiveness of any ship to comply with the discharge re- cient guidance on: (i) what size and/or type of gear represents quirements of MARPOL depends largely upon the availability a significant threat to the marine environment; (ii) the roles of adequate port reception facilities. MARPOL Annex V Regula- and responsibilities of the coastal and flag States; (iii) how the tion 8 requires signatory states to provide adequate reception information was to be reported; and (iv) what actions might facilities at ports and terminals for the reception of garbage. need to be taken once reported. Government of Indonesia Regulation 81/2012 on Domestic Waste Management requires all public ports to conduct waste Some of the concerns raised with respect to a lack of detail separation, waste collection and temporary waste storage. on types of losses to report were addressed when IMO pub- Subsequent waste treatment should include compaction, lished guidelines for the implementation of MARPOL Annex V composting, recycling and energy recovery. via Resolution MEPC.219(63)41 and Resolution MEPC.295(17) 42 which state: Presidential Regulation 83/2018 on Marine Debris Manage- • The accidental loss or discharge of fishing gear which ment addresses the management of plastic waste from is required to be reported by regulation 10.6 of MARPOL maritime activities and outlines targets to establish waste Annex V should be determined specifically by the coastal reception facilities at 112 public ports, establish waste han- State. For such determination, the government is encour- 41 RESOLUTION MEPC.219(63) (adopted on 2 March 2012). 2012 Guidelines for the Implementation of MARPOL Annex V. https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/ en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/MEPCDocuments/MEPC.219(63).pdf 42 RESOLUTION MEPC.295(71) (adopted on 7 July 2017). 2017 Guidelines for the Implementation of MARPOL Annex V. https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/ KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/MEPCDocuments/MEPC.295(71).pdf aged to consider various factors including: (i) the amount members have been considering changes to both Regulation of the gear lost or discharged and (2) the conditions of 10.6 and the reporting requirements. For example, it has been the marine environment where it was lost or discharged. proposed to make reporting of accidental loss or discharge of Comprehensive consideration is needed on the charac- fishing gears mandatory and to remove the term “significant teristics of the gear that was lost, including types, size threat to the environment” from the text of Regulation 10.6. (weight and/or length), quantity, material (especially While there is growing support among IMO members for man- whether synthetic/plastic or not), and buoyancy. In addi- datory reporting of lost gears, the consensus-based approach tion, governments should consider the impact of the fish- to IMO procedures makes it difficult to say with certainty if or ing gear in different locations in order to assess whether when such changes to Regulation 10.6 will occur. Moreover, the lost gear represents a significant threat to the marine unless concurrent changes are also made to require vessels environment or navigation, taking into account the vulner- <400GT to maintain a garbage record book, the possibility will ability of habitat and protected species to gear interac- remain for Indonesia’s fishing vessels to dispose of their plas- tions. Governments are encouraged to report to IMO their tic waste without record keeping (albeit illegally). measures taken for this issue with a view to promoting in- formation sharing and opinion exchange among govern- RELEVANCE TO INDONESIA’S FISHERIES ments and relevant International Organizations. Further, MARPOL Annex V reporting regulations are not suited to In- 170 governments are encouraged to report to IMO progress donesian fishing vessels. Annex V specifies different report- made in implementing these measures, including sum- ing requirements for vessels <100 GT, <400 GT and >400 GT. maries of where gear was lost and, if applicable, actions These differences were intended for merchant ships, where taken to address the gear loss; the degree of reporting reflected the relative numbers of mer- • Examples of lost or abandoned fishing gear which could chant ships in each size class. Almost all of Indonesia’s fishing be considered to pose a significant threat to the marine vessels are smaller than 400 GT, and below the threshold for environment include whole or nearly whole large fishing detailed reporting on the quantity of waste generated and the gear or other large portions of gear. In determining the location and method of disposal. threat to the marine environment, governments should • Key deficiencies that limit the applicability of ANNEX V give careful consideration to the impact of gear in sensi- to address plastic leakage from Indonesia’s fishing oper- tive areas, such as coral reefs, and in areas where inter- ations include: actions would have higher risks of detrimental impacts, • a non-requirement to carry and fill out a GRB by all Indone- such as foraging or breeding areas for protected species; sian fishing vessels due to vessels sized <400GT; • Governments are encouraged to develop communica- • no mandatory requirement for Indonesian fishing vessel tion frameworks to enable the recording and sharing of operators to report all lost fishing gear and fishing gear information on fishing gear loss where necessary in order accidentally discharged; and to reduce loss and facilitate recovery of fishing gear. Gov- • limited guidance in Annex V on how lost fishing gears and ernments are further encouraged to develop frameworks fishing gears accidentally discharged overboard should to assist fishing vessels