*Manuscript including abstract

Click here Total FishingManuscript

to download Pressure produced by artisanal
including abstract: fisheries, from a
Manuscript.docx Marine Spatial Planning
Click here to view linked References

perspective: A case study from the Basque Country (Bay of Biscay).

Authors: M. Pascual *a,b, A. Borjab, I. Galparsorob, J. Ruizc, E. Mugerzac, I. Quincocesc, A.

Murillasc, L. Arregic.

Addresses:

a
Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3). Alameda Urquijo, 4. Bilbao, Spain. T. (+34) 94
401 46 90 | F. (+34) 94 405 47 87.

b
AZTI-Tecnalia, Marine Research Division, Herrera Kaia, Portualdea s/n, 20110 Pasaia,
Spain. T. (+34) 94 657 40 00 | F. (+34) 94 657 25 55.

c
AZTI-Tecnalia, Marine Research Division, Txatxarramendi Ugartea s/n, 48395 Sukarrieta,
Spain. T. (+34) 94 657 40 00 | F. (+34) 94 657 25 55.

*
Corresponding authors´ email: marta.pascual@bc3research.org

Abstract:

The increasing human pressures on marine ecosystems and the need for integrating planning
tools for managing and protecting the marine environment have pushed towards accurate
assessments of the spatial distribution of human activities and impacts. An accurate
understanding of the spatial distribution of fisheries will help determine potential conflicts that
may arise in coastal regions as these regions are exposed to new types of resource use and
development (e.g., renewable energy, aquaculture). This study characterizes the existing
artisanal fishing activity along the Bay of Biscay in the Basque Country (Spain) by métier
unit, by commercially relevant species biomass, and by trophic level. Total fishing pressure
(measured as area covered per sampling effort) was calculated per métier unit by year (2009
and 2010), and aggregated using data collected from 10,185 fishing trip events, questionnaires,
and other non-official logbooks. Results revealed that the spatial preferences and fishing
intensities of specific métiers were linked to spatial location; water bodies closest to the
coastline, especially in the most westerly areas of the Bay of Biscay, were more intensely
fished. The integration of total fishing pressure across métiers is an important first step
towards assessing the cumulative pressures of fishing, and determining the foundations for an
improved ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in Basque Country waters.

Keywords: total fishing pressure; artisanal fisheries; métier; trophic level; Basque Country.

1
1. Introduction

As human pressures on marine ecosystems increase (Halpern et al., 2008;

Stelzenmüller et al., 2008) and the need for integrating planning tools for managing and
protection of the marine environment intensifies (Stelzenmüller et al., 2008), accurate
assessments of the spatial distribution of human activities and impacts become more important
(Bastardie et al., 2010; DEFRA, 2005; Fock, 2011; Halpern et al., 2008, 2012; Reed et al.,
2012; Stelzenmüller et al., 2008, 2010b). These pressures and the resultant needs have also led
to new management approaches, such as Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) (Ehler and Douvere,
2009).

Multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary MSP methods are highlighted in the European

Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD; EC, 2008). Integrated marine management
must consider all marine uses, from commercial and non-commercial fisheries to transport,
aquaculture, renewable energy exploitation, and leisure activities. From a practical aspect, the
spatial characterization of fishing pressure (FP) is crucial to improving the design and
interpretation of surveys and experimental studies (Stelzenmüller et al., 2008). In addition, it
will enable the design of more accurate management programs that include adequate scales for
spatial-temporal variations.

The European Common Fisheries Policy (EC, 2009) recognizes the importance of
accounting for the heterogeneity of fishing practices from different fleets in managing the
resources. The policy supports a shift from managing individual fish stocks towards managing
fleets, mixed fisheries, and economic issues (Nielsen and Limborg, 2009, Reeves et al., 2008).
In this type of management framework, the total fishing activity in a given area must be
disaggregated into fleet segments; a set of vessels with common physical characteristics that
target the same main type of fishing activity are termed “métier units” (Bastardie et al., 2010;
ICES, 2003). Thus, a given métier unit defines a homogeneous subdivision of fishing boats
that target the same assemblage of species and use similar gear during the same season and
within the same area (EC, 2009; ICES, 2003). Individual fishermen and vessels may have
several métiers in a given year, as they adapt to fluctuations in fishing opportunities and stock
availability (Bastardie et al., 2010).

Mapping spatial FP per métier unit would enable better ecosystem and fleet-based
fishery management within the European Common Fisheries Policy (ICES, 2010). This type
of spatial fishing information has been shown to have important implications for
understanding the effects of management measures, and the potential impacts, when fisheries
are one of the main concerns of a MSP (Murenu et al., 2010).
2
 Apart from remote sensing and geographical positioning systems (GPS), geographical
information systems (GIS) are the most commonly used tools for mapping (NOAA, 2010).
GIS have undergone rapid evolution since the inception of the technology in the early 1960s;
fisheries GIS have contributed to and paralleled this evolution, although not at the same pace
(Fisher, 2010). Applications of GIS in fisheries grew rapidly in the 1990s (Fisher, 2007) and
the number and variety of GIS applications in marine fisheries have provided a solid
foundation for the future of fisheries GIS (Fisher, 2010). Despite this, many challenges and
opportunities remain for the application of GIS in fisheries, especially with respect to their use
as part of an MSP (Stelzenmüller et al., 2010a).

Applications of GIS in marine ecosystems have focused mainly on mapping the

distribution and abundance of fisheries resources and relating these patterns to habitat features
in surface waters or on the ocean bottom (Fisher and Rahel, 2004; Meaden and Do Chi, 1996;
Nishida et al., 2001, 2004, 2007; Valavanis, 2002, 2008; Wright and Scholz, 2005), or to
monitoring fishing efforts (Riolo, 2006; Stewart et al., 2010), or even to using Vessel
Monitoring Systems (VMS) (EU, 2011; Stelzenmüller et al., 2008). In the context of control,
conservation, and use planning, geospatial sciences will undoubtedly continue to help fisheries
professionals make sound and informed decisions about the management and conservation of
fish and fisheries (Fisher, 2010).

