Ocm knudsen et al published version

lable at ScienceDirect

Ocean & Coastal Management 53 (2010) 252e269

Contents lists avai

Ocean & Coastal Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ocecoaman

Identifying drivers for fishing pressure. A multidisciplinary study of trawl and seasnail fisheries in Samsun, Black Sea coast of Turkey

Ståle Knudsen a,*, Mustafa Zengin b,1, Mahmut Hakan Koçak c,2

aDepartment of Social Anthropology, University of Bergen, Fosswinckelsgate 6, 5007 Bergen, Norwayb Trabzon Fisheries Research Institute, Kasüstü Beldesi, 61250 Yomra, Trabzon, Turkeyc Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Marmara University, Ressam Namik Ismail Sok. No:1 Bahcelievler, Istanbul, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 13 April 2010

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ47 55589280; fax: þE-mail addresses: [email protected]

hotmail.com (M. Zengin), [email protected] (M.H. Ko1 Tel.: þ90 462 34110 54; fax: þ90 462 341 11 52.2 Tel.: þ90 212 507 99 25; fax: þ90 212 505 93 323 European Lifestyles and Marine Ecosystems. GO

elme-eu.org/Public/Results.aspx for further informatio4 This model was first elaborated and introduced b

Agency. See [1].

0964-5691/$ e see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.04.008

a b s t r a c t

This study aims to investigate and model driving forces that lead to increased fishing pressure and analtered state of the environment in the coastal areas near Samsun on the Turkish Black Sea coast. Wehave applied a modified DPSIR model to structure our investigation and analysis and have investigatedthe drivers that generate fishing pressure in the Samsun fisheries. The overall health of the ecosystem isdeclining, and there is a consistent trend of deterioration in the condition of the three major speciestargeted by the trawl fisheries. Although introduced invasive species have brought significant changes tothe Black Sea, it is clear that the state of the environment is significantly and negatively affected by thepressure exerted by fisheries. Fishing pressure has to a certain extent been redirected to pelagic trawlingas bottom trawling has become less profitable and a rise in catch capacity has levelled off. This reductionis, however, offset by an increase in illegal trawling and dredging by a very rapidly growing sector ofmulti-purpose small boats, resulting in a considerable increase in the overall accumulated engine powerof fishing boats in Samsun during 2000e2005. Fisheries in Samsun, in particular sea snail fisheries, haveconstituted a frontier of sorts open to the poorer populations of Samsun during the last 20 years, and,thereby, constitute one of the major drivers for fishing pressure. We identify eight drivers of importancefor the period 2000e2005. Although the authorities can impact all or most of those drivers, most of themare beyond the scope of conventional ‘fisheries management’.

� 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Interactions between fisheries and the marine environment inthe Black Sea have received little academic attention. This studyaims to investigate and model driving forces that lead to increasedfishing pressure and changed state of the environment in thecoastal areas around Samsun on the Turkish Black Sea coast. Whilefishing pressure is widely held to be responsible for habitatdestruction and fish stock reductions here, few efforts have beenmade to understand the drivers behind this fishing pressure. In thismultidisciplinary study, originally conducted within the frameworkof the EU FP6 funded ELME3 project, we have applied a modifiedDPSIR model4 to structure our investigation and analysis.

47 55589260.(S. Knudsen), mzengin@

çak).

.C 505576. See http://www.n.y the European Environment

All rights reserved.

A number of recent studies of marine and coastal ecosystemshave applied the DPSIR framework to facilitate analytical integra-tion across conventional scholarly disciplines. To our knowledge,however, only one study of reef fisheries management in Kenya [2]has used the DPSIR framework in an analysis of a fishery system.Fisheries receive short shift [3e6] or are not mentioned at all[7e10] in the other studies. Furthermore, each of these studiestends to start from a natural sciences perspective, often integratingsocial science and economic data only superficially without rigor-ously examining the causal mechanisms that relate associatedvariables. Typically, social and economic data are collected fromalready available statistical databases without first carefully draft-ing a conceptual model. This often results in scale mis-matches.

This study tries to identify drivers for fishing pressure througha bottom up approach in which a conceptual model was firstdesigned on the basis of ethnographic fieldwork and interviews.Since the scope of the ELME project, and, therefore, our datagathering and analysis, was restricted to DePeS elements of theDPSIR model, we have focused on environmental state changesthemselves and the DePeS ‘causal chain’ (see Fig. 1). This approachto understanding fishing pressure embodies the potential to

mailto:[email protected]




http://www.elme-eu.org/Public/Results.aspx

http://www.elme-eu.org/Public/Results.aspx

www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09645691

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman

Nomenclature

SPO Turkish Republic State Planning OrganizationTFRI Trabzon Fisheries Research InstituteTurkStat Turkish Statistical Institute

S. Knudsen et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 53 (2010) 252e269 253

broaden the scope of fishery management beyond purely regula-tory measures aimed at fishing practice.

Fisheries in Samsun were deliberately chosen as a case study toinvestigate DriverePressureeState relations since it is easier here thaninmostotherTurkishfisheries in theBlackSeatoapproximateasystemin which ecosystem (State) and fishing activities (Pressure) haveroughly the samespatial scale. Basically,wehave looked for thedriversoffishingpressure inSamsunfisheries.What is the relative importanceof different drivers? What changes have there been over time?

Unlike the other regional seas of Europe, international bodieslike ICES or Eurostat have not regularly collected, registered andorganized data on fish stock, fishery fleets and relevant socioeco-nomic variables for Black Sea fisheries. Moreover, and unlike EUmember states, there is no national fisheries data centre in Turkey.However, to indicate and/or document causal links we haveincluded qualitative data whenever it has been available. We havehad to seek out data and information from a variety of sources,often of variable quality, short time-series etc. Data sources include:Turkish public statistics, reports and articles (mainly in Turkish),previously unprocessed raw data obtained by the TFRI, provinceboat and fishers license registers, monthly surveys by TrabzonFishery Research Institute (TFRI) during February 2005-January2006, joint socio-economic fieldwork (survey, interviews)including visits to a range of government institutions and fishingharbours, and a questionnaire survey of 342 fishers in 2005.

Below we will organize the presentation of our findings alongthe DePeS relationships according to the DPSIR model, startingwith States and working ‘upwards’ through Pressures to Drivers.

2. States

2.1. General outline of ecology

The Black Sea is characterized by a relatively low speciesdiversity, high productivity and biomass, and anoxic conditions

Driver

Human activity or process

Response

An initiative intended to reduce

impact

Impact

Effect on human welfare attributable to change in state

Pressure

Mechanism by which Driver contributes to a

change in State

State

Attribute(s) reflecting ecosystem integrity for

a specific issue

External

variability

Fig. 1. Modified DPSIR (Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response) framework (Mee etal., in preparation). D-P-S causal chain highlighted.

below 150e200 m depth. The prevalence of a cold intermediatelayer (CIL, thermocline) is one of the main reasons that the biomassof whiting (Merlangus merlangius euxinus) e one of the dominantbenthopelagic species e is much higher in the Black Sea than in theMediterranean. Most of the Turkish Black Sea coastal region andcontinental shelf consists of steep rocks and canyons. Thus thereare very few areas suitable for trawling. Around the port city ofSamsun, however, deposits from the rivers Kızılırmak and Yeşilır-mak have created two wide deltas, the Bafra delta and the Çar-şamba delta, with extensive shallow grounds between Sinop andTerme reaching as far out as 10e15 km. At the southern coast of theBlack Sea an important upwelling in the region between Bafra andSinop, contributes to the productiveness of the Samsun shelf area[11] (Fig. 2).

This area constitutes a fairly well circumscribed ecosystemwithsupposedly somewhat uniform and characteristic qualities, and, assuch, is rather unique on the northern coast of Turkey. Theseshallow grounds support the most important trawl fisheries inTurkey. Yet there are, unfortunately, almost no studies that examineparticularly the marine ecosystem and habitats in the Samsunregion; therefore, the text on ecosystem and habitat belowdiscusses the Black Sea and the south east region of the Black Sea ingeneral.

In the general outline of the food web in the south-eastern BlackSea it (Fig. 3) is evident that sprat (Spratus spratus) occupiesa central position in the energy transfer between the tropic levelsby connecting the upper predator and lower plankton levels [12,13].Among the dominant species in the Samsun littoral there existsa strong prey-predator relationship between sprat, whiting andturbot (Psetta maxima). Sprat constitutes 38.9% of the prey ofwhiting [14], while whiting accounts for 61.7% of the prey of the toppredator turbot [15].

2.1.1. Ecosystem change with introduced speciesBeginning towards theendof the1980s, theestablished foodweb

was disturbeddramaticallywith the establishment and rapid spreadof the accidentally-introduced gelatinous Mnemiopsis leidyi. Mne-miopsis first preyed on zooplankton and, when thesewere depleted,turned to anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus ponticus) eggs and larvae[16]. The trophic food chain was seriously altered with especiallydeleterious effect on pelagic species. Given the strong connectionbetween pelagic and benthic food webs via the important role ofsprat asprey forwhiting,wecanassume that the increasedmortalityof sprat impacted the populations of whiting and, therefore, at thetop of the food chain, mature turbots. Mnemiopis initially had nonatural enemies, but with the introduction in 1997 of anotherCteophore from the Atlantic, Beroe oveta, Mnemiopis was subject topredation pressure and its biomass decreased significantly [17].While the pelagic food web has seen some recovery during the last10e15 years, the benthic system has, during the second part of the20th century, been beset with continued high fishing pressure andby introduced species, particularly the Japanese sea snail Rapanathomasiana, but also bybivalves (Anadara cornea, Teredonavalis) andCrustecea (Balanus eburneus) [18]. Theequilibriumof thepelagic andbenthic ecosystem has been disturbed to the advantage of intro-duced species which have to a certain extent become dominantspecies [19].

2.1.2. Other ecosystem changesThere is probably substantial degradation of this ecosystem, but

there are few reliable indicators. One thing we can observe anddocument to a certain extent is the disappearance and decline ofseveral species. The rich nutrient loads carried by the largeKızılırmak and Yeşilırmak rivers are widely believed to have beenreduced after several large dams were constructed during the

Fig. 2. Map of south-eastern Black Sea coast and study area. In this text ‘the eastern Black Sea region’ will mean the coastal areas of Turkey between Sinop and Hopa.