in reporting the loss of gear to be reported. the flag State and to a coastal State. Such frameworks should take into consideration implementation challeng- In its present form, MARPOL Annex V is not sufficiently tai- es in small scale and artisanal fisheries and recreational lored to Indonesia’s fishing operations and practices and has operations. The fishing industry, relevant international or- limited application to reduce plastic leakage from Indone- ganizations and governments are encouraged to under- sian fishing operations. As a consensus-based organization, take such research, technology development, information changes to MARPOL Annex V require agreement among the sharing and management measures as may be needed to Members before adoption. Amending the Annex to reduce the minimize the probability of loss, and maximize the proba- size of vessels mandated to carry and fill out garbage record bility of retrieval of fishing gear from the sea; and books or to make reporting of lost fishing gear mandatory will • Governments should encourage vessel operators to im- require consensus. Such processes can take an extended time plement appropriate onboard storage and handling of to complete, and the final amendments may not be precisely fishing gear and should also consider relevant guidance suited to Indonesia’s fishery specific problems. from FAO and IMO. On the other hand, Indonesia has benefitted from the guidance The 2017 Guidelines also included examples of lost or aban- provided on port reception facilities which have been established doned fishing gear which could be considered to pose a sig- at the 23 PPN/PPS ports, and this may provide a reasonable nificant threat to the marine environment, including whole or foundation for follow up work on EOLFG and ALDFG reporting. nearly whole large fishing gear or other large portions of gear. To date, few reports have been filed with IMO, calling into ques- tion the merit of Regulation 10.6 in its present form. Some IMO 171 ANNEX 10 Reporting and monitoring of EOLFG and ALDFG ALDFG represents a significant risk to Indonesia marine nat- MARPOL Annex V and that would be applicable to any fishing 172 ural resources. The findings of this study have shown that: vessel within Indonesia’s maritime jurisdiction. The develop- (i) a significant quantity of fishing gear is deployed into the ment of such regulatory measures requires robust evidence marine environment by Indonesian fishing vessels; (ii) a sig- of the types, sources and magnitude of ALDFG and its asso- nificant proportion of this gear is replenished annually due ciated ecological impacts. However, the availability of such to wear and tear, damage and loss; and (iii) that those fish- evidence is currently limited and, given Indonesia’s vast and ing gear materials that end up as ALDFG may cause adverse complex fisheries, this should be seen as a red flag that has ecological impacts through ghost fishing, entanglement, raft- potential to inhibit the ability to allocate and prioritize invest- ing of invasive species and smothering of sensitive marine ments into ALDFG management effectively. habitats. This study also noted that, due to the absence of a robust shore-side monitoring and reporting system in fishing Integrating a mass balance approach to EOLFG and ALDFG ports, it is not currently possible to separate out the quantities reporting into existing systems and infrastructure offers an of waste fishing gear materials that are disposed of ashore effective solution while minimizing barriers to initiation. In (EOLFG) from those that are disposed of at sea (ALDFG). order to differentiate the weights of EOLFG that are landed and disposed of ashore from those that are disposed of at The adage ‘you can’t manage what you can’t measure” holds sea (ALDFG), a strategy is need for monitoring the quantity of true for EOLFG and ALDFG. The ad hoc surveys conducted new gears that are deployed (e.g., via manufacturer or suppli- during this study have revealed the extent and urgency of er reporting requirements established as a part of extended this issue, and have helped to inform next steps. However, to producer responsibility schemes) and the quantity of gears achieve the Government of Indonesia’s ambitious objectives removed from the environment as waste (e.g., via port waste to reduce marine debris, a regular process for monitoring is reporting). The difference between these two quantities pro- needed to (i) improve understanding of the key issues, drivers, vides an estimate of the amount of leakage in the form of ALD- and ‘hotspots’ of EOLFG and ALDFG generation; and (ii) eval- FG. These estimates could be further improved if: (i) a system uate the efficacy and efficiency of management interventions. is put in place for vessels to report lost fishing gears, possibly Given its importance as a key cross-cutting action and a pre- integrated into existing fishery logbook and reporting systems; cursor to the success of several other management measures, and (ii) compliance with waste fishing gear landing and report- this Annex describes a proposed approach for reporting and ing requirements is made a condition of the license to fish. A monitoring of EOLFG and ALDFG, and outlines a strategy for skeleton design for a mass balance approach to monitoring piloting and evaluation. weights of gear deployed, weights of EOLFG landed and prop- erly disposed, and weights of ALDFG is depicted in Figure 40. There is a need for an Indonesian solution to waste fishing gear reporting and monitoring. International conventions and A differentiated approach is required for reporting and moni- agreements such as MARPOL provide a framework for ad- toring of ALDFG in small- and large-scale fisheries. Electron- dressing ALDFG. However, clauses relating to reporting and ic reporting has potential