Many studies (Eastwood et al., 2007; Murenu et al., 2010; Witt and Godley, 2007)
have highlighted the benefits of applying VMS data, both in terms of vessel coverage and
time-frequency reporting, which allows for high-resolution spatial estimations of fishing
efforts. However, VMS are unable to distinguish between types of activities. Despite this,
some researchers have developed pattern algorithms to describe the movements of the fleets
based on specific fishing gear used (Russo et al., 2011). Others have tried to link logbook and
VMS data to more accurately identify fishing efforts and fishing gear used (Bastardie et al.,
2010). The lack of VMS or GPS data, however, can make this mapping task difficult and lead
to reliance on information based on catch-books, logbooks, or casual surveillance, which could
potentially distort the reporting (Bastardie et al., 2010; Lewison et al., 2004).

The narrowness of the Basque continental shelf makes it particularly prone to strong
conflicts about the spatial distribution of marine uses. New potential marine uses such as
renewable energy and aquaculture are envisaged in the near future along the coast of the Bay
of Biscay, Basque Country (GV, 2007, 2011). These potentialities have aroused interest in
more accurate characterization of the spatial distribution of the artisanal fisheries in the area,

3
which is needed to determine possible conflicts between existing artisanal fishing activities
and the new activities.

Despite this interest, no detailed efforts to map the catch targets of the fishing vessels
operating in Basque Country waters has been undertaken to date. Some landings reports are
available, as are some recent fisheries mappings carried out by the Spanish Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Environment (2012). These mappings are at an aggregated spatial scale
of ICES rectangle (1º longitude by ½º latitude) and a scale of 5 by 5 nautical miles (nm) (5.4
km2), respectively, both of which are considered too broad to characterize the smaller
movement radii of artisanal fisheries.

In this context, our aim was to provide an accurate portrayal of annual artisanal fishing
activities in the Basque Country, including their spatial extent and patchiness (i) per métier
unit, (ii) per commercially relevant species biomass, and (iii) per trophic level. This
information may ultimately be used to inform MSP decision-makers.

2. Material and Methods

2.1 Study area characteristics and artisanal fishing definition

The study area covers the Spanish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) waters, offshore of
the Basque Country (Bay of Biscay), and includes 10,816 km2 of coastal waters (Fig. 1). With
respect to fish landings, Hondarribia, Pasaia, Getaria, Ondarroa, and Bermeo are the most
important of the 11 ports along the 150 km of the Basque coast. European legislation that
requires an assessment of the human pressures within the study area includes (i) the above-
mentioned MSFD, which applies to an area that extends from an established baseline (from
which the extent of territorial waters is measured) to the 200 nm limit of the EEZ, and (ii) the
Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC), which applies from the coastline to 1 nm
offshore the baseline. For management purposes of this latter directive, four coastal water
bodies were identified in the Basque Country where human pressures should be quantified:
Cantabria-Matxitxako, Matxitxako-Getaria, Getaria-Higer, and Mompás-Pasaia (Borja et al.,
2006) (Fig. 1).

Despite the importance of artisanal fisheries worldwide, there is no universally

accepted definition; the concept remains ambiguous and variable depending on the
geographical context. In practice, terms such as “artisanal”, “small‐scale” or “traditional”
fisheries are used indistinctly in opposition to industrial or semi‐industrial fisheries. Likewise,
no consensus exists for the definition of an artisanal fleet (Desarrollo Sostenible de las
Pesquerías Artesanales del Arco Atlántico [PRESPO], 2012). Because this study focuses on
4
the artisanal fishing fleet operating in the Basque Country, we adopted the definition of
artisanal fleet developed for the PRESPO project (Murillas et al., 2012), which considers all
local traditional craft that conduct short fishing trips to coastal fishing grounds as artisanal. In
the Basque Country, this fleet consists of 129 vessels, and includes small (5–6 m length) and
large (up to 28.5 m length) boats that employ an average of 3.6 ± 2.2 persons per vessel.

2.2 Analysis grid

To support the characterization of the total fishing pressure (TFP) and analysis of the
data, we created a grid with a 1 km2 resolution analysis unit, which was considered appropriate
and a good compromise between the large spatial scale of the EEZ study area and the
precision and accuracy needed for the fine resolution of fishing positions for most artisanal
fishing fleet events (Fig. 1). Additional spatial result analyses were carried out at specific
boundaries: the four coastal water bodies targeted for quantification, a zone extending up to 12
nm beyond the coastal water bodies (territorial waters), and for waters between 12–24 nm
(contiguous zone) from the coast line (Fig. 1).

2.3 Fishing activity database and quality checkup

For the characterization of the spatial FP of the artisanal fishing vessels operating at
the Basque Country, no VMS data were available for vessels greater than 12 m in length and
vessels less than 12 m in length are not required to bring VMS systems or any other positional
devices on-board. Consequently, positional information was obtained from detailed
interviews, questionnaires, and other non-official logbooks used in conjunction for PRESPO
(PRESPO, 2012).

The questionnaires gathered information from each vessel, per tide, about biomass
caught, fishing position, gear used, number of nets/hooks/traps/etc. used, fishing depth,
departure/arrival port, and catch sale price. We revised, refined, digitalized, and entered the
data in a database on artisanal fisheries that serves as the basis for a sustainable information
gathering system (beyond the life of the PRESPO project). For this study, we analyzed a total
of 10,185 fishing trip events, occurring between 2009 and 2010 and departing from all the
ports of the study area.

