Jochen Depestele

Consumption of discards by Herring Gulls Larus argentatus and Lesser Black-backed Gulls Larus fuscus off the Belgian coast in the breeding season

Fishery discards in the Belgian part of the North Sea are a source of food for Herring Gulls Larus argentatus and Lesser Black-backed Gulls L. fuscus. To understand the importance of discards for local L. argentatus and L. fuscus populations, single-item discard experiments were performed at four offshore distances from the gullery of the Port of Zeebrugge, at four different stages of the breeding season (May to August 2011). We compared flock composition during discarding with the distribution of Herring and Lesser Black-backed Gulls, with respect to offshore distance from the colony as reflected by an 11-year (2002–2013) dataset of standardised ship-based surveys. Consumption of discards depended on the type of fish that was discarded, but prey selectivity by adults was reduced during the chick rearing stage. A generalised linear mixed model identified the number of scavengers following the vessel, the proportion of adults and of Herring Gulls in the flock and the frequency of food robbery events interacting with the stage of the breeding season as affecting the variation in flatfish consumption. Shifts in scavenger flock composition and discard consumption between stages of the breeding season are likely linked to variation in food requirements of the gull population along the season and to dispersal patterns towards the end of summer. Nutrient requirements of breeding adults peak during the chick rearing stage, making this a key period in terms of dependence of the breeding parents on discarded fish as food source.

Comparison of mechanical disturbance in soft sediments due to tickler-chain SumWing trawl vs. electro-fitted PulseWing trawl

&NA; Tickler‐chain SumWing and electrode‐fitted PulseWing trawls were compared to assess seabed impacts. Multi‐beam echo sounder (MBES) bathymetry confirmed that the SumWing trawl tracks were consistently and uniformly deepened to 1.5 cm depth in contrast to 0.7 cm following PulseWing trawling. MBES backscatter strength analysis showed that SumWing trawls (3.11 dB) flattened seabed roughness significantly more than PulseWing trawls (2.37 dB). Sediment Profile Imagery (SPI) showed that SumWing trawls (mean, SD) homogenised the sediment deeper (3.4 cm, 0.9 cm) and removed more of the oxidised layer than PulseWing trawls (1 cm, 0.8 cm). The reduced PulseWing trawling impacts allowed a faster re‐establishment of the oxidised layer and micro‐topography. Particle size analysis suggested that SumWing trawls injected finer particles into the deeper sediment layers (˜4 cm depth), while PulseWing trawling only caused coarsening of the top layers (winnowing effect). Total penetration depth (mean, SD) of the SumWing trawls (4.1 cm, 0.9 cm) and PulseWing trawls (1.8 cm, 0.8 cm) was estimated by the depth of the disturbance layer and the layer of mobilized sediment (SumWing = 0.7 cm; PulseWing trawl = 0.8 cm). PulseWing trawls reduced most of the mechanical seabed impacts compared to SumWing trawls for this substrate and area characteristics.