to provide an efficient and effective monitoring have limited applicability in Indonesia because solution to the challenges of monitoring fishing gear quanti- the majority of fishing vessels are below the threshold sizes ties throughout their lifecycle and by the various stakeholders regulated by the convention (Annex 9). Notwithstanding this, if involved (Table 27). To minimize setup and operational over- Indonesia wishes to improve the reporting requirements of its heads, e-reporting of ALDFG should be integrated into existing national fleet—and especially those vessels operating within systems where feasible. An essential first step in the design Indonesia’s EEZ—the GOI may choose to develop national pol- and implementation of an e-reporting strategy for ALDFG, ex- icy, laws and regulations that go beyond the requirements of isting information and e-reporting systems should be identi- FISHING GEAR SUPPLIER FISHING GEAR LICENSE HOLDER Gear Purchased Quantity of fishing from Supplier gear on vessel t=0 Weight of EOLFG/ Size of Gear and weight ALDFG replenished of gear linked to Fishing and Vessel license # Estimates of weights Weight of fishing gear license. Weights sent sent electronically to derived from Fishing purchased by license holder server Gear Plans and purchase to Fisheries server orders sent electronically electronically to license holder Weight of fishing gear on vessel 173 Quantity of Quantity of fishing Quantity of fishing new fishing gear EOLFG at end gear Lost or gear ordered by of trip accidetally discharged license holder Report weight Report weight of EOLFG for of EOLFG for disposal and disposal and license # prior to license # prior to landing landing SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY Design/ Record of license # Weight of EOLFG & Weight of EOLFG & ALDFG for standardization of Record of Gear weights ALDFG sent to Sever disposal and vessel license data collection sheets submitted to DG Capture electronically checked in port reception area Fisheries at start of season “Pre-condition” Record of weights sent to license holder FISHERIES PORT MINISTRY AUTHORITY Figure 40: Outline of a mass balance approach to monitoring and reporting EOLFG and ALDFG. fied and reviewed. This includes current logbook and electron- smaller than 30 GT, the high diversity of vessels and fishing ic logbooks which could be extended to facilitate reporting of gears operating in Indonesia’s 357 PPIs, coupled with the fishing gear loading and decommissioning by vessel skippers, different types of management authority controlling licenses as well as fishery information systems currently used by ma- and ports is likely to make the logistics of managing a pilot ex- rine and fishery services to manage data on fishery landings tremely complicated. Moreover, since there are already some and fishery licenses. Similarly, the applicability of extended port reception facilities within PPSs and PPNs, establishing a producer responsibilities schemes to be applied to manufac- pilot in these ports where prior experience exists is likely to be turers and suppliers of fishing gears in Indonesia to encourage most efficient in the short term, and enable approaches to be greater transparency and accountability with regard to plastic trialed and validated before replication to more the more com- components. Piloting of e-reporting strategies should consider plex context of the PPIs. the need for a differentiated approach within small- and large- scale fisheries. While the number of fishing vessels and fishing capacity of the Indonesian fleet is greatest amongst vessels Table 27: Five principal actors play an essential role in a successful gear reporting system. Fishing gear • Provide feedback to the vessel license holder on the weights of plastic materials purchased. This information suppliers is provided electronically to the license holder broken down by netting, ropes and floats based on a request for purchase basis. A duplicate of the plastic weight information and the license holder could also be sent electronically to fisheries (a check and balance). Fishing vessel • Prior to commencement of the first trip on a new license, the dimensions and weights of the fishing gear to license holders be deployed during fishing operations (baseline weight) are submitted electronically. Such information can be provided to the license holder by the fishing gear supplier, but it is the responsibility of the license holder to confirm the dimensions and weights and submit the information. This will be the baseline against which EOLFG and ALDFG and replenishments will be measured. • Prior to commencement of any subsequent trip, the weights of all fishing gear purchased as a result of wear and tear, loss, abandonment and discarding incurred during a fishing trip is to be submitted electronically. • Prior to commencement of any subsequent trip, the weights of all fishing gear placed on the vessel from all other sources (personal gear store, etc.) where no electronic receipt is available are to be submitted electronically. • Prior to arrival at any landing port, the license holder is required to inform the port authority of arrival and to declare any plastic EOFLG and ALDFG materials to be offloaded for disposal. There will be no requirement to weigh any EOLFG or retrieved ALDFG. This will be the responsibility of the port authority. 