Search

The silver cauldron from Gundestrup Mose, a bog in northern Jutland, Denmark, is a unique piece of chased silver work, probably from the time around the birth of Christ. The decorations on the richly decorated cauldron have been embossed in very high relief and tooled to finish with a variety of punches. This paper is based on the identification and documentation of imprints of pattern punches occurring on the surface of the Gundestrup Cauldron. Silicone rubber impressions of tool marks on the vessel's surface have been the basis of the study. By identifying and comparing the individual tool marks, we can in certain instances verify or invalidate a stylistic/iconographic evaluation. Perhaps one day we shall finally be able to establish the provenance of the cauldron by comparing its tool marks with those of tools represented on other objects.

Executive Summary: This report is intended to contribute to a successful implementation of the landing obligation (LO) of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy of the EU. The work package focuses on how unavoidable, unwanted catches (UUC) can be utilised once they have been landed. The first step in that work is to provide an overview of current and expected supplies of UUC, where and when they will be landed, what are the available facilities and how the set-up is at the landing harbours to cope with changing supplies effected by the LO. This document addresses that by focusing on five selected fisheries, which will be key case studies in future work within the work package i.e. Bay of Biscay (landings in the Basque country), North Sea (Danish fleet) and Iceland. Landing and discarding statistics from the Mediterranean (bottom trawlers landing in Mallorca) and the English Channel (French fleet) are also analysed. The role of Iceland in this report is to provide an example of where a LO has been successfully in effect for decades. Estimating future landings of what used to be discarded under a policy regime that obliged fishermen to discard UUC cannot realistically take into consideration changes in behaviour of fishermen that inevitably will occur. Once the LO is implemented the fishermen will change their practises, for example by avoiding areas with high volumes of UUC or by applying more selective fishing gear. The historic discard data can therefore only give indications on what UUC are likely to be landed in certain areas, as well as when and by which fleets. The general results from all of the case studies is that relatively few species and fleets account for most of the discards. There are also in most fisheries very few harbours that stand out, representing vast majority of the discards. The available facilities are in most cases going to be sufficient to cope with changing supplies of catches intended for production of products for human consumption. Catches below Minimum Conservation Reference Size (MCRS) and other catches that cannot be utilised for direct human consumption will however present a challenge in many areas. Solutions for processing those materials will either have to be simple and inexpensive, or strategically located so that raw materials can easily be transported to them. The lessons learned from Iceland are that a successful implementation takes time and that economic incentives generally work best. Safety criteria’s relevant for UUC utilisation are fairly straightforward and need to apply to established rules and regulations. There is a fundamental difference in requirements for UUC intended for direct human consumption and catches that are used for other purposes, but traceability and documentation verifying that the products are safe are always required. When it comes to quality criteria’s requirements can be more subjective, as long as the products are safe., This is DiscardLess Project Delliverable Report 6.1 towards Strategies for the gradual elimination of discards in European fisheries., {"references":["77/1998. (1998, February 6). Reglugerð um botn- og flotvörpur. Reykjavík, Iceland.","Agrifish. (15. December 2015). Fisheries. Hentet fra Ministry of environment and food of Denmark: http://agrifish.dk/fisheries/","Directorate of fisheries. (2015, October 20). Um fiskveiðistjórnun. Retrieved from Fiskistofa: http://www.fiskistofa.is/fiskveidistjorn/stjornfiskveida/","EC. (2007). Impact assessment of discard policy for specific fisheries. Brussels: EC.","EC. (2011, 7 13). Commission staff working paper SEC(2011) 891: Impact assessment. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from europarl.europa.eu: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2011/0891/COM_SEC(2011)0891_EN.pdf","EC. (2013). Regulation (EU) 1380/2013. Brussels: European Commission. Hentet fra http://eur-lex.europa.eu/: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:354:0022:0061:EN:PDF","Eustat. (2015, December 12). Eustat. Retrieved from www.eustat.eus.","Havneguide. (2015, December 15). HanstholmHavn. Retrieved from Havneguide: http://havneguide.dk/da/havn/hanstholm-havn","Íslandsbanki. (2014). Íslenski sjávarútvegurinn. Reykjavík: Íslandsbanki.","Johnsen, P. J., & Eliasen, S. (2011). Solving complex fisheries management problems: what the EU can larn from the Nordic experiences of reduction of discards. Marine Policy, 130-139.","Larsen, E., Dalskov, J., Nielsen, E., Kirkegaard, E., Nielsen, J., Tørring, P., & Schou, M. (2013). Dansk fiskeris udnyttelse af discardforbuddet. Copenhagen: DTU Aqua.","Nielsen, M., Larsen, E., Egekvist, J., Gedefaw Abate, T., Nielsen, R., Frost, H., & Kjærsgaard, J. (2013). Dansk kystfiskeri: Struktur og økonomi. Copenhagen: IFRO.","Nyman, P. (2015, September 20). Technical Director Hanstholm Harbour. (E. Larsen, Interviewer)","Palsson, O. K., Bjornsson, H., Gudmundsson, S., & Ottesen, Þ. (2015). Mælingar á brottkasti þorsks og ýsu 2013. Reykjavik: Marine Research Institute.","Pálsson, Ó. (2003). A length-based analysis of haddock discards in Icelandic fisheries. Fisheries Research, 59(3), 437-446.","RSF. (2015, October 23). Fiskmarkaðir á Íslandi. Retrieved from Reiknistofa fiskmarkaða: http://kvotinn.is/add-news/reiknistofa-fiskmarkada-fiskmarkadir-a-islandi/","Sanchirico, J. N., Holland, D., Quigley, K., & Fina, M. (2006). Catch-quota balancing in multispecies individual fishing quotas. Marine Policy, 767-785.","SDSP. (2015). Spanish Discard Sampling Program. ES: SDSP.","Statistics Iceland. (2015, December 15). Fisheries. Retrieved from Statice: http://www.statice.is/statistics/business-sectors/fisheries/","STECF. (2014, Setpember 21). STECF 14-20 Fishing effort regimes data tables. Retrieved from STECF: https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/data-reports","STECF, Håkansson, K. B., & Ulrich, C. (2015, August 21). Data extracted from STECF datasets and aggrigated and expanded on by DTU. Copenhagen, Denmark.","Valeiras, J., Pérez, N., Araujo, H., Salinas, I., & Bellido, J. (2014). Atlas de los descartes de la flota de arrastre y enmalle en el caladero nacional Cantábrico-Noroeste. Santiago de Compostela: IEO"]}