5 Experts disagree about the relative importance of these two causes, see e.g.[26].

S. Knudsen et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 53 (2010) 252e269254

1980s. It has been argued that this has contributed to decreased fishcatches [20]. The construction of irrigation structures, togetherwith overfishing [21,22] brought the sturgeon species (Acipenserstellatus, Acipencer sturio, Huso husu) close to extinction during the1960s. In the late 1960s umbrina (Umbrina cirossa) was one of themajor commercial species in Samsun [22]. Today, this species,which typically prefers to live in sea-grass habitat that is likelydestroyed by trawling and dredging, has almost no commercialimportance and hardly figures on the fish counter or in the statis-tics. There has also been a marked and rapid decrease in Black Seasalmon trout (Salmo trutta labrax) [23].

There is also reason to believe that intensive trawling in thisregion has had a negative effect on spawning grounds and theregeneration of a range of species. There are, however, no studies todocument this. The destructive effect of sea snail dredging onbenthic communities and habitats is demonstrated by a study thatcompared dredged and non-dredged (protected by concrete blockson the sea bed) areas in Bulgarian waters [24]. While the north-western area of the Black Sea has experienced serious eutrophica-tionproblems, there has been less of a problem in the southernBlackSea, although sewage and other household and agriculture-relatedriverine and marine pollution cause increased nitrite and organicmaterial concentration at river mouths, such as Kızılırmak [25].When it comes to the effect ofMnemiopsis on the target stocks of thetrawlers, it is difficult to assess the relative importance of predation

by introduced species versus fishing. But since catches and meansize of turbot and whiting (see below) display the same decreasingtrends as red mullet (Mullus barbatus), which is not affected to thesame extent by the ecological disturbance brought on by Mne-miopsis, and since the decline continues even after the decrease inMnemiopsis biomass, it is reasonable to assume thatfishing pressureis themain cause for the diminished status of the demersal stocks inthe Samsunwaters.

2.2. Species targeted by commercial fishing

The number of commercially exploited species in this region hasdecreased [16]. Species with high economic value have, to a certainextent, been replaced by species with lower commercial value.Another trend is the change in status of some species from by-catchto target species (e.g. red scorpion fish, Scorpaena porcus). Inparallel with the changes in species composition, the stocks ofmany species have declined [16].

As a result of overfishing and the Mnemiopsis bloom5 the stocksof small pelagic species almost collapsed during the late 1980s andearly 1990s. Concurrently, with the importance of sprat stocks for


demersal species (see Section 2.1 and Fig. 3), it is likely that thedecimation of sprat stocks resulted in stock decline of demersalspecies, including those targeted in Samsun trawl fisheries. Whilethe stocks of small pelagics, especially anchovy, have to a largeextent recovered, the decline has continued for benthopelagic anddemersal fish species. The increase in the proportion of whiting inSamsun trawl catches from 65% in 1990 [27] to 75% in 2005 (datacollected for this report) demonstrates both the resilience of thewhiting and the decrease in the stocks of other commercial speciessuch as turbot, red mullet, sole (Solea nasuta), flounder (Flesus.flesus luscus), red gunard (Trigla lucerna), and picarel (Spicarasmaris).

While there are no studies of the composition of the benthiccommunity, landings of by-catchmaygive some indication as to the

Fig. 3. Simplified food web, south-eastern Black Sea ecosystem. Note: Predator-prey relatiocriteria for inclusion in this model.

state of the stocks and the ecosystem. Although thornback ray (Rajaclavata) is not usually marketed in Turkey (and most of the catch isdiscarded), it is included in the TurkStat landing statistics, whichshow a clear trend of decline in landings (Fig. 4). Use of illegalundersized meshes and other illegal fishing practices result inbycatch of non-target species that, combined with discard ofundersized target species, accounts for 40% of the total annual catch.

In this study we will focus on the most important target speciesin the bottom trawl fisheries: whiting; redmullet; turbot; as well asthe sea snail that is targeted by dredging (see Fig. 4 for summary offindings). On the eastern Black Sea coast of Turkey, trawlingaccounts for the larger share of landings of several of the demersalspecies. In the years 1990e2000 around 75% of landings of redmullet and more than 80% of landings of whiting were caught by

ns where consumption exceeds 50% of total energy consumption have been taken as

0

200

400

600

800

1000

0

200

400

600

800

1000

snot

5002

7002

0002

5991

1991

10

15

20

25

30

0991

5991

0002

5002

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

)mc(

htgnelegarevA

)snot(gnidnaL

10

11

12

13

14

15

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0991

5991

0002

5002

)mc(

htgnelegarevA

)snot(gnidnaL

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0991

5991

0002

5002

)mc(

htgnelegarevA

)snot(gnidnaL

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

0

3000

6000

9000

12000

15000

5891

0991

5991

0002

4002

)sllehshtiw(

snot

Sea snail landings (SIS) Sea snail export 1985-1988 (Bilecik 1990) 1993-2003 (EPC)

Thornback ray

Whiting

Red mullet

Turbot

Sea Snail

Average lengthLanding

Landing



Fig. 4. States. Thornback ray landings: Turkey. Source: SIS. Whiting, red mullet and turbot: eastern Black Sea region of Turkey. Mixed commercial and scientific catch. Source: TFRI.



trawl [19]. In 2000 approximately 50% of the eastern Black Sea coastcatches of these two species were landed in Samsun.

2.2.1. Whiting (M. merlangus euxinus)Constituting 65e70% of the bentic and bentopelagic macrofauna

biomass [15,28e30], whiting is a dominant species in the littoralzone of the south-eastern Black Sea. Since whiting reaches repro-ductive maturity at two years age [29,31], lays eggs almostthroughout the whole year, and has potential for rapid growth, thestock reproduces and regenerates quickly. The whiting stock is,therefore, more resilient to fishing pressure than sturgeon andturbot, whichhave longer life spans and later reproductivematurity.

Excluding the summer period, whiting in the southern Black Seayields abundant catch throughout the year. Whiting is a cold waterfish, and its seasonal vertical distribution depends on the sea watertemperature. During the summer, whenwater temperature rises inthe southern Black Sea, the whiting population passes to deepwaters at and below the thermocline layer (30e40 m) that hasa constant water temperature (in general 7.5e8.5 �C).

Length at maturity for whiting is 14.7 cm [29,32,33]. Between1990 and 2000 average length of whiting in commercial trawlcatches in Samsun was 16 cm. 49% of catches were below length atmaturity. While the estimated biomass of whiting in the waters ofthe eastern Black Sea region of Turkey was approximately 30,000tons for 1991/92 [29,30], the average biomass between 1998 and2000 fell to 24,000 tons [34]. Our studies during 2005 show that asmuch as 75% of whiting catches (by individuals) were discardedsince they are below marketable size. It thus seems reasonable toclaim that despite the whiting’s resilience to fishing pressure,whiting stocks in the southeastern Black Sea are stressed byexcessive exploitation.

2.2.2. Red mullet (M. barbatus)Red mullets live at different depths during the year, depending

on the fluctuations in water temperature. From late spring andthroughout the summer red mullets prefer shallow coastal waterswhere they reproduce. During this period red mullets are caughtwith beach seines, gillnets and small trawls (multi-purpose boatslicensed for sea snail dredging e see below). Red mullet is moreintensively fished from September through April when 96% of thetotal catch is taken, primarily by trawlers.

Changes in the red mullet landings in the southern Black Seafollow a pattern similar to whiting. Turkish Black Sea catchesgradually increased until 1989 when a maximum 5600 tons werelanded. After 1990, landings gradually decreased to 498 tons in2003. Redmullet landings in the eastern Black Sea region decreasedparticularly dramatically during the early 1990s (likely related bothto overfishing and the Mnemiopsis introduction) and from 1997 (asa result of accumulated fishing pressure).

Length at maturity for red mullet is 11.2 cm [30,31]. In theeastern Black Sea region mean size of landed red mullet hasdecreased from 13.7 cm in 1990 to 10.5 cm in 2005. Over the sameperiod 60.5% of individuals in landings were below minimum legalcatch size (13 cm) [30,31]. The biomass of red mullets in thesoutheastern Black Sea was estimated to have declined fromaround 4000 tons in 1992 to 3000 tons in 2000. This indicates thatred mullet stocks are also overfıshed [31,34].

2.2.3. Turbot (P. maxima)Turbot migrations are local and seasonal in character and are

related to spawning and feeding habits, with concentration inspawning areas at 30e40 m depth during early summer. Afterspawning, turbot moves to 50e90 m depth in June-August.

Although there is a substantial demand for turbot in Turkey,landings are relatively low as compared to other sea fish. While

turbot is caught with gillnets in most coastal waters of Turkey,turbot fishing with bottom trawls is carried out in areas where thecontinental shelf allows, especially in areas in the Samsun and Sinopbays. Since the continental shelf in the northwestern part of theBlack Sea is very wide, turbot is caught not only in coastal waters,but also in international waters, especially by Turkish fishers.

While the turbot stocks in the Black Sea were not too eroded in1980, the increasing catch pressure since then in coastal regions ofTurkey in particular, and the impact of excessive eutrophication onfauna in the northwestern Black Sea have led to a rapid decrease inthese stocks [35].

Length at maturity of female turbots is 38.8 cm, and that ofmales 34.6 cm. Average length of landed turbot was 39.2 cm in1990, 28.6 cm in 1996, 32.0 cm in 2000, and 30.4 cm in 2005. Theaverage for all years is 32.3 cm [15]. Individuals in the age groups 0,1, 2 and 3 constituted 62.5% of the trawl catch (by individuals,average for all years 1990e2005). These year classes have not yetreached reproductive maturity [15]. This composition of the stockand the prevalence of juveniles in catches are important indicatorsof growth overfishing. The lack of selectivity of the trawl nets hascontributed to much lower biomass concentrations in trawl areas(between Sinop and Ordu: 70.6 kg/km2) than that found in areasclosed to trawling (between Ordu and the Georgian border:119.6 kg/km2 [15]). Furthermore, there is also indication ofrecruitment overfishing: trawl nets with no selective propertiesand gillnets with a mesh size varying between 160 mm and360 mm are used to catch turbot during its reproductive periodduring early summer when predominantly egg-bearing turbotspass to shallow waters to lay their eggs. Approximately 70% ofturbot catches take place during this period. This survey of the basicparameters of the turbot population thus reveals that the conditionof the turbot stock in the trawl area is poor.

2.2.4. Sea snail (R. thomasiana)The sea snail originates in the Pacific and was first observed in

the Black Sea towards the end of the 1940s. In the southeasternBlack Sea it was first described in 1962 [36]. Thereafter, it spreadrapidly and caused important changes in the nearshore benthicsystem. The sea snail has awide margin of tolerance to variations intemperature and salinity. Therefore, once it has adapted to anecosystem it is a dynamic species. It lives in sandy, muddy and algalbottoms around mussel beds. Although it is found to a maximumdepth of 90 m, the highest concentrations of sea snails (76.5% bybiomass) are found in very shallow waters (0e15 m.).