We divided the artisanal fishing fleet into métier units in accordance with their
definition in the Data Collection Framework1 and ICES (2003). A total of nine métiers were
identified for the Basque Country artisanal fishing fleet: four hook métiers (hand and pole

1
Data Collection Framework (EC) No. 665/2008 of 14th of July, 2008
5
lines; trolling, and longlines); two pots and traps métiers (targeting cephalopods or
crustaceans); and three net métiers (gillnets and trammel nets). No gillnets with mesh sizes
between 99–280 mm are being used in the study area and we did not include trolling data in
the analyses, as trolling is mostly carried out beyond the limits of the study area. The defined
fishing métier units, the number of fishing trip events per year, and the characteristics of the
nets, hooks, or traps on the vessels are summarized in Table 1.

Vessels with no clear stated métier unit or fishing trip position (less than 0.5% of the
total analyzed data) were removed from subsequent analyses; when information on the number
of hooks or number of nets was not available, we used the average value obtained from other
vessels.

2.4 Spatial Representation of Fishing Activity

For hauls with only one recorded position, we used a circle buffer centered on the
known location and estimated the fishing area according to the gear used (number of nets,
hooks, or trap characteristics) in combination with the State legislation rules (see Table 1),
rather than simply using a track-line polygon. For example, by knowing the position of a
fishing trip using pots and traps, combined with the number of pots and traps used and the
knowledge that, legally, no more than 350 pots and traps can be used to cover a maximum of
3000 m, we were able to convert the fishing point data into footprint swept areas.

By spatially joining the grid-cell table to the FP data, we created a new database table
comprising the spatial overlay of the grid with the polygon’s fishing area. This enabled us to
quantify FP data by grid cell to determine the amount of effort per cell over time and to
generate an indicative footprint of the FP at the study area.

2.5 TFP Calculation

Within a GIS framework, we filtered the position data and converted them into FP
measures. To obtain a final TFP value per grid cell, we did not dissolve track boundaries, but
retained all records of overlapping tracks. For each cell, we calculated the aggregate TFP for
all portions of the estimated swept-area polygons that lie within that cell and obtained the
determination of cumulative FP. We calculated TFP per métier and per year as the total area
covered by the métier multiplied by the sampling effort. The sampling effort involved the
number of fishing days and the number of fishing tides per fishing trip event. The spatial unit
surface area represented the unit at which the TFP would be calculated (in this case, equaling
the grid cell surface area of 1 km2) and the Grid Cell_ID indicated a unique identifier number
for each of the grid cells.
6
 We calculated TFP per métier and per year as the total area covered by the métier
multiplied by the sampling effort (i.e. the number of fishing days and the number of tides per
fishing trip event). The estimated FP for each spatial unit (grid cell) was obtained as follows:

1º) TFPMétier per year = (Area covered by the gear (km2) x number of fishing days x number of
tides) / spatial unit surface area

2º) Spatially join between TFPMétier per year and Grid Cell_ID

3º) SumTFPMétier per year = Σ per Grid Cell_ID (TFPMétier per year)

4º) AvgTFPper year = Σ (SumTFPMétier per year / spatial unit surface area) / number of Métiersyear

5º) AvgTFPAll = Σ ((AvgTFPyear1 / spatial unit surface area) + (AvgTFPyear2 / spatial unit
surface area)) / number of years

Where the spatial unit surface area represents the unit at which the TFP is calculated
(in this case, the grid cell surface area of 1 km2) and the Grid Cell_ID indicates a unique
identifier number of for each of the grid cells. Fig. 2 explains these steps for calculating the
TFP value using a visual example.

To make data more visually clear, the SumTFPMétier per year, AvgTFPper year and AvgTFPAll were
qualitatively grouped into five sub-equal classes according to their maximum TFP value per
métier per year. According to this grouping, a TFP of 0–1 was Very Low and a TFP of 4–5
was Very High.

Following Stelzenmüller et al. (2008), we used Coefficient of Variation (CV)

measurements to examine the level of consistency of the FP at the various boundaries over
time (CV = SDAvgTFPBoundary/ AvgTFPBoundary  100%). In accordance with Stelzenmúller et
al. (2008), a low CV (<50%) reflects a high level of consistency of FP within a boundary over
time; a CV of 100% characterizes areas with fluctuation around the mean FP; and a CV
>150% defines areas where the FP was most inconsistent over time.

We performed two-sample comparison analyses (a parametric T-test and a non-

parametric Mann-Whitney [Wilcoxon] test) using the statistical package Statgraphics Plus 5.1,
to check possible effort values or spatial differences between years TFP.

3. Results

3.1 TFP

7
 We calculated TFP per métier unit and year and aggregated the results over the two-
year period (2009–2010) (Fig. 3a-f). Overall, results revealed the spatial preferences of certain
métiers, such as the use of set gillnets (<99 mm mesh size) in the Cantabria-Matxitxako and
Matxitxako-Getaria water bodies, or the use of pots and traps in waters up to the 12 nm mark.
Coastal water bodies experienced different intensities of FP depending on their spatial
location, with water bodies nearest the coastline, especially the most westerly parts, being
more intensely fished.

The analysis of each of the métiers with respect to hand and pole lines revealed very
low to low TFP within the study area for both years, with a slight increase in pressure between
the 100–200 m depth isobaths (Fig. 3a). The Getaria-Higer water body showed the highest FP
for hand and pole lines in 2010, despite still having a low TFP (Fig. 4a). This métier exhibited
low FP consistency over time with CV > 60% for most of the boundaries (Table 2).

TFP for pots and traps were mostly very low to almost null at near coastal areas (Fig.
3b), increasing to high FP near the 12 nm area (Fig. 4b). The western and central water bodies
(Cantabria-Matxitxako and Matxitxako-Getaria) presented the highest aggregated covered area
by this type of métier (almost 10% and 15% coverage, respectively) (Table 2). FP spatial
patterns varied by year, with patches of higher FP that remained centred at the same locations.
Essentially FP hotspots were seen at the most westerly waters around the 200 and 1,000 m
depth isobaths. This métier also showed low FP consistency over time with CV > 50% (Table
2).