174 • Prior to arrival at any landing port, the license holder is required to inform the port authority of any fishing gear that is to be removed from the vessel for repair. Port authority • Make available, maintain and operate a secure area of the port for: (i) offloading of plastics from vessels, and (ii) weighing offloaded plastics by fishing vessels. • Ensure the vessel requesting offload of EOLFG and retrieved ALDFG is met promptly and is proving a berthing spot for rapid offload of materials. • Record the license number of the vessel and the weights of plastics offloaded according to floats, ropes, twines and netting. • Submit the recorded weights electronically to fisheries and provide the license holder with a copy of such weights. • Maintaining a safe record of all vessels, license numbers, and EOLFG / ALDFG weights offloaded. • Participate in the design and overall management of the pilot. Fisheries • Provide overall technical leadership for the pilot. authority • Liaise with fishing gear suppliers and license holders involved in the pilot. • Coordinate the work of the principal actors and lead the drafting of templates for collection of information on fishing gears, EOLFG and retrieved ALDFG. • Lead the technical work on compilation and analysis of data on EOLFG and retrieved ALDFG plastic fishing gear materials. Solid waste • Provide guidance on templates for collection of data on plastics from fishing operations. management • Provide feedback on weights of EOLFG and ALDFG materials dispatched for disposal in landfill etc. authority • Provide technical support in design and overall management of the pilot. An initial pilot could be completed within six PPS and PPN reporting system might be selected from these provinces, and class fishing ports over a two-year period. A pilot should in particular from ports in Java province which accounts for be designed to encompass fishing gears that: (i) have a high around 30 percent of Indonesia’s capture fisheries production weight of plastic content, are likely to be landed ashore at (BPS, 2019). Within these top five provinces, there a three PPS, the end of life, and are a candidate for recycling (e.g., purse three PPN, 18 PPP and over 300 PPI (Table 28). The island seine and drift gillnets); and (ii) have a high risk of causing of Java, bounded predominantly by WPP 712 and WPP 573 ecological impact when abandoned, lost or otherwise dis- stands out as a candidate area to trial an EOLFG/ALDFG mon- carded (e.g., set anchored gillnets, set plastic pots and set itoring and reporting pilot given the comparatively short dis- longlines). Ports with high production volumes, and hence tance to Jakarta and the likelihood for logistical support and high numbers of fishing vessels, fishing gears and generated technical backstopping from the capital. Candidate fishing fishing gear waste should be prioritized. The top five provinces ports include: PPS Cilacap, PPS Nizam Zachman Jakarta, PPN (Jawa Barat 13 percent, Aceh 11.3 percent, Jawa Timur 11.2 Palabuhanratu, PPN Prigi, PPN Pekalongan, PPN Karangantu, percent, Jawa Tengah 8 percent and Banten 5.1 percent) ac- PPN Kejawanan, PPN Brondong and PPN Muara Angke. It is count for 54.7 percent of Indonesia’s annual fish capture pro- suggested that a minimum of 100-150 vessels are required duction suggesting that candidate ports for piloting an ALDFG for the pilot across for all six ports (average 16-25 vessels per 43 The approach adopted in other countries is to focus on fisher experience and knowledge of clean up rather than seeking to understand the underlying science of where and how gears are lost. port), distributed equally amongst across purse seine, drift define the framework under which the pilot would operate; (iii) gillnet, set anchored gillnet, set anchored trammel net, crus- development and testing of the protocols for e-reporting and tacean pot, and longlines gears. A minimum of 15-20 vessels e-monitoring; (iv) field evaluations of the baseline weights of per gear subcategory should enable trends between fleets as the gears involved in the pilot; (v) agreed terms and conditions well as between vessels within a specific gear subcategory to for carrying out the trials between the parties (port authority, be monitored. Pre-conditions for establishing a pilot should in- MMAF, vessel operators, and other relevant stakeholders). clude: (i) collection of disaggregated port data to confirm the suitability of candidate fishing ports; (ii) dialogues between the GOI (MMAF and port authorities) and vessel operators to Table 28: Number and types of ports in the top five landing provinces. PROVINCE OCEAN FISHING ARCHIPELAGIC COASTAL FISH LANDING PORT (PPS) FISHING PORT FISHING PORT BASE (PPI) (PPN) (PPP) 175 West Java 0 1 3 44 Aceh 1 0 0 113 East Java 1 1 5 50 Central Java 1 1 9 67 Banten 0 1 1 25 DKI Jakarta 1 0 0 1 Preventative and curative measures tailored to the local con- • Engage the coastal fishing community in small fishing text are likely to be a more effective strategy for PPP and port waste cleanup and proper disposal [Preventative]. PPI class fishing ports. Such measures should aim to incen- NGOs and other advocacy groups have demonstrated tivize a “whole community approach” to participation in marine their capacity to engage with and provide value added in pollution mitigation rather than focusing on enforcing a com- beach cleanup, ghost gear retrieval and safe disposal of munity sub-group’s compliance with applicable international such gears. or national ALDFG regulations. Pilots could be established in • Develop community awareness about EOLFG/ALDFG 20 PPP/ PPI fishing ports to develop and evaluate strategies. best practices [Preventative]. These actions should aim As a pre-condition, ports should have secure fenced areas for to provide information, communication and management unloading, sorting, weighing and safe disposal of EOLFG and platforms to both government and community with tar- retrieved ALDFG. Such facilities could also consider weighing, geted campaigns in and around small fishing ports and sorting and safe disposal of fuel oils and other hazardous ma- especially in schools targeting youth, the next generation terials used by small-scale fishers. For potential ALDFG man- of fishers. agement