Executive Summary This document is the second deliverable in work package 5 of the DiscardLess project. The project is intended to contribute to a successful implementation of the landing obligation of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy of the EU. The work package 5 addresses how unwanted, unavoidable catches can be handled on-board the fishing vessels i.e. from catch to first sale. The objective of this deliverable is to identify available alternatives and recommend the most applicable solutions for on-board handling of these unwanted, unavoidable catches for four different fleet segments in three case studies. The case studies are North Sea, Bay of Biscay and Northeast Atlantic (Iceland and UK), but the selection of vessels has taken into consideration transferability to other European fleets and areas. Practical and cost efficient solutions are identified, adapted and developed for four different fleet segments based on input from different tasks in the project (1.4, 5.1, 6.1 & 6.2) and stakeholder interaction. The fleet segments selected are 10-15 meter hook & line coastal vessels typically operated in Northeast Atlantic, 18-30 meter Danish seine/bottom trawl vessels typically operated in the North Sea and adjacent areas, 34-44 meter Bay of Biscay bottom trawlers typically operated by the Spanish fleet and finally 40-60 meter fresh-fish bottom trawlers used by most EU offshore fleets. Solutions for sorting, bleeding, cleaning, chilling, pre-processing, storing and other on-board handling are suggested and evaluated based on need, cost and applicability. Some parts of the work include elements of technological innovation, but most rely on exploiting currently available solutions, applying “best practice” technology and knowledge. Recommended solutions are presented on deck-plans (drawings) in order for stakeholders to get a clearer picture of the suggested changes. The work presented in this report focuses on the four previously mentioned fleet types that provide a relatively good cross-section of important EU fleets that are to be heavily affected by the landing obligation. It includes reviewing current setup of on-board handling where discarding is allowed and then identifies solutions applicable for those fleet types under a discard ban. The main challenges are connected to catches of juvenile fish, which cannot be utilised for direct human consumption. A number of alternatives are identified for each fleet segment and the most applicable solutions are discussed and demonstrated in detail e.g. in deck-plans, mas-balance calculations, cost/benefit assessment etc.