The FP for set gillnets (<99 mm mesh size) ranged from very low to almost very high
at near coastal areas (Fig. 3c), with very low FP at the Mompás-Pasaia water body in 2010 in
waters up to the 12 nm mark and in waters from 12–24 nm offshore. Low FP occurred at
Getaria-Higer while moderate to high FP was found at the Cantabria-Matxitxako and
Matxitxako-Getaria water bodies for 2010. Very high FP occurred at the Mompás-Pasaia
water body in 2009 (Fig. 4c). This métier’s coverage was >50% at waters up to the 12 nm
mark and decreased to less than 13% at waters between 12–24 nm). This métier showed high
FP consistency over time, especially at the Cantabria-Matxitxako and Mompás-Pasaia
boundaries, with CV < 50% (Table 2).

We observed no FP by set gillnets (mesh sizes >280 mm) for either the near coastal
areas or for waters up to100 m depth (Fig. 3d). Furthermore, the area covered by this métier in
waters up to the 12 nm mark and between 12–24 nm did not exceed 40% (Table 2). The
pressure increased slightly moving offshore towards the 12 nm mark (Fig. 4d). However, we
observed similar FP hotspots to those encountered for pots and traps for this métier for both
8
years in waters around the 1,000 m depth isobath and in those close to the Spanish EEZ
boundary. We found slight levels of FP inconsistency over time for this métier with CV > 57%
(Table 2).

Vessels using set longlines (< 1,000 hooks) showed very low FP at all areas except for
some FP hotspots (noted both years) in the most westerly waters between 200 and 1,000 m
depth isobaths and offshore in the Cantabria-Matxitxako water body (Fig. 3e). We found
moderate FP in waters between 12–24 nm in 2009 (Fig. 4e) and high FP inconsistencies over
time in all areas with CV >100% (Table 2).

Longlines (boat lengths < 24 m) exhibited no FP in the water bodies, but this FP
slightly increases in waters around the 100 m depth (Fig. 3f). We found moderate FP moving
offshore towards waters between 12-24 nm (Fig. 4f), even though this métier’s fishing
coverage did not reach 7%. We observed high FP inconsistency over time with CV values
ranging between 51–123% (Table 2).

With respect to the average of the aggregated FP across all métiers (Fig. 5), a general
homogeneous distribution of very low FP can be observed (Fig. 4g), with more than 80% of
the area up to the 12 nm mark being subject of some kind of métier FP. The CV of the
TFPMétier per year highlighted locations with low temporal consistency of FP (CV >50%) most of
the time, with some locations and métiers reaching a CV of 200% (i.e. 2009 hand and pole
lines in waters between 12–24 nm). Some water bodies, however, such as the Mompás-Pasaia
boundary, showed some level of consistency in FP throughout time, with CV <26% (Table 2).

The Wilcoxon test results for comparing inter-annual TFP per métier revealed
significant differences (p<0.0001) for all métiers except for set gillnets < 99 mm (p = 0.004)
and hand and pole lines (p = 0.99). We used a t-test to identify possible spatial differences in
inter-annual TFP and observed significant differences (p <0.0001) between the spatial
occurrence of the TFP for set gillnets (<99 and >280 mm) and set longlines (<1,000 hooks).
No significant TFP spatial differences were found for the hand and pole lines, pots and traps,
and set longlines (<24 m LOA) métiers.

3.2 TFP per Commercially Relevant Species

Almost all waters in the Basque Country up to the 24 nm mark are subject to some
kind of artisanal FP for the most common commercially exploited marine species (Fig. 6). Due
to their biomass or economic profitability, these species include: Scomber scombrus
(mackerel); Thunnus alalunga (albacore); Merluccius merluccius (European hake); Conger
conger (conger); Mullus surmuletus (red mullet); Lophius piscatorius and Lophius budegassa
9
(anglerfish); Solea vulgaris and Pegusa lascaris (sole and sand sole); Dicentrarchus labrax
(bass); and Scorpaenidae (scorpion fishes). The spatial FP results for these species are
analyzed below. Long-finned tuna, typically caught using trolling fishing gear, was not
analyzed in our study.

The highest biomass catches of mackerel occurred in the waters off Cape Matxitxako
(Fig. 6a), while the highest biomass catches of hake were taken in the waters off Cape
Matxitxako and Cape Jaizkibel (Fig. 6b). Conger was fished either from waters off Cape
Matxitxako, Cape San Antón, or Cape Jaizkibel, or from the upper part of the canyon at Cap
Bréton (Fig. 6c). The maximum biomass catches of red mullet occurred all along the coastal
waters up to 100 m depth, as well as in waters off Cape Matxitxako (Fig. 6d). The highest
biomass catches of sole were taken in the Matxitxako-Getaria water body or in waters off
Cape Matxitxako, Cape San Antón, or Cape Jaizkibel (Fig. 6f). Bass was fished primarily in
the Cantabria-Matxitxako water body or off Cape San Antón and Cape Jaizkibel (Fig. 6g) and
scorpionfish were caught mostly in the Matxitxako-Getaria, Getaria-Higer, and Mompás-
Pasaia water bodies (Fig. 6h). The highest biomass catches of the analyzed species were
anglerfish (Fig. 6), harvested mostly along the canyon of Cap Bréton and offshore to the 24
nm mark (Fig. 6e).

The economic revenues obtained from the sales of these eight species totaled €116.63
± 7.67 million for the aggregated catches of 2009 and 2010. The highest revenues were
obtained from anglerfishes, European hake, red mullet, and sole, and the highest average price
per kg of biomass was obtained for sole and bass (€14.79 ± 0.46 € and €13.85 ± 0.09,
respectively). These two species were the most profitable for artisanal fisheries (highest
revenue/biomass rate) (Fig. 6).

3.3 TFP per Trophic Level

Information on the species caught and their trophic level per grid cell (averaged value
when more than two values occur in the same cell) can indicate which trophic level is the
mostly caught in specific areas (Fig. 7). In coastal areas, the largest catches were for trophic
level species, while higher trophic level species were caught in offshore areas at 100 m depth
and from areas near upper part of the Cap Bréton canyon (Fig. 7). Typically, lower trophic
level species included mullet, pilchard, and crustaceans (squid, prawn, spider cabs), while
higher trophic level species included hake, tuna, and anglerfish.