In the Black Sea the sea snail has almost no natural predators[37]. This has made possible a very rapid population increase. Itsdominant feeding strategy targets mussel species and its excessivepredation on these species has resulted in the near disappearanceof mussel stocks (Mytilus galloprovincialis, Chamelea gallina, A.cornea) in the region between the TurkeyeGeorgia border andTerme [38]. In 1995 the C. gallina population in this region was stillhealthy [39]. By 2005 the sea snail had started to threaten otherspecies of mollusc and crustaceans (Liocarsinus depratur, Donax sp.,Isophad, Amphipod and Decapodesnail juveniles), including theintroduced Anadara cornea.

The extreme increase in the sea snail population and thedetrimental predation pressure it exerts on mussels have also hadan impact on the structure of the sea snail population itself. Thus,the sea snail has caused important changes in the interactionbetween fishing and habitat in the coastal waters of the south-eastern Black Sea.

While being an introduced species that has attained an impor-tant role in the demersal ecosystem of the Black Sea, Rapana hasalso become one of the most important commercial species. Seasnails are now fished in most coastal waters around the Black Sea.

Table 1Fish landings Samsun 1960s.

1959e62 annual average [42] 1968 [22]

Red mullet 17,306 kg 69,000 kgTurbot 28,213 kg 314,000 kgWhiting 14,019 kg e


The relative share of Samsun sea snail landings has increased, butwe have been unable to obtain data on landings originating fromcatches in Samsun. Processing plants receive sea snails from awideregion and do not register the origin of the delivery. Yet, unlike inthe 1900s, all the major sea snail processing plants in the TurkishBlack Sea region are now located in or near Samsun. Although theState Institute for Statistics has published figures for annual Turkishcatches, as all sea snails are exported, export figures give a betterindication of catches than official landing statistics (see Fig. 4).

The mean size of sea snails has, since 2000, decreased signifi-cantly east of the Province of Samsun, especially around Trabzon:from 62 mm in 1991 [40] to 47 mm in 2005. Since the marketprefers large sea snails, sea snail processing plants have stoppedoperating, and fishers have almost stopped dredging for sea snailsnear Trabzon. Sea snails in Samsun seem to regenerate very quicklyand mean size of sea snails remained stable until 2005 (mean64 mm) despite increased catch effort. There exists no scientificdata on recent development of sea snail average size in Samsun, butsome anecdotal information indicates that the sea snail stock inSamsun now experiences the same decline as previously seenfurther east. When we talked to the owners/managers of the threelargest sea snail processing plants in Samsun during the autumn of2008, all complained about the increasing difficulty of findingbuyers for their produce since average size had declined consid-erably during the past 2e3 years. In one processing plantmore than50% of the processed sea snails were in the smallest of the sevensize categories.6 Fishers in Samsun also complained about thegradual, although geographically uneven, decline of sea snail meansize. They increasingly find themselves shovelling undersized seasnails back to sea.

2.3. Conclusions

Species composition in the marine ecosystem has changedconsiderably; stocks of some species have declined considerablyand some are close to extinction. Despite the absence of formalstock assessments, the evolution of landings and sizes (relative tosize at reproduction) of the major target species indicates high andincreasing fishing pressure and likely growth overfishing, with aneffect on reproduction that can only be serious. The poor quality ofstatistics raises concerns as to the value of the indicators available.In brief, although the successful establishment of introducedspecies complicates the picture, the fishery data points towardsa generally unsatisfactory state of the sector.

3. Pressures: detailed description of fisheries and fishingcapacity

3.1. Overview

A range of human activities affects habitat and fish stocks in thisarea, including pollution (probably not severe), physical disruptionof the coastal zone, changed pattern and amount of water flow inthe rivers because of construction of dams, and overall human-induced ecological change in the Black Sea (including introducedspecies). We know from extensive involvement (ethnographicfieldwork and interviews) in this sector over many years thatmarine scientists and fishers alike consider bottom trawling

6 Processed sea snail are sorted into the following size categories: 3L (extralarge): ue15 pcs/kg, LL (extra large): 15e20 pcs/kg, L (large): 20e40 pcs/kg,M (medium): 40e60 pcs/kg, S (small): 60e80 pcs/kg, SS (small): 80e120 pcs/kg,3S (small): 120eup pcs/kg.

together with sea snail dredging to be themain pressure exerted onthe rich marine ecology of these wide shallow grounds.

3.2. Brief history of fishing in Samsun

Although fishing does not have as prominent a place in thehistory of Samsun as it has in Istanbul and Trabzon (Knudsen 2009),historical sources document that fishing has been of someeconomic importance. At the beginning of the 20th century up to3000 turbots were caught each week during the catch season [41].Turbot, swordfish and sturgeon were sent to Ankara and Istanbul[42]. The catch of sturgeons in the river mouths for extraction ofcaviar was economically important during the 1940s and 1950swith an annual production of 4e5 tons of caviar [22]. Yet, until themid-1950s fishing technology was very simple and sea fisherycatches in Samsun were quite small compared to current catches(Table 1).

3.2.1. Development of trawl fisheriesFrom the 1950s onwards economic development, urban growth

in Samsun and improved transport facilities created bettercircumstances for the development of the fishery sector. Moreover,state incentives, such as subsidised credits, construction ofharbours etc. facilitated the development of sea fisheries [43]. In1952 there were two small trawlers in Samsun [44]. Around 1960the state-controlled Meat and Fish Establishment imported trawlequipment from Greece and started experimenting with trawlingoutside Samsun. In 1968 there were three trawlers registered inSamsun and 13 smaller boats with engines [22]. The bottom trawlfishing sector only took off during the 1980s when demandincreased and infrastructure improved (Fig. 5).

All bottom trawlers employ basically the same kind of beamtrawl. Boats are typically between 12 and 30 m long with engine

Fig. 5. Bottom trawlers. Two large trawlers belonging to one of the most successfulfishing firms in Samsun. Yakakent, September 2005. These boats may be used both forbottom and mid-water trawling.

able 2verview of registered boats. Includes only boats used for sea fisheries owned byersons resident in the province of Samsun 2005.

Engine power Hp 0e32 33e149 150e299 300e Total

Samsun register 345 82 44 45 516Sinop register 63 23 5 4 95Odu register 21 18 4 0 43Total 429 123 53 49 654Total % 65.5 18.8 8.1 7.5

7 This calculation excludes developments in parts of the fleets in Yakakent andTerme, but trends here are probably similar to those observed for boats registeredin Samsun, which, in terms of engine power, accounts for approximately 90% of theregistered fishing boats owned by people resident in the Province of Samsun.


power ranging between 100 Hp and 600 Hp. All boats are built inTurkey, most in the Black Sea region. The trawlers are manned bya crew of five or six men who are usually recruited locally. Bottomtrawl nets with no selectivity properties e typically a ‘catch all’ netwith a mesh size of 40 mm (legal minimum size) e are typicallyused to catch whiting and red mullet, as well as turbot and a rangeof other species, including small bluefish, horse mackerel and pic-arel. It is also common practice to add an extra net with meshessmaller than the legal minimum size inside the regular seine. Thisensures larger catches (of smaller fish).

In contrast to practices in Istanbul and the provinces east ofSamsun, Samsun has no tradition for (the overall more important)purse seine fishing. After the mid-1990s a few of the larger trawlcompanies started pursuingmid-water trawling for pelagic species.

3.2.2. Development of sea snail fisheriesParallel with the growth in the big boat trawl fisheries a large

and diversified sector of artisanal or small boat fishing has alsodeveloped that targets a wide variety of both pelagic and benthicspecies. From the early 1980s sea snail fishing started to attaineconomic importance, and has expanded considerably in Samsunsince 2000. In the province of Samsun approximately 200 boats hadlicenses for sea snail fishing in 2005, but in practice many moretook part in this fishery. Compared to many other kinds of fishing,this fishery does not require much skill or investment in tech-nology. The threshold for entering this sector is therefore relativelylow. There will usually be two or three men on the boat whendredging for sea snails. Boats generally dredge at low speed parallelto the coast in relatively shallow waters. Although illegal, mostboats use two (or even three) dredges simultaneously and oftenoperate at night (also illegal). Although dredging is illegal duringthe summer, this fishery is most intense during the warm monthswhen catches are best.

3.3. Fishing harbours, fishing centres

Boats of less than 7e8 m in length are landed routinely onbeaches in many small villages on the delta seaside. Boats of up toapproximately 16 m can find shelter in the river mouths of the twomajor rivers, where there are larger concentrations of smalltrawlers (typically 12e16 m.) (Koşuköyü, Fener). Almost all fishcaught by trawlers in this region are landed at the fishery port inthe city of Samsun. Here fish is sold by middlemen at an auctionorganized by the municipality. Some fish is marketed locally, butmost is brought to the large cities in Turkey. Export of fish isnegligible.

There are four major fishing harbours in Samsun that giveshelter to both large boats and many smaller boats, from west toeast (construction year in parentheses): Yakakent (1973e1994),Dereköy (Ondokuzmayıs) (1994e), Central Samsun, and Terme(1994e). Yakakent and Central Samsun are the harbours and fishingcommunities where trawl fisheries were first developed. Terme andDereköy have only developed into important fishing centres duringthe last two decades with a substantial number of both small andlarge boats.

3.4. Overview of boats, change in catch capacity

Two of the most important measures of catch capacity, and,therefore, fishing pressure, are numbers of boats and engine power.Trawling and dredging tend to become more effective with morepowerful engines, evenwhen boat size is not increased. Since manysmall boats are not registered, and boats owned by persons residentin the Province of Samsun are registered elsewhere, it is difficult toestablish the exact number of boats in the Province of Samsun. Also,

TOp

since the fishing boat registers in Turkey do not hold time-seriesdata, it is difficult to get an overview of changes in registered boatsfrom year to year. It has, therefore, been very challenging todocument catch capacity developments in the Samsun fisheries.However, relying on data from some irregular surveys we havebeen able to recognise some general trends.

According to the lists of fishing boat licenses at Samsun, Sinopand Ordu Province Agricultural Directorates respectively, therewere 654 boats registered in 2005 for sea fishing with ownersresident in Samsun (Table 2).

The head of the Fishery Control Sectionwithin Samsun ProvinceAgricultural Directorate estimates that there are 200e300 unreg-istered fishing boats in Samsun Province, mostly less than 6 m.length/33 Hp. Information gathered by TFRI provides some addi-tional information. The Institute undertook surveys of boats in theProvince of Samsun in 1992 and 2005, using the same method eachtime and registering boats irrespective of whether and where theywere registered, and found that the number of small boatsincreased from 569 to 1094 during the period. Other surveys addmore detailed information concerning larger boats boats registeredfor trawling (Table 3).