strategies could be considered: • Provision of secure EOLFG / ALDFG reception bins in • Establish a Ghost Gear Fund for ALDFG retrieval involv- small ports [Curative]. Experience from other countries ing fishers [Curative]. Fishing for Litter schemes have has shown that retrieved gear is often comprised of a grown in popularity and are relatively simple to introduce. highly mixed material that contains metal anchors, chains, Under such a program a fund (“ghost gear fund”) is made organic matter such as mussels and dead fish and other available to fishers to go out and retrieve lost gear. It is 43 marine litter as well as nets, ropes, float and sink lines. recommended that a cost-sharing approach be applied to A pilot to assess the merits of setting up a secure area use of the fund, similar to approaches implemented by for EOLFG waste receiving and storage bins would allow the Government of Canada. the fine tuning of a small port marine litter program to be developed. ANNEX 11 Rationale for the feasibility and prioritisation of recommendations 176 POLICY AREA ALDFG PREVENTION Marine spatial planning: Zoning or communication protocols to reduce gear conflict, interactions with other marine users. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance The high rank of relevance and acceptability relates to the commitment of Indonesia government HIGH following the UU No. 27/2007 and following the implementation and technical in Ministerial lev- el, and provincial level through RZWP3K. The planning, strategy, objective/target, implementation Acceptability team are already settled and provided by Directorate General of Marine Spatial Management, in- HIGH tense coordination, and communication within the relevant stakeholder, such as Directorate Gen- eral of Capture Fisheries and Directorate General of Marine Resources and Fisheries Surveillance. Enforceability Regarding the needs of additional support program and intense collaboration from national level MEDIUM with the Provincial and Regency/District level government. This will be required to manage and cover the enforcement activities due to the remote area location. Local communities’ engagement such as kelompok masyarakat pengawas/Pokmaswas are an option to support the surveillance and enforcement activities. Benefit-cost MSP framework is already well developed and established; it would not take a lot to factor in ALD- HIGH FG considerations within the standard review cycle. POLICY AREA ALDFG PREVENTION Vessel design: e.g. ensuring fishing vessels have sufficient space & equipment to store, deploy, retrieve and stow used fishing gear FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance As per the ministerial decree (Ministerial Decree Number 29 of 2021), only explained the 5 GT, 10 MEDIUM GT and 30 GT vessels. For vessels, less than 5 GT and above 30 GT, it is not well explained under this regulation which the relevance to Indonesia is given to medium scale Acceptability The larger class of vessels (above 30GT) is managed under the central government, while MEDIUM the vessels below 30 GT are under the governor’s authority. Specifically, in terms of ter- minology of “Small Scale Fisherman” referred to the regulation, there are two categories of the small scale fishers which are in National law number 45 of 2009 said that the small scale vessels used ≤5GT vessels while in Ministerial Regulation number 58 of 2020 concerning the capture fisheries business concerning the capture fisheries business, the small scale is the fishers that used ≤10 GT vessels. In conclusion, the acceptability is medium because there is a need to consider specific regulation that mainly described the “vessel design” in further detail and combined with the available SNIs for the fishing vessels, Currently, there are two standards of the vessels construction based on the SNIs include the construction of purse seiner 75-150 GT and 75-150 GT of tuna long-liner (for the other type of fishing vessel is not available yet on the SNIs). And also, there is a need to consider the terminology of small scale fisherman. Enforceability In terms of the vessels design, the enforceability for all the vessels class is same as this is man- HIGH dated (required) through the PERMEN 23/2021 for the vessels to get the legal operation standard of fishing vessels and other fishing license or permit. Benefit-cost Changing the design of the vessels is costly and there regulation in Indonesia allowed the chang- LOW ing of the vessels (see the Ministerial Regulation number 5 of 2019 – paragraph 10 point (1.c) physical changes of the fishing vessels. POLICY AREA ALDFG PREVENTION Awareness raising: Campaigns for fishers and public. Develop codes of practice FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance The high rank for relevance, enforceability and benefit-cost relates to the Fishery Extension or Pen- HIGH yuluh Perikanan, this unit is a legal position that is already regulated by ministerial regulation. The 177 budget allocation for additional activities must be planned and approved during the discussion Acceptability of budget allocations at the beginning of the year or the previous year where the budget comes HIGH from the Central Budget, De-concentration to the provincial government or external parties with a cooperation scheme. Enforceability MEDIUM The enforceability is medium - As being part of the National Implementing Team of the National Benefit-cost Action Plan of PERPRES 83 of 2018, the MMAF is already undertaking numerous awareness-rais- HIGH ing efforts as described earlier. POLICY AREA ALDFG MITIGATION Fishing gear design: e.g. Non-entangling gears and FADs, biodegradable or more recyclable components. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high – by considering the list of fishing gear designs that include in SNIs HIGH and combined with the Indonesia Catalogue of fishing gear design categorized as “high rank” (high relevance to Indonesia). Also considered the newly ratified regulation of Ministerial Regula- tion number 18 of 2021 combined with the new plan regarding the “Perikanan Terukur”, it is clear for the “spatial distribution of each fishing gear that permitted operated per WPP by each type of fishing gear, GT class, and the fishing zone would be highly relevant to Indonesia related to the fea- sibility of ALDFG measures towards developing the circular economy for fishing gear in Indonesia. Acceptability Acceptability is medium – Some fishing gear has already been defined in regulation, but there is MEDIUM a need to update the new list of SNIs per each fishing gear with further detail. In the newly ratified regulation of Ministerial Regulation Number 18 of 2021, there is no mention of “biodegradable or more recyclable components”. There is a need to consider adding these specific elements or derivative regulations. The significant change compared to the previous regulation Enforceability Enforceability is low – as the newest ratified regulation has recently launched in 2021, so the gov- LOW ernment will be required to evaluate the progress in upcoming years regarding the effectiveness of this regulation being implemented in Indonesian fisheries sectors. Due to the increasing fishing effort, the vessels might use more than one fishing gear in their trip. Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is medium – we consider the given rank for this is medium because it is likely that the MEDIUM changes of the government regulation would much impacted to the fisheries sectors in Indonesia and for the new initiative in developing the biodegradable or more recyclable components of fish- ing gears might need a high cost. POLICY AREA ALDFG MITIGATION Gear marking: Owner identification of fishing gear and its components FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance There is a lot of zonation and differentiation of management by gear types, but as yet limited regu- HIGH latory requirements for gear marking beyond that contained within PP 27 /2021 and PP 18/2021. Acceptability Indonesia through the pilot project of FAO partnered with GGGI to implement the pilot project on LOW gear marking in small-scale fisheries in Indonesia in 2017. In general if we will implementing the specific regulation on gear marking it will be low in acceptability due to implementation barrier for the massive distribution of Indonesia Archipelago area for small-scale fishing vessels. Enforceability Large sections of the fleet are located far from technical implementation unit/ Unit Pelaksana LOW Teknis-UPT level government agency, limiting enforceability by the authority and jurisdiction from Regency or District marine and fisheries agency or officer regarding the new law or regulation. Law or Undang-Undang/UU No. 23/2014 concerning Local Government, the regency/district level only has a mandate regarding the fisheries only to socialize and increase awareness of the fishing community and support the auction fish operation. There is no role or actions related to enforce- ment. Enforcement and management under the provincial government. Benefit-cost It will take a lot of effort since there is no top tier hierarchy regulation that can be as guidance to LOW legalize this action as mandatory in Indonesia area. The best approach will be as the Pilot Project with a scheme section in the Oceanic Fishing Port (PPS) level and the lowest tier level of fishing port in regency/district government. POLICY AREA 178 ALDFG MITIGATION Integrate EOLFG and ALDFG management into fisheries management: Include gear details, loss reporting, recovery requirements. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia and Benefit-Cost is High – as this also has been agreed within the several HIGH initiative and action plan of GOI both in collaboration and coordination inter-governmental, bilater- al, multilateral and international NGOs. It shows how the government is concerned about marine Acceptability debris and its management. In conclusion, the rank of relevance to Indonesia is high. To be noted LOW that, it strictly depends on the national and provincial level governments’ commitment to develop and formulate the regulations, socialization, and implementation. Enforceability LOW Acceptability and enforceability are low - due to the time costs in identifying where to amend and then the time and procedures involved in changing regulations. Benefit-cost HIGH POLICY AREA ALDFG RETRIEVAL EOLFG-ALDFG reporting programs: Recording, reporting and communicating ALDFG incidents FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high – currently there is not a regulation that requires ALDFG reporting HIGH in Indonesia. However, the GOI has already started the program of marine debris related issues (and ALDFG is mention under this) and ALDFG reporting programs needs to be added in the reg- ulation. The ALDFG reporting program should be added as a part of the GOI program on marine debris of President Regulation Number 83 of 2018 concerning the marine debris management as part of the current reporting system expected under this regulation (paragraph 9). Acceptability Acceptability is Med – Linked with the GOI plan on marine debris management, this would be MEDIUM accepted by the GOI in integrating or adding to vessel reporting programs/systems or ongoing program on https://sampahlaut.id/data-spasial/#tab-id-1 and https://sipsn.menlhk.go.id/sipsn/# for vessels >30GT. Enforceability Enforceability is high – if part of the regulation (Ministerial Regulation of Coordinating Ministry for HIGH Maritime and Investments Affairs number 69 of 2019) and applied to vessels over 30GT, enforce- ability should be high. Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is medium - because the current regulation does not yet specifically and technically MEDIUM explain the ALDFG reporting programs so a follow-up regulation needed and the cost of imple- menting across Indonesia is high POLICY AREA ALDFG RETRIEVAL ALDFG Recovery Programs: Provision of equipment and training to locate and retrieve gear. Clean-up operations FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia, acceptability, and enforceability is high – As mandated through the Presi- HIGH dent Regulation Number 83 of 2018 concerning marine debris management, the MMAF is respon- sible for national movement on beach clean-up. By integrating the ALDFG recovery programs into Acceptability the program of MMAF, it will highly the support the MMAF. HIGH Enforceability HIGH Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is high - the implementation and action related to the clean-up generally are focused HIGH on the marine litter or debris initiated by the NGOs, government, and other initiatives in Indonesia. Clean-up operations (e.g., CITARUM River Clean Up Actions) have been effective if well-targeted. Possible to target ghost gear high risk areas and tourism hotspots (reefs). 179 POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Enabling gear repair activities – e.g. provision of repair facilities at ports. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia, acceptability, and enforceability are medium – Most of the fishers that MEDIUM conduct the repair activities are usually used the open space or open area in the port or even in front of their docking location. For the broken piece of gear, the fishers might replace or repair Acceptability their gear firstly before they decided to throw it away. Then if all the fishing ports in Indonesia (538 MEDIUM ports) have repair facilities, then the waste as resulted from the unused gear in the repairing pro- cess can be centralized in this facility then all the waste can be easy to be monitored. Also, if the Enforceability waste of gear is accepted by the collectors in the port/land so the fishers might choose to bring MEDIUM the waste of the fishing scrap to the collector (refer to point 13 below on Recycling and treatment markets). Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is low - by considering the investment in building the repair facilities is high and the LOW cost-benefit of this parameter is low. The fishers mostly do the repair activities without using the repair facilities in the ports. As the fishers will repair the gear depending on the available space/ area in the ports and they not only do the repair in the port because they repaired the gear them- selves at home. POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Circular Design: Research and development of design to aid re-use/repair/recycling. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high – the R&D of design to aid re-use/repair/recycling is lacking. Gen- HIGH erally, most of the research is concerned with “marine debris” and not yet focused on ALDFG. Engage with recyclers for a future pilot project that specialized to do the pilot project related to the R&D on the design to aid re-use/repair/recycling things. As the MMAF task within the PERPRES 83 of 2018, the MMAF is expected to do the research on marine debris pollution and its impact (11 WPPs), we can suggest including the R&D specialized on the re-use/repair/recycling as a part of this program. ALDFG that cannot be processed to re-use and repair could be useful as an input material for waste into the energy under President Regulation Number 35 of 2018 concerning the Acceleration of Development of Waste Treatment Installation Into Electricity based on Environ- mentally Friendly Technology. Acceptability Acceptability and enforceability are medium – the rank for these categorized as the medium be- MEDIUM cause we consider that R&D capacity on fishing gear is limited, specifically on how to re-use/ repair/recycling. Enforceability MEDIUM Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is high - The model developed and regulations concerning circular design, both in HIGH research and development of designs to aid re-use, repair/recycling, are highly needed to be imple- mented across Indonesia. The cost for this is high because the R&D will require several iterations before we get the ideal model to applicable and replicated in Indonesia (include the pilot study). In addition, we identified if this program is successful in the future, the cost-benefit will be high. POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme: e.g. tax on producers and/or collection and treatment. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high - There are some companies that have already started implement- HIGH ing the EPR scheme in a voluntary basis (PT Kemasan Ciptatama Sempurna (KCS), GO-JEk, Djour- nal Coffee, and The Body Shop) BUT there is no fishing gear producer participating in this. If the GoI is willing to implement the EPR scheme, the cost will be high for this. The EPR is a good scheme to realize zero waste to landfills. Related to the tariff could integrate the regulation of Ministerial Regulation of Ministry of Home Affairs Number 7 of 2021. Acceptability Acceptability, enforceability and benefit-cost are low – no fishing gear producers participated in LOW this EPR scheme. It is likely that the producers might worried about the cost if they implemented the EPR scheme. So we consider that there is a need for having a win-win solution to bridge/ac- Enforceability commodate between the interests of protection on the one hand, and the investment economic LOW climate on the other. 