4. Discussion

10
 All Basque Country waters up to 1,000 m deep are subject to artisanal fisheries FP.
However, the location preferences of certain métiers, based on their gear characteristics or
their targeted species, allows fisheries preferences to be spatially allocated. Fig. 8 summarizes
the spatial fishing preferences per métier together with the TFP values at each of the
boundaries.

We discovered FP hotspots (consistent over the two-year period) at the most westerly
(traditional) fishing grounds of Laguanak, Sigarre, Martxatxu, Kabarga, Okarantza, Arkakala,
and Apo, as well as at the Spanish EEZ boundary, Garro, Gaztelu and Erreka (shown in bold
at Fig. 8). The preference of artisanal fisheries for these areas identify them as important
socio-economic fishing locations that should be noted for fisheries management decisions.

Except for these localized hotspots, TFP was generally inconsistent during the year
(high CV). The significant temporal and spatial differences found between the TFP of the
various metiers over the two-year study period indicates that artisanal FP is inconsistent for
most of the métiers. However, we found no spatial differences for hand and pole lines, pots
and traps, and set longlines (<24 m LOA) between 2009 and 2010 and the temporal
differences in FP for hand and pole lines were insignificant, allowing us to conclude that the
FP for this métier is more consistent than for the remaining métiers.

A possible reason for the general spatial-temporal inconsistency of FP could include

positional misreporting based on the questionnaires and reports (Bastardie et al., 2010); this
highlights the need to interpret the obtained data with caution. Also, the overall spatial
coverage of each fishing trip event was calculated by buffering from positional data, taking
into account the characteristics of the gear or legislation limits. Using this buffering approach
to convert positional data into fishing footprints could lead to spatial extent errors in FP
estimation, which should also be taken into account when reviewing the results.

To improve FP data accuracy, we suggest more intense monitoring of the artisanal

fishing fleets, especially those nearest the coastline. This would provide more accurate spatial
information for the efficient management of fisheries in the Basque Country waters. The
availability and public disposition of an accurate, continuous, and near-real time VMS,
initially conceived to assist in the monitoring and control of fisheries activities of vessels >12
m length, would facilitate this spatial characterization (Chang, 2011). However, for vessels
<12 m long, the installation of localization devices such as blue boxes (MSN, 2007), and
further artisanal fleet characterization projects (such as BATEGIN, 2012) could also provide
needed information. Using near real-time position data would also allow the creation of
effective distance buffers (Berry, 2007).
11
 When FP values are combined into a single measure of annual FP, the within-year
seasonality of each component of the fisheries is lost. Shifts in inter-annual FP can result from
changes in target species, catch limit regulations, and/or individual fishing strategies. For
example, fishermen could exploit different species and age classes of the population by using
different fishing grounds in different seasons, depending on fishing opportunities, fish prices,
fishing costs, fishing traditions, and/or regulations in force (Babcock and Pikitch, 2000;
Bastardie et al., 2010; Bellman et al., 2005). This highlights the need to describe patterns and
drivers in resource exploitation for spatially and seasonally explicit fleet-based management
(Nielsen and Limborg, 2009).

Despite these constraints, a comparison of our results with those acquired by the
Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment (2012) indicate similarities,
especially for vessels using particular gear (e.g., pots and traps). However, the 1 x 1 km
resolution used in our study allowed the spatial highlighting of areas that that did not appear
on the 5 x 5 nm grid of the Ministry’s study, and allowed us to capture with higher precision
the physical boundaries which constrain the activity of certain métiers (e.g., hand and pole
lines efforts between 100–200 m isobaths).

Our FP maps show only where artisanal FP occurs in the study area; they do not
categorize the intensity or impact on marine ecosystem components and environments.
Knowing the exact location of fisheries and determining their pressure would allow us to
highlight areas of high pressures, where cumulative impacts might occur. These data could be
used for assessing the environmental status within the MSFD for qualitative descriptors such
as fish exploitation and food webs (Piet et al., 2010; Rogers et al., 2010). Hence, in contrast to
previous works in the study area that relied on non-spatial proxies of FP, these maps provide
an important first localizing step for the measurement of the cumulative impacts of human
activities on the marine environment in the Basque Country and can increase the accuracy of
the MSFD status assessment performed in the area (Borja et al., 2011).

A spatial database of FP will make it possible to highlight conflicts that may arise
between marine uses and to seek solutions under the MSP framework (Ardron et al., 2008;
Stelzenmüller et al., 2010a). Fisheries management using GIS and spatial analysis techniques
will provide better information for decision-makers and will allow movement towards a more
information-based and effective management of our oceans that support the design and
development of marine management plans and regional plans (e.g., German EEZ, [Fock,
2008] and UK [Stelzenmüller et al., 2010a]).

12
 Mapping TFP by commercially relevant allows us to determine what areas are being
fished for which species. For example, this study identified important artisanal fisheries (Fig.
8) such as Martxatxu (for hake, mackerel, and conger), Laguanak and Garro (for anglerfish),
and Gaztelu and Erreka (for conger and anglerfish). Other locations offshore of the main
fishing grounds also appear relevant in terms of species such as anglerfish. Knowledge of
locations rich in important economic species will help managers identify potentially
vulnerable areas where impacts could lead to socio-economic repercussions. Additionally, the
spatial assessment of footprints and intensities of these human activities along with ecological
and landscape responses, can assist in the determination of spatial vulnerabilities and
sensitivities and allow for spatial management scenarios within the MSP (Stelzenmüller et al.,
2010a).

Trophic level catch information shows that the Basque artisanal fisheries rely on
species from low trophic levels fished in coastal areas and species from high trophic levels in
waters farther offshore. Spatial mapping of the FP over the trophic level enables us to link the
ecological impact of fisheries with the dynamics of trophic levels and trophic webs and allows
us to see potential shifts in fishing related food webs (Pauly et al., 1998). In addition, this
information can be used within the MSFD assessment, as indicative of the food web descriptor
(Rogers et al., 2010).