The increase in number of trawlers has levelled off as has meanengine power since 2000. After 1997 most of the increase in thetrawler fleet has been in the vessel group 100e200 Hp/11e14 m.These boats are typically also used for sea snail dredging and netfisheries.

Our analysis of the changes reported to (and manually, notelectronically, registered) in the Samsun fishing vessel register2000e2005, shows that, while the number of larger boats sold andpurchased out of and into Samsun roughly balance, there has beena significant rise in the number of boats in the vessel group33e149 Hp, typically multi-purpose (m-p) boats that combine seasnail dredging, bottom trawling and net fishing (Fig. 7).

During 2000e2005, almost no small boats were sold out ofSamsun. Fishers in Trabzon, in contrast, had been selling theirmedium-sized m-p boats to fishers in Samsun. During a 1997survey we registered 33 m-p boats dredging for sea snails in thefishing village of Keremköy in the Province of Trabzon. In 2008none of those fishers were dredging for sea snails any longer andmany had bought smaller boats having sold their m-p boat out ofTrabzon; among those four went to Terme. Of 73 boats bought in toSamsun from other provinces during the years 2000e2005, 43came from provinces east of Samsun and 16 from neighbouringSinop (Table 4).

Many small boats have also had their engines upgraded (typi-cally to 85 Hp or 135 Hp), enabling them to dredge or trawl moreeffectively. Analysis of registered sea fishing boats in SamsunProvince7 shows that there is a levelling off of the total enginepower within the registered trawl fishing fleet (although boats not

Table 3Composition of trawl fishery fleet Samsun Province 1988e2005.

Year Number of boats Boat length (m) Engine power (Hp)

Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean

1988 38 12 25.5 18 43 540 256.41992 56 9 28 18 32 580 215.31997 104 12 28 19.6 85 630 280.32000 115 10 28 19.8 32 565 301.32005 123 9 34 19.4 32 600 298.3

Only trawlers registered in Samsun.Sources: 1988 and 1997: Samsun Harbour Authorities; 1992 and 2000: TFRI; 2005:Samsun Province Agricultural Directorate fishing boat license register.


registered for trawling may in practice be used for trawling).Growth in the fleet of smaller or middle-sized m-p boats accountsfor most of the increase in catch capacity during 2000e2005. Non-trawlers here include (both in 2000 and 2005) the large purseseiner Sürsan-1 with 2000 Hp. The resulting increase in small boatnon-trawler engine power during this five year period is 468%.Thus, the overall increase in engine power is muchmore significantthan that indicated in Fig. 6, which only includes boats registered astrawlers (Table 5).

Facing decreasing catch and profitability in the demersal trawlfisheries, Samsun trawlers have increasingly explored mid-watertrawling. While only 2e4 trawlers in Samsun used pelagic trawlduring the 1990s, after this fishery became legalized in 2000numbers increased rapidly. In the 2008/9 season 40 large Samsuntrawlers, mostly in the size category 18e29 m, regularly took partin this fishery. This, in effect, means that some of the fishing efforthas been directed away from bottom trawling to pelagic trawling.

3.5. Relation to other fisheries/other regions

It is difficult to understand the dynamics of the trawl and seasnail fisheries around Samsun unless we take into account themultiple relations with other fisheries in the Black Sea and beyond.The Samsun fisheries is not a closed system. Relations to otherfisheries can roughly be categorized as either:

(1) fishing boats and fishers from Samsun operating outside of theprovince of Samsun (engaging in other fisheries elsewhere);

(2) fishing boats from outside of Samsun fishing in Samsun Prov-ince; or

(3) political activities of fishers outside of Samsun affecting Sam-sun fishers.

Table 4Net change in number of boats Samsun Province 2000e2005.

Ports 0e32Hp

33e149Hp

150e299Hp

300þHp

Cumulativenet change

Total net change inengine power Hp asa result of investmentin new boats

Terme 2 11a 2 0 15 1600b

Fenerköyü 0 2 0 0 2 178Samsun 13 11 2 1 26 2530.5Dereköyü 2 12 2 0 16 1367Koşu Köyü 0 3 0 0 3 280Yakakent 0 0 1 1 2 655Other 0 2 0 0 2 175Total 17 41 7 2 66 6785.5

Based on survey of change in Samsun Province fishing boat register.a Note that many small boats in Yakakent and Terme are registered outside of

Samsun. 18 out of 31 boats in the 33e149 Hp range (2005) in Terme are registeredin the Province of Ordu. Most of the boats registered in Ordu were likely, like theboats in the same group registered in Samsun, bought after 2000. Thus, the totalnumber of new boats in the 33e149 Hp category during 2000e2005 in Terme mayexceed 20.

b Excludes vessels registered in Ordu.

Issue (1) will be more fully discussed under Section 4, Drivers.(2) clearly impacts total pressure in demersal fisheries and includesthe following activities:

� It is common for non-Samsun purse seiners to switch totrawling in Samsun if the anchovy catch fails, or before andafter the usually shorter purse seine season.

� The resource crisis in the pelagic sector during the early 1990scaused many former purse seiners, especially from Trabzon, toswitch irrevocably to trawling. This clearly contributed tohigher trawl fishing effort during the 1990s (not accounted forin the statistics above). With decreasing profitability, however,in the trawl fisheries there are few of these left. During1990e1998 seven trawlers in the district of Çarşıbaşı (Povinceof Trabzon) trawled regularly in Samsun. By 2008 only tworemained.

(3) Political mobilization of fishers in places such as Ordu andSinop has resulted in restrictions on fishing grounds open totrawling, in effect making it more difficult for trawlers based in theProvince of Samsun to explore some fishing grounds that aresuitable for trawling.

3.6. Summary

Development in trawl fisheries accounted for a significantincrease in demersal fishing pressure until the late 1990s, whenstagnationwas brought about by decreasing catch and profitability.This decrease in demersal fishing pressure is offset, however, by anincrease in illegal trawling and dredging by a very rapidly growingsector of multi-purpose boats. Large boat fishing pressure is redir-ected to pelagic trawling to a certain extent. This redirection infishing methods impacts demersal ecology indirectly by targetingsprat, an important link between the pelagic and demersal foodwebs (see Fig. 3).

4. Drivers

In this section we will survey and discuss a range of potentialdrivers. The scope of this survey was arrived at during interdisci-plinary discussions within the ELME project and, thus, takes intoconsideration a broad range of issues that are thought to drivefishing pressure across many fisheries in Europe. Most of thedrivers discussed here are summarized in Fig. 8.

4.1. Fishing costs and incomes

Turkish fisheries generally operate on a share system that iscompletely paperless: there are no written contracts betweenowner and crew; there are no official accounts of the boats’finances. Although clearly important variables in the long timeviability of fishing firms, salary/shares can, generally speaking, notbe regarded as being part of operating costs. No data exists con-cerning expenses such as repairs and investments, but we mayassume that this variable is fairly constant. Neither is there anyinformation available concerning investments. Generally speaking,the need for continual upgrading of equipment is much less in trawland sea snail fishing then in purse seine fishing in the Turkish BlackSea region. The most important expense in trawl and sea snailfisheries is fuel. A study of trawl fishing on the western coast ofTurkey, where the conditions of the trawl fisheries resemble thosein Samsun, shows that fuel made up 41.3% of the operating costs oftrawl vessels during the 1999e2000 fishing season [45]. Fuelexpenses have increased considerably during the 2000s, but have

600-650

550-600

500-550

450-500

400-450

350-400

300-350

250-300

200-250

150-200

100-150

50-100

0-50

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

HP

lessevlwart

desnecilforebmu

N200519971988

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

8891

2991

7991

0002

5002

staobforebmu

N

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

pH

Total Hp

Licensed trawlers

Number of trawlers

Trawl engine power

Fig. 6. Pressures. Number of registered trawlers Samsun Province 1988e2005. Samsun trawl engine power distribution 1988e2005. Sources: same as in Table 3.


decreased since 2004with a newpolicy of tax exemption on fuel forprofessional fishers (see Section 4.10.3).

4.2. Fish prices, consumption and market

There is no statistical, not even a good, estimate, of fishers’income. Fish prices may thus be the best proxy for fishers’ income.

Table 5Overview over increase in engine power (Hp) Samsun Province 2000e2005.

Total enginepower

Total enginepower trawlers

Total enginepowernon-trawlers

2000 38,860 34,650 42102005 51,246 36,691 14,555Increase 2000e2005 12,386 2041 10,345% Increase 31.8 5.9 245.7

Source: Our own analysis of Samsun Province fishing boat registers. Note that thenon-trawl fleet is not included in Table 3 and in Fig. 6.

The trawl fisheries around Samsun is the main supplier of some ofthe more abundant and popular species in the Turkish fresh fishmarket. In general, demand is high and fresh fish bring a fairlyhigh price, even as mean size decreases. Some of the demersalspecies, in particular red mullet and turbot, are among the mosthighly priced in Turkey. They are luxury foods primarily indulgedin by the elite [46]. Practically all turbot, whiting and red mulletlanded in Turkey are consumed domestically. During the first halfof the 1990s catches of pelagically migrating fish such as anchovy,horse mackerel, bonito and bluefish were very meagre. Thissecured a high demand for demersal fish. Whiting e a speciespreviously not much consumed in Turkey e became a substitutefor anchovy during this period. Trawl fisheries in the coastal areasof Samsun is one of the most important suppliers of benthic fish tothe Turkish market.

Since statistics on seafood consumption in Turkey are based on‘production’ (and not on de facto consumption), registered percapita seafood consumption has largely varied with changes inanchovy catches and is, therefore, not a good measure of demand.Since 2000 there has been a disassociation of per capita seafood

Fig. 7. Mid-size, multi purpose boats. Typical boats that combine trawling, dredgingand net fisheries. All kinds of gear are visible here on the ground beside the boats.Fenerköyü, çarşamba, September 2005.


consumption from anchovy catches. This is probably in largemeasure due to an increased production of farmed fish. Whiledomestically farmed fish accounted for less than 5% of total seafoodconsumption in Turkey in 1995, production has risen steadily.Almost 25% of seafood consumption in 2007 was domesticallyfarmed fish (TurkStat Fishery Statistics). Availability of farmed fishhas reached a level where it may affect relative demand of some ofthe species caught in the Samsun trawl fisheries. Relative prices offarmed fish have decreased significantly in the domestic market.While a significant proportion of sea bass and sea bream isexported to Europe, all trout (43,000 tonnes, 2004) is consumeddomestically (compared to domestic catch of 1800 tonnes of redmullet and 8000 tonnes of whiting).