180 Benefit-cost LOW POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Buy-back scheme: e.g., Deposit and return schemes (strengthening the link between gear suppliers and users) FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high – In general, the buy-back scheme from the gear suppliers and HIGH users could be strengthen if the MMAF have their owned regulation (through Directorate General Regulation, or other relevant regulation under the MMAF) that specifically required the fishing gear producers/supplier to implement the buy-back scheme (producers-supplier-users) in supporting the current regulation of Ministerial Regulation of Ministry of Environment and Forestry Number P.75/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/10/2019 on the roadmap in reducing the waste by the producers. In conclusion, the buy-back scheme is highly relevant to Indonesia as it will increase the willing- ness of end-consumers or users to transfer their waste into the money (waste to money). Acceptability Acceptability and enforceability are medium – there is no fishing gear factory/producers that par- MEDIUM ticipated in giving their owned roadmap in reducing their waste for 2020-2029 program to the Enforceability MoEF-Indonesia. MEDIUM Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is high – it seems that this is likely feasible and would have an impact HIGH POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Recycling and treatment markets: Collection facilities incentives for recycling and treatment markets value chains for EOLFG materials FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high – this will be highly relevant to Indonesia and feasible in developing HIGH the circular economy for fishing gear in Indonesia as it would be have a high added values (waste to money) and this could be used as a trigger in activating the new business model both in recycle and treatment markets. Acceptability Acceptability is medium – most recycling and treatment markets are not currently receiving ALD- MEDIUM FG, although the waste of fishing gear and other materials in supporting the fishing activities cat- egorized as a marine plastic debris. Enforceability Enforceability is high – the GOI under the RAN PSL had been strategically made the national team HIGH called “Tim Koordinasi Nasional Penangan Sampah Laut” Benefit-cost Benefit-cost is high – the investment in the recycling and treatment facilities represents a high HIGH cost, to include the financial incentives to develop markets for recycling and treatment of fishing gear compared to other plastic waste, but market development will be needed for actions to be sustainable beyond project interventions. POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Port Reception Facilities: Separate port reception facilities for end-of-life fishing gear and assist the port in transporting the recyclable material to the recycler. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia is high: by enabling specific ALDFG facilities in the port, it will trigger and HIGH stimulate the business player on the waste sectors (related to the ALDFG waste) to be operated and invest their business in the port by enabling the third party cooperation (joint cooperation). Also, it is noted that the MARPOL Annex V yet to be fully implemented, but separate facilities would help with the above buy-back and recycling initiatives. Acceptability Acceptability and enforceability are low ranking – as most of the end-of-life fishing gear needs to LOW be managed and regulated with the proper guidelines and follow-up regulation. We also noticed as a lesson learned of two plastic recycler facilities in the fishing port of PPS Kendari and PPS Bitung Enforceability are not fully be operated due to operational issues and other administration issues. LOW Benefit-cost Benefit-cost – this will need significant investment (exclude the assisting cost in supporting the HIGH 181 port in transporting the recyclable material to the recycler). POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Engagement with waste operators: Improving links and support to informal waste collection sector, cross-sectoral links to improve viability FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance Relevance to Indonesia, acceptability, enforceability, and benefit-cost are high: by enabling specific HIGH ALDFG facilities in the port, it will trigger and stimulate the business player on the waste sectors (related to the ALDFG waste) to be operated and invest their business in the port by enabling the Acceptability third party cooperation (joint cooperation). Also, it is noted that the MARPOL Annex V yet to be LOW fully implemented, but separate facilities would help with the above buy-back and recycling initia- tives. The engagement with waste operator is highly relevant to Indonesia in order to support the Enforceability circular economy for fishing gear in Indonesia, and the cost benefit for this is categorized as high. N/A Although there is a gap in the supply chain of waste (those involved in solid-waste management need to be part of the EOLFG-ALDFG supply chain. Benefit-cost HIGH POLICY AREA CIRCULAR ECONOMY Engagement with other stakeholders: e.g., government and private sector. FEASIBILITY SCORE COMMENT Relevance The coordination, meeting and communication between private sector can be establish and pro- HIGH vide during the regular meeting forum and workshop of the related RFMO. Acceptability The regular meeting, forum and workshop can be a platform in between Indonesia government LOW with private sector including the NGO, Academic and local communities to discuss, sharing and develop the action regarding the fisheries issue and challenge. Enforceability N/A Indonesia government can also support and working together with the private sector in order to comply with the RFMO requirement if the RFMO has the new initiate or program to achieve. Benefit-cost MEDIUM 182 183 184