As stated by the FAO (2003), the purpose of an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries

management is to restore and maintain well-functioning ecosystems that are able to supply
various ecosystem services to humans, including sustainable fishing, biodiversity, and
functioning food webs. The environmental status assessment within the MSFD requires spatial
information on different qualitative descriptors that are associated with fisheries (i.e.,
biodiversity, exploited fish, food-webs, seafloor integrity) to obtain a better integrated
assessment (Borja et al., 2011).

Information obtained through the TFP integration across métiers is an important first
step towards assessing the cumulative pressures of fishing, and determining the foundations
for a better ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in Basque Country waters. Our
characterization of the FP, especially for the near-coastal areas, allows us to better determine
the potential ecological effects that might occur in these coastal zones, which are already
subject to many other environmental pressures because of their proximity to human
settlements (Dunn et al., 2010). Finally, this information will be useful in designing
sustainability scenarios, in terms of maximum sustainable yield for fisheries, to achieve the
policy goals from European maritime policies (Fock et al., 2011).

13
5. Conclusions

The mapping of artisanal TFP by métier allows us to spatially define the important
areas used for artisanal fisheries and, thus, to see their social/human dimension. Additionally,
mapping the TFP by commercially relevant species provides a spatial view of the economic
dimension of artisanal fisheries, and mapping the artisanal FP by trophic level shows the
ecological dimension of those fisheries. Understanding the interactions between these
parameters will allow us to undertake a more ecosystem-based approach to fisheries
management and will suggest solutions for potential marine use conflicts and decision-making
within a MSP framework.

Acknowledgements

This work has been carried out under the MESMA-Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially
Managed Areas FP7 Project (grant number: 226661; www.mesma.org) and under BATEGIN.
Special thanks go to Vanessa Stelzenmüller for her clarifications on the TFP methodology at
the very early stages of this work as well as to two anonymous referees who helped to improve
an earlier version of the manuscript. This is contribution number XXX from the Marine
Research Division (AZTI-Tecnalia).

References

Ardron, J., Gjerde, K., Pullen, S., Tilot, V., 2008. Marine spatial planning in the high seas.
Mar. Policy 32, 832-839.
Babcock, E.A., Pikitch, E.K., 2000. A dynamic programming model of fishing strategy choice
in a multispecies trawl fishery with trip limits. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57, 357-370.
Bastardie, F., Nielsen, J.R., Ulrich, C., Egekvist, J., Degel, H., 2010. Detailed mapping of
fishing effort and landings by coupling fishing logbooks with satellite-recorded vessel
geo-location. Fish. Res. 106(1), 41-53.
BATEGIN, 2012. BAses TEcnicas para el aseGuramiento de la sostenIbilidad de la pesca
costera de País Vasco en base a una planificación Espacial mariNa. EFF 2012-2013.
Bellman, M.A., Heppell, S.A., Goldfinger, C., 2005. Evaluation of a US west coast groundfish
habitat conservation regulation via analysis of spatial and temporal patterns of trawl
fishing effort. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 62, 2886-2900.
Berry, J.K., 2007. Topic 13: Creating Variable-Width Buffers. In: Berry, J.K.s (Ed.), Beyond
Mapping III: Procedures and Applications in GIS Modeling. Published by Berry &
Associates. Spatial Information Systems, Inc, online book. Available at:
www.innovativegis.com/basis/MapAnalysis/.