Seafood exports have, since 2001, exceeded imports by a factorof four (by value), but still amount to only approximately 5% oftotal catches and production [47]. In value farmed sea bream andsea bass together with sea snail constitute the larger share of theexport and also account for the rise in total seafood exports duringrecent years. Due to dietary norms associated with Islam sea snailsare not consumed in Turkey [46]. There is also little demand in theother Black Sea countries for this species. It is, however, exportedto East Asian markets where it brings a very high price. Demandseems to be stable, with annual average prices varying between 3and 7 USD/kg.

Fish consumer prices, as calculated by TurkStat, seem to corre-latemore strongly with per capita GDP thanwith total landings.Weplace, therefore, more trust in first-sale prices at the IstanbulKumkapı fish hall8 (Fig. 8) which display patterns that deviateconsiderably from the TurkStat figures. Demand, especially of‘luxury’ fish such as turbot, remains high or increases even as meansize decreases and alternative, cheaper fish (both farmed fish andanchovy) are available. Demand thus seems to be an importantdriver for fishing pressure, especially of high-value demersalspecies. Demand for sea snails is, however, more sensitive todecline in average size.

8 First-sale prices were unobtainable from the Samsun fish hall. The Kumkapı fishhall is by far the largest fish market in Turkey. Also, fish traded here and in Samsunenter the same national market (Ankara, Istanbul etc.).

4.3. Technology

Technological equipment on trawlers usually includes an echosounder, radar, and communication equipment, and often GPSnavigator. Most of this equipment is imported. GPS-navigators havemade it much easier for trawlers to mark, find and stick to provengood fishing ‘tracks’. This equipment became available in the mid-1990s, is relatively cheap and is today found onmost large trawlers.The rise in number of (the much more expensive) sonars used tolocate pelagic shoals of fish also indicates an increase in mid-watertrawling.

Our questionnaire survey in Samsun provides some informationas to when electronic equipment was first acquired (Fig. 8).9 Thegrowth in use of electronic equipment has been more rapid thanthe rise in the number of licensed trawlers. Small echo soundershave become so inexpensive during the 2000s thatmany small boatfishers have acquired them, making it easier for them to dredge ortrawl at the depth they find is most profitable. Thus, adoption ofnew technology has been a major driver for increased pressuresince the early 1990s.

4.4. Structural flexibility

4.4.1. Gear combinations and switchingA main characteristic of fisheries in Samsun is the ease with

which fishers and boats switch between different kinds of fishing.Large trawlers are increasingly switching between bottom andmid-water trawling for pelagic species such as anchovy, horsemackerel and, especially, sprat which had previously not beencommercially exploited in Turkey. There is no domestic market forsprat, and catches are delivered to fish meal and oil factories. In2005 there was only one purse seine fishing firm based in Sam-sun. The Sürsan company possesses several boats, among themTurkey’s largest purse seiner (62 m). This company receives itslargest profits from tuna fishing in the Aegean. However, the samecompany owns three smaller boats (approx. 25 m.) that are usedboth in purse seine and trawl fisheries. This complex inter-weaving of the different fisheries makes it difficult to separatethem economically. The ability to switch among different gearsand fisheries makes the larger firms more resilient to fluctuationsin catches and market.

Medium-sized boats can easily switch between different kindsof fishing, depending on what is seen as most profitable at themoment: dredging for sea snails; net fisheries, especially for turbot,bonito and ‘Russian’ mullet; or trawling, which is often illegal asboats under twelve metres in length are not eligible for a trawlinglicense. As long as the engine is powerful enough, switching fromdredging to trawling is simple and requires very little investment.As a result, there is no clear distinction between trawlers andmedium-sized boats. A new class of truly m-p boats has evolved.Flexibility is a pervasive character of these m-p boat fisheries. Itcontributes to viability and is, thus, a major driver of fishing pres-sure (Fig. 9).

4.4.2. Employment and income flexibilityAlmost all fishing boats based in Samsun, large as well as small,

are owned and operated by families resident in the province. Familyeconomy and the economy of the fishing business are ofteninseparable. When catches are poor fishing can be subsidised byother activities or by reducing household expenses. This is a prev-alent character of Turkish Black Sea fisheries, and contributed to the

9 All electronic equipment is imported, but the Foreign Trade Office has, unfor-tunately, been unable to provide any data on this.

Fig. 8. Drivers. Fuel prices paid by fishers 1990e2005. Source: TurkStat. Fish first sale prices, Istanbul. Source: Data provided by the Kumkapı fish hall, Istanbul. UiB analyses of data.Calculated from monthly average prices during the months when trade volumes at Kumkapı are highest: Red mullet all year; Turbot December-June; Whiting September-April(Timur and Do�gan, 1999); and Anchovy September-March (Tekinay et al, 2003). New electronic equipment. Data obtained from survey in Samsun September 2005. This is based oninformation from approx. 250 boats, of which 86 (24) were equipped with echo sounders, 11 (2) with sonars, and 20 (6) with GPS guided positioning system (number in bracketsindicate the number for which we do not know date first acquired). These figures do not account for equipment sold out of Samsun. Net migration Province of Samsun 1970e2005.Sources: TurkStat and SPO. Data not available for 1990e1995 period. Social security fishers Samsun Province. Source: Questionnaire survey of 342 fishers Samsun, September 2005.Fishery credits Turkey and Samsun. Sources: Agricultural Bank Head Office, Agricultural Bank Regional Office Samsun, TurkStat. Upgrading of engine power Samsun 2000e2005.Source: Our own analysis of Samsun Province Agricultural Directorate fishing boat registers. Fishing harbour investment Samsun Province. Source: Ministry of Transport RegionalOffice Samsun.


Fig. 9. Typical seasonal cycles of multi-purpose and large boats in Samsun.


greater resiliency of these fisheries relative to other Black Seacountries’ fisheries during the resource crisis of the early 1990s[48]. One or more able men from the family owning a boat willusually be on the boat, generally as captain. Thus, one family (groupof brothers, sometimes including father) will seldom own andoperate more ‘units’ (boats, factories, fish sales office) than thenumber of grown-up males in the family. This has, to some extent,limited investment and operational flexibility. Yet, during the lastten years, a few of the larger companies have successfully started toleave control of their vessels to hired captains.

Flexibility and resilience is also secured by combining differentroles in the fisheries and/or involvement in other sectors, partly atthe individual level but particularly at the household level. It isfairly common among owners of small boats (up to 10 m) tocombine work on one’s own boat, typically during sea snail andbonito seasons, with work as crew on trawlers or purse seinersduring winter. Of the fishers interviewed for our questionnaire,10.4% combined fishing from their own boat with work as crewduring the previous fishing season (September 2004eAugust2005). 28.6% of the fishers had income from activities other thanfishing, primarily from agriculture (17.2%), but some were alsoseasonal workers (5.2%) or civil servants/tradesmen (3.8%). Forunskilled young men it is not uncommon to combine or switchbetween fishing and constructionworke both hard, migratory, andpoorly paid seasonal work.

4.4.3. Fishing in waters outside of the Province of SamsunFlexibility and viability in the fishery sector is further facilitated

by the possibility for crew and boats to operate outside of Samsun.This has been an increasing trend since themid-1990s. However, nonumerical data exists to substantiate and document the trend.Vessels are not obliged to report such activities to the authorities.The most important fishing activities by Samsun fishers outside ofSamsun are:

� Fishers in Samsun signing on with boats in Istanbul and Izmir.� Trawlers trying other trawling grounds further west along theBlack Sea coast.

� Fishing for shrimp part of or most of the year in the Aegean. Of35 large boats (16 m and 250 Hpþ) in our survey, 14 had goneto the Aegean during the previous year.

� Trawling in Georgian waters. During winter 2005, 25e30trawlers from Samsun reportedly tried their luck there. Thelegal basis for this is not very clear.

� Some medium and large trawlers venture illegally into thewaters of the western and northern Black Sea to fish for turbotswith bottom nets.

� During the 2005 season approximately 10 medium-sized boatsfrom Samsun dredged for sea snails in the Sea of Marmara.

4.5. Tradition and identities

While a majority of the fishers in Samsun have roots in prov-inces further east along the Black Sea coast, fishers representdiverse ethnic and regional backgrounds. Many fishers in smallfishing villages at the river mouths have Caucasian roots, the Yörük(formerly pastoral nomads) have their own inland fishery cooper-ative near Bafra, one of the largest fishing firms is owned bya Kurdish family in Bafra, and there are many Roma and Alevifishers in Terme. Together with the brief history of fishing inSamsun above, this shows that fishing in Samsun is not stronglyrelated to tradition or identities. People of all backgrounds easilyenter into or leave the fishing sector. It is primarily economic anddemographic factors together with settlement patterns and infra-structure for fishing (harbours etc.) that affect who is a fisher.

4.6. Province economy and demography

Until the 1970s the city of Samsun and the plains were a fron-tier, a place of opportunity, and the population increased veryrapidly with in-migration. Now times have changed. While thecity population (363,000) has continued to grow slowly, villagepopulation and overall province population (1,209,000) hasdecreased since 1985 (Population survey 2000, TurkStat). TheProvince of Samsun’s net rate of migration has been increasingly

Table 6Level of formal education among fishers. All figures in %.

5 years primaryeducation or less

Lower secondary,8 yrs.

Higher secondary,11 years

Higher education

Fishers Samsun Province, survey 2005a 74 13 13 0Fishers (skippers/managers) Black Sea region 2005b 60.7 14.9 20.9 3.6Fishers Samsun Province 2000 (TurkStat)c 80.4 10.0 5.8 1.5Males Samsun Province 2000 d 70.6 8.6 12.6 8.2Male agricultural workers Turkey 2003

(Çakmak 2004:8)84.7 8.0 6.7 0.6

Total Turkey 2003 (Çakmak 2004:8) 58.8 11.4 18.8 11.0

a Survey of 345 fishers (including twowomen) in most fishing communities in the Province of Samsun, September 2005. The figures here include fishers below 25 years age,while the official figures for educational level in Turkey and Samsun are based upon the population above 25 years age. Since the younger population is generally bettereducated the figures for Samsun may show a relatively high proportion as having secondary education.

b [52]. 308 managers of fishing operations/boats (all sizes/kinds), mostly (more than 90%) boat owners. Boats owners and skippers, especially owners of and hired skipperson larger boats, are generally better educated than small boat fishers and crew.

c TurkStat Census of Population 2000. 672 employed persons above age 12 reported to have their main income from ‘fishing and water produce’.d TurkStat Census of Population 2000.