14
Borja, A., Galparsoro, I., Irigoien, X., Iriondo, A., Menchaca, I., Muxika, I., Pascual, M.,
Quincoces, I., Revilla, M., Rodríguez, J.G., Santurtún, M., Solaun, O., Uriarte, A.,
Valencia, V., Zorita, I., 2011. Implementation of the European Marine Strategy
Framework Directive: A methodological approach for the assessment of environmental
status, from the Basque Country (Bay of Biscay). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 889-904.
Borja, A., Galparsoro, I., Solaun, O., Muxika, I., Tello, E.M., Uriarte, A., Valencia, V., 2006.
The European Water Framework Directive and the DPSIR, a methodological approach
to assess the risk of failing to achieve good ecological status. Estuar. Coast. and Shelf
S. 66, 84-96.
Chang, S.-K., 2011. Application of a vessel monitoring system to advance sustainable fisheries
management & benefits received in Taiwan. Mar. Policy 35(2), 116-121.
DEFRA, 2005. Charting Progress: an Integrated Assessment of the State of the Seas.
Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK, p. 120.
Desarrollo Sostenible de las Pesquerías Artesanales del Arco Atlántico (PRESPO), 2012.
Report: Use of a numerical descriptors approach for the definition and segmentation of
European artisanal fishing fleets, p. 9. Available at:
http://www.cripsul.ipimar.pt/PRESPO/index.php
Dunn, D.C., Stewart, K., Bjorkland, R.H., Haughton, M., Singh-Renton, S., Lewison, R.,
Thorne, L., Halpin, P.N., 2010. A regional analysis of coastal and domestic fishing
effort in the wider Caribbean. Fish. Res. 102, 60-68.
Eastwood, P.D., Mills, C.M., Aldridge, J.N., Houghton, C.A., Rogers, S.I., 2007. Human
activities in UK offshore waters: and assessment of direct, physical pressure on the
seabed. Ices J. Mar. Sci. 64, 453-463.
EC, 2008. Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 17 June 2008
establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental
policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive).
EC, 2009. Green Paper. Reform of the Common Fishery Policy. COM (2009), p. 28. Available
at: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2009:0163:FIN:EN:PDF
Ehler, C., Douvere, F., 2009. Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-step approach toward
ecosystem-based management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and
Man and the Biosphere Programme. IOC Manual and Guides No. 53, ICAM Dossier
No. 6. . UNESCO, Paris, p. 99. Available at:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001865/186559e.pdf
EU, 2011. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 of 8 April 2011 laying
down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009
15
 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the
Common Fisheries Policy. p. 153. Available at: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:112:0001:0153:EN:PDF
FAO, 2003. Fisheries Management, 2. The ecosystem approach to fisheries. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, p. 121. Available at:
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y4470e/y4470e00.pdf.
Fisher, W., 2007. Recent trends in fisheries geographic information systems. In: Nishida, T.,
Kailola, P.J., Canton, A.E.s (Eds.), GIS/Spatial Analyses in Fishery and Aquatic
Sciences (Vol.3). Fishery-Aquatic GIS Research Group, Kawagoe, Saitama, Japan, pp.
3-26.
Fisher, W., 2010. GIS and spatial analyses in fisheries: challenges, opportunities and the
future. In: Nishida, T., Canton, A.E.s (Eds.), GIS/Spatial Analyses in Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences (Vol.4). International Fishery GIS Society, Saitama, Japan, p. 579.
ISBN: 4-9902377-2-2.
Fisher, W.L., Rahel, F.J. (Eds.), 2004. Geographic Information Systems in Fisheries.
American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, p. 275.
Fock, H., 2008. Fisheries in the context of marine spatial planning: defining principal areas for
fisheries in the German EEZ. Mar. Policy 32, 728-739.
Fock, H., 2011. Integrating Multiple Pressures at Different Spatial and Temporal Scales: A
Concept for Relative Ecological Risk Assessment in the European Marine
Environment. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 17, 187-211.
Fock, H., Kloppmann, M., Stelzenmüller, V., 2011. Linking marine fisheries to environmental
objectives: a case study on seafloor integrity under European maritime policies.
Environ. Sci. Policy 14, 289-300.
GV, 2007. Gobierno Vasco. Fisheries Strategic Plan for the Basque Country 2009-2013, p. 86.
Available at: www.nasdap.ejgv.euskadi.net/r50-
3812/es/contenidos/plan_programa_proyecto/plan_pesca0813/es_agripes/adjuntos/Plan
%20Estrat%C3%A9gico%202009-2013.pdf
GV, 2011. Gobierno Vasco. Energy Strategy for the Basque Country 2020, p. 200. Available
at: www.eseficiencia.es/eseficiencia%5Cbiblioteca%5C201112-estrategia-energetica-
euskadi.pdf.
Halpern, B.S., Diamond, J., Gaines, S., Gelcich, S., Gleason, M., Jennings, S., Lester, S.,
Mace, A., McCook, L., McLeod, K., Napoli, N., Rawson, K., Rice, J., Rosenberg, A.,
Ruckelshaus, M., Saier, B., Sandifer, P., Scholz, A., Zivian, A., 2012. Near-term
priorities for the science, policy and practice of Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning
(CMSP). Mar. Policy 36, 198-205.
16
Halpern, B.S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K.A., Kappel, C.V., Micheli, F., D´Agrosa, C., Bruno,
J.F., Casey, K.S., Ebert, C., Fox, H.E., Frujita, R., Heinemann, D., Lenihan, H.S.,
Madin, E.M.P., Perry, M.T., Selig, E.R., Spalding, M., Steneck, R., Watson, R., 2008.
A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems. Science 319, 948-952.
ICES, 2003. Report of the Study Group for the Development of Fishery-based Forecast. ICES
CM2003/ACFM, 08 Ref. D., p. 39. Available at:
http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2003/SGDFF/SGDFF03.pdf.
ICES, 2010. Report of the Joint ICES-STECF Workshop on methods for merging métiers for
fishery based sampling (WKMERGE), 19-22 January 2010, Copenhagen, Denmark.
ICES CM 2010/ACOM: 40, p. 100. Available at:
http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2010/WKMERGE/WKMERGE2010.pdf.
Lewison, R.L., Crowder, L.B., Read, A.J., Freeman, S.A., 2004. Understanding impacts of
fisheries bycatch on marine megafauna. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 598-604.
Meaden, G.J., Do Chi, T., 1996. Geographical information systems: applications to marine
fisheries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Fisheries
Technical Paper 356, Rome, Italy, p. 335.
MSN - Merchant Shipping Notice 1813, 2007. The Fishing Vessels Code of Practice for the
Safety of Small Fishing Vessels, p. 26. Available at:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/msn_1813_amended_5-4.pdf.
Murenu, M., Muntoni, M., Cau, A., 2010. Spatial characterization of fishing areas and fleet
dynamics in the Central Mediterranean: GIS application to test VMS usefulness. In:
Nishida, T., Canton, A.E.s (Eds.), GIS/Spatial Analyses in Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences (Vol.4), p. 579.
Murillas, A., Mugerza, E., Arregi, L., Alzorriz, N., Artetxe, I., 2012. PRESPO-Desarrollo
sostenible de las pesquerías artesanales del País Vasco. Colección Itsaso. Servicio
Central de Publicaciones del Gobierno Vasco, Vitoria, Spain.
Nielsen, J.R., Limborg, M., 2009. Managing fleets and fisheries rather than single stocks-
conceptual change in European fisheries management advice. World Fish 58(1), 8-9.
Nishida, T., Kailola, P.J., Hollingworth, C.E. (Eds.), 2001. Proceedings of the First
International Symposium on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in Fishery
Science. Fishery GIS Research Group, Saitama, Japan, p. 486.
Nishida, T., Kailola, P.J., Hollingworth, C.E. (Eds.), 2004. GIS/Spatial Analyses in Fishery
and Aquatic Sciences (Vol.2). Fishery-Aquatic GIS Research Group, Saitama, Japan,
p. 735.
Nishida, T., Kailola, P.J., Hollingworth, C.E. (Eds.), 2007. GIS/Spatial Analyses in Fishery
and Aquatic Sciences (Vol.3). Fishery-Aquatic GIS Research Group, Saitama, Japan,
17
 p. 494.
NOAA, 2010. A review and summary of human use mapping in the marine and coastal zone.
NOAA Coastal Services Center, Charleston, SC, p. 48. Available at:
http://www.csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/_/pdf/human-use-mapping-report.pdf.
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R., Torres, F.J., 1998. Fishing Down Marine
Food Webs. Science, New Series 279(5352), 860-863.
Piet, G.J., Albella, A.J., Aro, E., Farrugio, H., Lleonart, J., Lordan, C., Mesnil, B., Petrakis, G.,
Pusch, C., Radu, G., Ratz, H.J., 2010. Marine Strategy Framework Directive - Task
Group 3 Report Commercially exploited fish and shellfish. EUR 24316 EN Joint
Research Centre, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, p. 82.
PRESPO (Desarrollo Sostenible de las Pesquerías Artesanales del Arco Atlántico), 2012.
Interreg, Nº 2008-1/038.
Reed, S.E., Boggs, J.L., Mann, J.P., 2012. A GIS tool for modeling anthropogenic noise
propagation in natural ecosystems. Environ. Modell. Softw. 37, 1-5.
Reeves, S.A., Marchal, P., Mardle, S., Pascoe, S., Prellezo, R., Thébaud, O., Travers, M.,
2008. From fish to fisheries: the changing focus on management advice. In: Payne, X.,
Cotter, A., Potter, J.s (Eds.), Advances in Fisheries Science. 50 Years on from
Beverton and Holt. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 135-154.
Riolo, F., 2006. A geographic information system for fisheries management in American
Samoa. Environ. Modell. Softw. 21, 1025-1041.
Rogers, S., Casini, M., Cury, P., Heath, M., Irigoien, X., Kuosa, H., Scheidat, M., Skov, H.,
Stergiou, K.I., Trenkel, V.M., Wikner, J., Yunev, O., 2010. Marine Strategy
Framework Directive - Task Group 4 Report Food Webs. EUR 24343 EN -. Joint
Research Centre, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, p. 55.
Russo, T., Parisi, A., Cataudella, S., 2011. New insights in interpolating Fishing tracks from
VMS data for different métiers. Fish. Res. 108, 184-194.
Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment, 2012. Estrategia Marina.
Demarcación marina noratlántica. Evaluación inicial. Parte II: análisis de presiones e
impactos. Madrid, pp.163. Available at: www.magrama.gob.es/es/costas/participacion-
publica/em.aspx.
Stelzenmüller, V., Lee, J., Garnacho, E., Rogers, S.I., 2010a. Assessment of a Bayesian Belief
Network-GIS framework as a practical tool to support marine planning. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 60(10), 1743-1754.