10 The SPO figures include dependants of insured persons. Since each fisher willusually have more than one person depending on him, the ratio is probably evensmaller than 41.9%.


negative (Fig. 8). Among the 81 provinces in Turkey, during2000e2005, Samsun had the highest negative net number ofmigrants. Economic development has been increasingly negativeduring the same period. While migration to a limited extent mightdecrease drivers for fishing, more importantly the high rate of out-migration is an indicator of the increasing difficulty of findingemployment or securing income in the agricultural and industrialsectors of the Province of Samsun.

Industrial employment in the Province of Samsun declined from10,030 in 1995 to 6760 in 2001. During the same period overallindustrial employment in Turkey increased by 13% (TurkStat).When the economy started to ‘pick up’ again after the 2001 crisis,open unemployment did not decrease. One of the ‘.key charac-teristic[s] of the post-2001 Turkish growth is its jobless nature’ [49].Poverty thus remains a major problem in the Turkish economy andsociety with a very skewed income distribution. In Samsun thesituation has been particularly difficult; industry has moved out ofthe province, resulting in many unemployed migrating to westernTurkey or exploring other, new opportunities locally e of whichfishing is one of very few options.

We can see the concentration of capital and the creation ofa large market of cheap labour expressed in the Samsun fisheriessector. Although ‘big capital’, e.g. large corporations, has notinvested in the fishery sector in Samsun, there is endogenousdevelopment towards capital concentration (see also [43]),primarily through increased vertical integration whereby 5e6companies now control most of the fish trade, many of the mostprofitable fishing boats (especially larger mid-water trawlers),factories, a large share of fish shops aswell as seafood restaurants inSamsun. While fishers seldom become wealthy, owners of thesecompanies are fairly rich. The Sürsan Company has for several yearsbeen one of the largest taxpayers in Samsun. These large companieshave no problem finding cheap labour locally.

4.7. Educational level

In their surveys of fishing cultures, both Acheson [50] andMcGoodwin [51] point out that fishers are generally less educatedthan non-fishers. This is also the case in Turkey. The educationallevel of fishers is substantially lower than among most otheroccupational groups, except agricultural workers. The main differ-ence in educational level between fishers and the larger populationin Samsun is the lack of higher education among fishers (Table 6).

It is the aim of most, if not all, fishers e even the wealthy bigboat fishers e to educate their sons and daughters. Generally, sonsof boat owners only settle for a career in fishing if and when they

fail to pass the university entrance exam. Thus, sons of thesuccessful fishing families who can afford private tuition fees tendto have more years of education and a career outside of fishing,while for young men with few resources (land, capital) and littleeducation, fishing is one of the few income options in the regionopen to them.

4.8. Social security and health insurance

In Turkey, a citizen’s rights towelfare and social security are verylimited. A satisfactory level of entitlement to medical treatmentand old age pension etc. is only established by state employment(membership in Sosyal Sigorta Kurumu e SSK, Social InsuranceInstitution) or, for self-employed, by voluntary (paid) membershipin state-organized Ba�g-Kur, or by private insurance. According toboth our survey and to TurkStat, approximately two-thirds offishers are self-employed. One of the most common complaintsfishers raise is the lack of social security in their profession. Most ofthem depend on paying regular instalments to Ba�g-Kur, which isdifficult for poor families with strained economy and erraticincome. The very poorest (with basically no formal employmentand income) are entitled to ‘Green Cards’ that give them right tobasic but restricted services (free medicines, etc.).

While the ratio of insured persons (private, SSK and Ba�g-Kur) inTurkey overall is 89.2% (TurkStat), only 41.9% of fishers in Samsunare similarly insured.10 Moreover, many fishers who are membersof the Ba�g-Kur often fail to pay their instalments and their rightsare, therefore, reduced accordingly. It is typically small boat fishersand crew who do not have any insurance or only hold a “GreenCard”. This indicates a high level of poverty among fishers. Lack ofalternatives results in many poor people entering and remainingwithin the fisheries sector despite the involved uncertainties, thelack of security, and the unfavourable working conditions. Thewillingness to work for a very low income, and the combination ortypical substitution with other non-formal and seasonal work isconfirmed by our interviews and survey data.

4.9. Poverty, and fishing as frontier

Poverty thus seems to be a major driver for fishing effort inSamsun. This is facilitated by the character of the fisheries: its


relative open nature; the lack of formal requirement of authori-zation (relatively easy to get a fishers’ license); the ease withwhich fishers can switch between different kinds of fishing; andthe lack of social barriers (tradition, belonging to local communityetc.) to becoming a fisher. The m-p boat fishery especially operatesin a sphere of opportunity, flexibility and hope. Sea snail fisheriesin Samsun can be said, therefore, to have constituted a kind offrontier since the mid 1980s, especially during 2000e2005.Frontier is “an undetermined space that is part of a regionalsystem, on the margins of the state” [53]. It is “notoriouslyunstable.and is made in the shifting terrain between legality andillegality, public and private ownership.” ([54]: 32e33). Thiscertainly seems to be the case in fisheries in Samsun, in particularin certain locations such as Terme and Dereköy. The sector of m-pboats in particular has been poorly regulated and controlled, yethas provided one of the few economic arenas open to poor peoplein the coastal region. While many fishers are poor, their involve-ment in the fisheries has nevertheless helped raise their standardof living. Many have built their own houses on income earned intrawl or sea snail fisheries.

In conclusion, the kind of economic structure and developmentpresently experienced in Turkey is a driver for increased fishingeffort in that it sustains or creates poverty and thereby anincreasingly cheap labour force in the large boat fisheries.11 Ina period of dramatic ecological change in the Black Sea and pooreconomic development in the Province of Samsun, the influx ofnew fishers to the m-p boat fishery has helped to secure employ-ment, rural settlement, and business opportunitiese and increasedfishing pressure. Of importance is also the fact that fishers areorganized to only a very little extent. The fishery cooperatives havegenerally proved to be ineffective tools for furthering fishers’interests (see [43], Chapter 9), and there exists no organization torepresent the interests of crew.

4.10. State policies

State policies towards fisheries have, since the 1950s, generallybeen ‘developmental’ and modernist, primarily focusing onincreasing catches [43]. After the fishery crisis around 1990 statepolicies changed somewhat with increased focus on sustainabilityand sound management of resources. Old and new agendas coexist,however, and, while some measures have been taken to restrictfishing effort, other initiatives are clearly drivers of higher pressure.Important policies have included subsidised credits, import taxexemption on engines and technological equipment to be used in thefisheries, the construction of harbours and harbour facilities, as wellas fish trade halls. Except for the most successful large fishingcompanies, fishers generally do not pay income or company taxes.There is a small sales tax (3%) on fish deduced from sales in the fishhalls.

4.10.1. Subsidised creditsSince the 1970s heavily subsidised investment and operational

state credits had been instrumental in the rapid growth of thefisheries. Interest rates werewell belowmarket interest rates, oftenless than half. During the late 1990s policies changed and fisherycredits were no longer subsidised, while new subsidised creditstargeted fish farming. As a result, fishers nearly stopped using thiskind of credit (Fig. 8). Total credits to the fishery sector have clearly

11 We currently explore the relationship between poverty and natural resourcesin another project/paper (see http://sites.google.com/a/maremacentre.com/povfish/Home). Any further discussion of this is, therefore, outside the scope ofthis article.

varied with the degree to which these credits have been subsidised.After 2000 subsidised fishery credits have not been a driver forfishing pressure.

4.10.2. Tax exemption on imported equipmentTax exemption on the import of equipment was an important

element in the growth of the fisheries during the 1980s and for itsresilience during the early 1990s. Almost all large engines andelectronic equipment were, and are, imported. With the estab-lishment of the customs union with EU in 1996 this became lessimportant and has not been a major driver since.

4.10.3. Tax exemption, fuelNot long after it assumed power in the autumn of 2003, the

new AKP government decided that, from the beginning of 2004,fishing vessels would be exempt from paying the 40% tax onengine fuel. This policy change made a big difference especially tofuel-intensive fisheries such as trawling and sea snail dredging. Itis, unfortunately, difficult to estimate what difference this hasmade in terms of fuel consumption since there are no records offuel sales to fishing boats. The effect of cheap fuel can, however, bemeasured by other indicators. Fishers themselves express theimportance of this policy for their viability, and tax-exempted fuelis ubiquitously used by licensed boats. According to the harbourauthorities in Samsun in 2005, there were 636 fishing boats inSamsun that benefited from subsidised fuel. This included most ofthe trawlers and sea snail boats. Our own questionnaire surveyshows that, of the boats included in the survey, 140 of the boatsused subsidised fuel, while 118 did not. Apart from 3 exceptions,all boats that did not take advantage of this subsidised fuel wereunlicensed (a condition for being entitled to the exemption) and/or had engines under 33 Hp, that is, boats unsuitable for trawlingand dredging. Practically all trawlers and dredgers thus benefitedfrom subsidised fuel. Furthermore, the subsidy stimulated anincrease in total engine power. We scrutinized the changes madeto the Samsun Province Agricultural Directorate fishing boatregisters and found that after this exemption came into effect 16small boats in Samsun had their engine power upgraded (typicallyfrom 10e30 Hp to 85e135 Hp), so that they were in effectupgraded from artisanal to sea snail fishing boats. Furthermore,approximately 30 combined trawlers/sea snail fishing boats andtrawlers had their engine power increased during 2004. Taxexemption on fuel has clearly been a major driver since itsinception.

4.10.4. Public investment in infrastructureBy far the most important public investment in infrastructure

for fisheries in Samsun has been the construction of the largefishing harbours. Larger harbours and more of them facilitatemore fishing activity, larger boats etc. The number of boats hasgrown much more in places where a harbour has been recentlyconstructed, such as in Terme and Dereköy. The number of smallboats in Terme increased from 80 in 1992 to 331 in 2005, and thenumber of trawlers from 0 to 19. In Yakakent, which has hada good harbour for several decades, the increase from 1992 to2005 was more moderate; from 35 to 70 small boats. Since mostfishers do not have cars it is difficult to own and operate a fishingboat if the boat is not tied to a place within walking distance ora short minibus ride from home. Fishing villages far from harbourshave seen almost no rise in number of boats during the1992e2005 period.

There is probably some time lag between actual harbourinvestments and effect on fishing pressure. The new harbour con-structed in Canik in Samsun city has replaced the Central harbourand has, therefore, not been a driver for increased fishing pressure.

http://sites.google.com/a/maremacentre.com/povfish/Home

http://sites.google.com/a/maremacentre.com/povfish/Home

12 Adjusted for inflation, 1995 prices and exhange rate.


4.11. Fisheries management

4.11.1. General rules and regulationsNo TAC or quota regulations apply, but several other measures

are intended to secure sound fishing practice and ecologicalsustainability. Biannual ‘circular[s]’ specify rules and regulationsthat apply to fishing in Turkey (General Directorate of Protectionand Control, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs).

Licenses are required for all fishing boats and fishers. Small feesapply. Trawl licenses are only granted to boats longer than 12 m.

After the fishery crisis around 1990 a ban on construction of newboats was put into effect in 1991. In 1994, 1997 and in 2001,however, the authorities granted exceptions to this regulation, ineffect making it possible for boats already constructed to obtainfishing licenses. SinceMarch 2002 it has not been possible to obtainnew licenses, but there is no regulation restricting the number oflicenses in individual provinces or fisheries. Enlargement of exist-ing boats (up to 20% every second year) is accepted. It is also legal toconstruct new boats under the license of older boats that dis-continue fishing. Although the stated aim has been to freeze catchcapacity, loopholes, amnesties, and the right to enlarge boats haveinstead led to the substantial increase in catch effort, discussedfurther below under Pressures.

4.11.2. Regulations concerning bottom trawlingThe following rules apply to bottom trawl fishing in the Samsun

area:

Seasonal limitations:- Bottom trawling is forbidden in summer; the length of theclosed season has varied somewhat over the years.

- Specific regulation applies to turbot on which there is a totalban on fishing during a couple months during spring/earlysummer.

Regional limitations: All trawling is forbidden within threenautical miles from shore. Since the early 1980s all kinds ofbottom trawling have been illegal in the region east of the prov-incal border between Samsun and Ordu (i.e. slightly east ofTerme). A small area fromSinop toGerze is also closed to trawling.These boundaries have been stable since the early 1990s.Equipment regulations: Net end mesh size in the trawl may notbe smaller than 40 mm. There has been almost no change since1992.Minimum size limitations: Minimum legal size applies toa range of species, including red mullet (13 cm) and turbot(40 cm). Until very recently there was no suchminimum size forwhiting.

4.11.3. Regulations applying to sea snail fishing

- Sea snail dredging/diving license required.- Seasonal closures apply. There has been large variation in thelength of the closure period over the years. Since 2000 theseasonal closure for dredging has been between 1 May and 31August.

- Each boat may take no more than one dredge.- Dredging for sea snails during night and closer than 500 m toshore is forbidden.

- Regulations pertaining to mesh size and dredge constructionapply.

4.11.4. FinesDuring the greater part of the 1990s fines were not adjusted to

keep up with inflation and, therefore, gradually came to be ridic-ulously small. In 1997 the maximum fine for illegal trawling was

0.14 USD. This changed from 1998 and during the 2000s the fine forillegal trawling has been in the range of 125 USD,12 which hurts fora small operator, but not for a large trawler.

4.11.5. Control and inspectionIn the early 2000s control authority was gradually transferred

from Samsun Agricultural Directorate to the armed forces CoastGuard, which is better equipped. The Coast Guard uses two patrolboats in the middle Black Sea region. Control is very poor,however, and many of the regulations described above are notadhered to. This, as mentioned in Section 3.2.2, is especially thecase in sea snail fisheries. Trawlers, in addition to regularly havingoverly fine-meshed nets, venture outside of the legal area ofoperation, that is, either within three nautical miles from shore orinto the no-trawl zone to the east. Controls are erratic andgenerally address small boats. Only 10 out of 57 fines registered bythe Samsun Agricultural Directorate between mid 2003 and mid2005 were written to boats longer than 12 m. The Coast Guardauthorities in Samsun were unwilling to supply us with dataconcerning their control activities.

5. Conclusions

The preceding discussion has surveyed a range of differentStates, Pressures and Drivers which we for clarity have summarizedin Fig. 10 which also shows the major relationships between thevariables.

In our discussion of changes in the state of the environment inSection 2 we documented the declining ecosystem health and theprimary species targeted by bottom trawling. Trawling during the1990s and early 2000s is likely to be the primary cause of the negativetrends in turbot, red mullet and whiting landings as well as averagesize.Withdeclining catches and reduced average size, bottom trawlingbecame less profitable and the rise in catch capacity levelled off. Withincreasing effort put into mid-water trawling, and fewer trawlerscoming in fromotherprovinces, bottomtrawl catcheffort (Pressure)bylicensed trawlersmay even have declined since the late 1990s. Yet, wehave documented a significant increase in overall accumulated enginepower by fishing boats in Samsun during 2000e2005. This post-2000growth in Pressure is, however, primarily a result of a tremendousgrowth in the number of and the average engine power of medium-sizedmulti-purposeboats. It is not yet clearwhateffect this growthhason the state of the environment, but there are indications that averagesea snail size has declined considerably since 2005.

We have discussed a range of potential underlying Drivers forthe continued high catch capacity in the fisheries studied here. Inconclusion, we consider the following to be the major Drivers after2000:

� consumption/demand� fuel price� increasing availiability of electronic equipment� fuel tax exemption� harbour construction� slack control and inspection� structural flexibility� poverty

It is evident that fisheries in Samsun, and in particular sea snailfisheries, have constituted a kind of frontier open to the poorerpopulations of Samsun during the last 20 years. Poverty and lack ofalternatives together with low educational level and poor social

Fig. 10. Simplified overview of major D-P-S variables and indicators.


security has clearly driven people into this sector of the economy.This has been facilitated by the other drivers listed above, togetherwith structural properties such as fishers being able and allowed toswitch liberally between different kinds of gear and regions andcombine income from fisheries flexibly with income from othersectors; and income opportunities opened by the establishmentand growth of an introduced species. Not all aspects of the fisheriesare driven by poverty, however. Some of the more successfulcompanies stay in the sector precisely because they are able tomake good profits. Yet, also for these large companies, flexibilityand, increasingly, vertical integration are critical for viability.

Although we believe that we have described and analysed themajor outlines of the DriverePressureeState relations in Samsunfisheries, note that the findings are characterized by a relativelyhigh degree of uncertainty. There are two major reasons for this.First, there is inherent or imposed change and flexibility in bothecological and human systems (sea snail transforming the benthiccommunity, flexibility and relation to other fisheries) that aresimply difficult to document because of their dynamic and unpre-dictable nature. Secondly, for many variables data e especiallytime-series datae are lacking, or of very poor quality. Furthermore,a more comprehensive analysis should also address more fullyrelations to fishers and fisheries outside of the Province of Samsun.The political activities of small boat fishers in neighbouring prov-inces have, for instance, resulted in restriction of areas open totrawling. Although our study reveals that there is more flow acrossthe Samsun border than expected, this spatial delimitation of thecase study has facilitated specification of the kinds of ‘flows’ thereare in and out of this ‘system’.

When it comes to management implications of our findings, it isclear that the authorities can impact all or most drivers listed

above. However, many of the drivers are beyond the scope ofconventional ‘fisheries management’. The Ministry for Agricultureand Rural Affairs, which carries the main responsibility for fisherypolicy in Turkey, maintains authority over only one of the maindrivers, namely control and inspection. The society at large shouldbe taken into consideration when designing sound fishery policies;although, conventional fishery management may have unintendedconsequences for ‘society’. One likely effect of Turkey’s adaptationto EU fishery policy would be a decrease in flexibility (licensingrequirements, improved inspection and control etc.). This coulddecrease fishing pressure, especially the activity of medium-sizedmulti-purpose trawl/dredgers. An important side effect of this,however, would be increased poverty. In transforming Turkishfishery policy, and thus the whole fishery sector, it will be impor-tant that policy makers and managers are aware of the socialconsequences of a tighter management regime that leaves lessroom for flexibility. Yet, general economic growth together withdevelopment of better public social security and welfare systemscould produce attractive alternatives to fishing and, thereby, resultin decreased fishing pressure. Flexibility (fisheries) and poverty(society) are connected and must not be seen in isolation.

Acknowledgements

Research and fieldwork for this study have received fundingfrom EU FP6 project European Lifestyles and Marine Ecosystems,from the Trabzon Fisheries Research Institute and from theUniversity of Bergen. We would like to thank in particular MehmetGül, head of Water Produce Section, Samsun Agricultural Direc-torate, Control and Inspection Division, for being particularlyhelpful and forthcoming, providing us full access to registers etc.


Appendix. Supporting information

Useofboats Samsun.Thisfigure shows (horizontally) theactivitiesof each of 258 surveyed boats in Samsun September 2004eAugust2005. Boats are listed according to engine power (right column).Supplementary data associated with this article can be found in theonline version, at doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.04.008.

References

[1] EEA. Environmental indicators: typology and overview, report 25. EuropeanEnvironment Agency; 1999.

[2] Mangi SC, Roberts CM, Rodwell LD. Reef fisheries management in Kenya:preliminary approach using the driverepressureestateeimpactseresponse(DPSIR) scheme of indicators. Ocean & Coastal Management 2007;50(5):18.

[3] Cave RR, Ledoux L, Turner K, Jickells T, Andrews JE, Davies H. The Humbercatchment and its coastal area: from UK to European perspectives. The Scienceof the Total Environment 2003;314e316:31e52.

[4] Lin T, Xue X-Z, Lu C- Y. Analysis of coastal wetland changes using the “DPSIR”model: a case study in Xiamen, China. Coastal Management 2007;35(2e3):289e303.

[5] Turner K. Integrated environmental assessment and coastal futures, VermaatJE managing European coasts: past, present, and future. Berlin Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag; 2005. 255e270.

[6] Nunneri C, Turner RK, Cieslak A, Kannen A, Klein RJT, Ledoux L, et al. Groupreport: integrated assessment and future scenarios for the coast, Vermaat JEmanaging European coasts: past, present, and future. Berlin Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag; 2005. 271e290.

[7] Bidone ED, Lacerda LD. The use of DPSIR framework to evaluate sustainabilityin coastal areas. Case study: Guanabara Bay basin, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.Regional Environmental Change 2004;4(1):5e16.

[8] Elliott M. The role of the DPSIR approach and conceptual models in marineenvironmental management: an example for offshore wind power. MarinePollution Bulletin 2002;44(6):iiievii.

[9] Pirrone N, Trombino G, Cinnirella S, Algieri A, Bendoricchio G, Palmeri L. TheDriverePressureeStateeImpacteResponse (DPSIR) approach for integratedcatchmentecoastal zone management: preliminary application to the PocatchmenteAdriatic Sea coastal zone system. Regional Environmental Change2005;5(2):111e37.

[10] Turner RK. Integrating natural and socio-economic science in coastalmanagement. Journal of Marine Systems 2000;25(3e4):447e60.

[11] Erüz C. Upwelling Sirkülasyonunun Tamamlanması ve Güneydo�gu KaradenizKıyılarında Varlı�gının Tesbiti Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. KTÜFen Bilimleri Enst. Trabzon: Karadeniz Technical University; 1992.

[12] Ivanov L BRJH. The fisheries resources of the Mediterranean, part two: BlackSea. FAO, GFCM; 1985.

[13] Prodanov K, Mikhailov K, Daskalov G, Maxim G, Chashchin A, Arkhipov A,et al. Environmental management of fish resources in the Black Sea and theirrational exploitation, report studies and reviews. FAO, General FisheriesCouncil for the Mediterranean; 1997.

[14] _Işmen A, Bingel F. Mezgitin, Merlangius merlangus euxinus, Mide Içeri�gi veBesin Tüketiminin Tahmini. In: ODTÜ, Erdemli Deniz Bilimleri Enstitüsü,TÜB_ITAK, Bildiriler ve Posterler, 177e182. 1. Ulusal Deniz Bilimleri Konferansı,Ankara; 2000. p. 177e82.

[15] Zengin M. Türkiye’nin Do�gu Karadeniz Kıyılarındaki Kalkan (Scopthamusmeaoticus, Palas, 1811) Balı�gının Biyoekolojik Özellikleri ve PopulasyonParametreleri. Marine Science Faculty. Trabzon: Karadeniz Technical Univer-sity; 2000, p. 220.

[16] Zaitsev Y, Mamaev V. Biological diversity in the Black Sea. A study of changeand decline. United Nations Publications; 1997.

[17] GESAMP. Opportunistic settlers and the problem of the Ctenophore Mne-miopsis leidyi invasion in the Black Sea. IMO/FAO/UNESCO/UNEP Joint Groupof Experts of Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP); 1997.

[18] Zaitsev Y, Öztürk B, editors. Exotic species in the Aegean, Marmara, Black,Azov and Caspian Seas. Istanbul: Turkish Marine Research Foundation; 2001.

[19] Zengin M. The current status of Turkey’s Black Sea fisheries and suggestionson the use of those fisheries, country report Turkey. In: Workshop onresponsible fisheries in the Black Sea and the Azov Sea, and case of Demersalfish resources, Sile, _Istanbul; 2003. p. 34.

[20] Çelikkale MS. Karadeniz’in Verimlili�gini Etkileyen Ana Faktörler. Tarım veMühendislik Dergisi, TMMOB Ziraat Müh. Odası. Yay 1992;42:2e27.

[21] Özesmi U. Environmental history of the Kızılırmak delta, Turkey: past andpresent resource use and conservation efforts conservation and biologyprogram. University of Minnesota; 1999.

[22] Çakıro�glu SB, editor. Karadeniz Balıkçılık (Black Sea Fisheries). Bilgi Basımevi;1969.

[23] Zengin M, Aksungur M, Tabak _I, Zengin. Karadeniz Alabalı�gı (Salmo truttalabrax) Populasyonunun Gelişimini Etkileyen Faktörler. In: Alpaslan EÖvN,editor. Türkiye’nin Kıyı ve Deniz Alanları IV. Ulusal Konferansı, Türkiye Kıyıları02, _Izmir; 2002. p. 747e58.

[24] Konsulova T, Tasev V, Todorova V, Konsulov A. The effect of bottom trawling onmussesl beds along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. In: Yilmaz A, editor. Ocean-ography of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Similarities anddifferences of two interconnected basins. Ankara: TUBITAK; 2002. p. 888e96.

[25] Ataç Ü, Aktaş, M, Yıldırım, C, Alemda�g, N, Zengin, B, Alkan, A. KaradenizBölgesinde Su Kirlili�gine Sebep Olan Faktörlerin Belirlenmesi ve Su ÜrünlerineOlan Etkilerinin Araştırılması. Proje Sonuç Raporu. Trabzon Fishery ResearchInstitute; 1999.

[26] Kideyş A. Fall and rise of the Black Sea ecosystem. Science 2002;297(5586):1482e4.

[27] Genç Y, Zengin M, Ceylan B, Çiftçi Y. Do�gu Karadeniz’deki Demarsal BalıkStoklarının Tahmini. Trabzon Fisheries Research Institute; 1993.

[28] Kara ÖF, Kaya M, Benli HA, Mater S. The productivity and hydroraphicproperties of the trawl areas of middle and eastern Black Sea. In: The Black SeaSymposium, _Istanbul; 1991. p. 205e22.

[29] _Işmen A, Bingel F. Karadeniz’in Türkiye Kıyılarındaki Mezgit (Merlangiusmerlangus euxinus) Balı�gının Biyolojisi ve Populasyon Parametreleri. Erdemli:Marine Research Department: METU; 1995.

[30] Bingel F, Gücü AC, Stepnowski A, Niermann U, Mutlu E, Avşar D, et al. Stockassessment studies for the Turkish Black Sea coast. Erdemli/Trabzon: METUInstitute of Marine Sciences/Fisheries Research Institute; 1996.

[31] Genç Y. Türkiye’nin Do�gu Karadeniz Kıyılarındaki Barbunya (Mullus barbatusponticus, ESS. 1927) Balı�gının Biyoekolojik Özellikleri ve Populasyon Para-metreleri. Trabzon: Marine Research Faculty, Karadeniz Technical University;2000.

[32] Zengin M, Düzgüneş E. Karadeniz’de Mezgit Merlangius merlangus euxinusNord. 1840, Avcılı�gında Kullanılan Dip Trol A�glarının Seçicili�ginin Belirlen-mesi. _Istanbul Üniversitesi Su Ürünleri Fakültesi. Su Ürünleri Dergisi ÖzelSayı; 1999:535e47.

[33] Genç Y, Zengin M, Tabak Ç, Ceylan B, Çiftçi Y, Üstünda�g C. Ekonomik DenizÜrünleri Projesi. Tarım ve Köyişleri Bakanlı�gı. Trabzon Fisheries ResearchInstitute; 1999.

[34] Genç Y. Doðu Karadeniz’deki av gücünün demersal balýk stoklarý üzerineetkisinin tespiti, Report TAGEM/IY/97/17/03/006. Trabzon Central MarineResearch Institute; 2002.

[35] Zengin M, Düzgüneş E. Variations on the Turbot (Scophthalmus maeoticus)stocks in the Southeastern Black Sea during the last decade and comments onfisheries management. In: Öztürk B, editor. Workshop on demersal resourcesin the Black Sea and Azov Sea, Sile, _Istanbul; 2003. p. 9e26.

[36] Bilecik N. La Repartition de Rapana thomasiana thomasiana (Grosse) sur leLittoral Turc de la Mer Noire s’etendant d’Ieada jusqu’a Çaltı Burnu. Comm.Int. Mer. Medt. 1975;23(2):169e71.

[37] Sa�glam HE. Do�gu Karadeniz’deki Deniz Salyangozunun (Rapana thomasiana,Crosse, 1851) Biyo ekolojisi. Trabzon: Marine Science Faculty, KaradenizTechnical University; 2003. p. 88.

[38] Dalgıç G, Karayücel S. Investigations on the stocks of the striped venus(Chamelea gallina L., 1758) in Ordu’s coastal zone of the Eastern Black Sea.Journal of Fisheries International 2007;2(1):12e6.

[39] Zengin M, Polat H. Do�gu Karadeniz’deki Kıyı Balıkçılı�gının Makrofauna ÜzerineOlan Etkilerinin Belirlenmesi. In: Özhan E, Yüksel Y, editors. Türkiye’nin Kıyı veDeniz Alanları III. Ulusal Konferansı, Istanbul; 2001. p. 357e71.

[40] Düzgüneş E, Feyzio�glu AM. Trabzon Sahil Seridinde Yaşayan Deniz Salyangozu-nun Rapana thomasiana Gross.1861 Populasyon ve Büyüme Özelliklerinin Ara-ştırılması. Ege Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Dergisi, Seri B 1994;16(1):1579e92.

[41] Devedjian K. Pêche et Pêcheries en Turquie Imprimiere de l’Administration dela Dette Publique Ottomane; 1926 [1915].

[42] Sarısakal B. Bir Kentin Tarihi. Samsun Samsun Valili�gi _Il Özel _Idare Müdürlü�güand SAM-SEV; 2002.

[43] Knudsen S. Fishers and scientists in modern Turkey. The management ofresources, knowledge and identity on the eastern Black Sea coast. BerghahnBooks; 2009.

[44] Öker A. Karadeniz’de Trolcülük ile Balık _Istihsalinin Araştırması. Balık veBalıkçılık. Et ve Balık Kurumu Umum Müdürlü�gü 1956;4(12):17e8.

[45] Ünal V. Viability of trawl fishing fleet in Foça (the Aegean Sea), Turkey andsome advices to Central Management Authority. Turkish Journal of Fisheriesand Aquatic Sciences 2004;4(2):93e7.

[46] Knudsen S. Between life giver and leisure: identity negotiation through sea-food in Turkey. International Journal of Middle East Studies 2006;38(3).

[47] SPO. 9. Kalkınma Planı Balıkçılık Özel _Ihtisas Komisyonu. Republic of TurkeyState Planning Organization; 2006.

[48] Knudsen S. A comparative study of fishing communities and public awarenessin Turkey and Ukraine. In: Black Sea Environmental Programme; 1997.

[49] BSB. Turkey in 2005 and Beyond. Macroeconomic Policy, Patterns of Growthand Persistent Fragilities. Independent Social Scientists Alliance (Ba�gımsızSosyal Bilimciler); 2005.

[50] Acheson JM. Anthropology of fishing. Annual Reviews of Antrhopology1981;10:275e316.

[51] McGoodwin JR. Crisis in the world’s fisheries. People, Problems, and Policies.Stanford University Press; 1990.

[52] TEAE. Karadeniz Bölgesi’nde Su Ürünleri Avcılığı Yapan _Işletmecilerin Sosyo-Ekonomik Analizi. Tarýmsal Ekonomi Araştırma Enstitüsü; 2006.

[53] Kopytoff I. The African frontier, The reproduction of traditional African soci-eties. Indiana University Press; 1987.

[54] Tsing AL. Friction. An ethnography of global connection. Princeton UniversityPress; 2005.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.04.008

Ocm knudsen et al published version

Documents

Transcript of Ocm knudsen et al published version