18
Stelzenmüller, V., Lee, J., South, A., Rogers, S.I., 2010b. Quantifying cumulative impacts of
human pressures on the environment: a geospatial modelling framework. Mar. Ecol-
Prog. Ser. 398, 19-32.
Stelzenmüller, V., Maynou, F., Bernard, G., Cadiou, G., Camilleri, M., Crec´hriou, R.,
Criquet, G., Dimech, M., Esparza, O., Higgins, R., Lenfant, P., Pérez-Ruzafa, Á. 2008.
Spatial assessment of fishing effort around European marine reserves: Implications for
successful fisheries management. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 56, 2018-2026.
Stewart, K.R., Lewison, R.L., Dunn, D.C., Bjorkland, R.H., Kelez, S., Halpin, P.N., Crowder,
L.B., 2010. Characterizing Fishing Effort and Spatial Extent of Coastal Fisheries.
PLoS ONE 5(12), e14451.
Valavanis, V.D. (Ed.), 2002. Geographic Information Systems in Oceanography and Fisheries.
Taylor and Francis, New York, USA, p. 209.
Valavanis, V.D. (Ed.), 2008. Essential Fish Habitat Mapping in the Mediterranean. Springer-
Verlag, New York, USA, p. 300.
Witt, M.J., Godley, B.J., 2007. A step towards seascape scale conservation: Using vessel
monitoring systems (VMS) to Map Fishing Activity. PLoS ONE 2(10), e1111.
Wright, D.J., Scholz, A.J. (Eds.), 2005. Place Matters: Geospatial Tools for Marine Science,
Conservation and Management in the Pacific Northwest. Oregon State University
Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA, p. 305.

19
Tables
Table 1: Métier types, characteristics, and applied buffers. (LOA = Length overall)

Type of métier unit Nº Fishing Max length of Max length of Max Nº of Applied Buffer (m)
Trips Netting (m) Gear (m) Hooks / Traps

2009

Pots & Traps (Targeting Cephalopods / Crustaceans) 164 Not Applicable 30001 3501 Nº Traps * 3000/350

Set Gillnets (Targeting Demersal Fish <99 mm mesh size) 2917 502,3 45001,2 Not Applicable Nº Netting * Max Length
of Netting

Set Gillnets (Targeting Demersal Fish >280 mm mesh size) 98 502,3 110001,2 Not Applicable Nº Netting * Max Length
of Netting

Hand & Pole Lines 1131 Not Applicable Not Applicable No limit 1

Set Longlines (Targeting Demersal Fish <1000 hooks) 1002 Not Applicable 20001 10001,2 Nº Hooks * 2000/1000

Set Longlines (Targeting Demersal Fish <24 m LOA) 42 Not Applicable 20001 45001,2 Nº Hooks * 2000/4500

2010

Pots & Traps (Targeting Cephalopods / Crustaceans) 202 Not Applicable 30002 3501 Nº Traps * 3000/350

Set Gillnets (Targeting Demersal Fish <99 mm mesh size) 2842 501,2 45001,2 Not Applicable Nº Netting * Max Length
of Netting

Set Gillnets (Targeting Demersal Fish >280 mm mesh size) 30 502,3 110001,2 Not Applicable Nº Netting * Max Length
of Netting

Hand & Pole Lines 657 Not Applicable Not Applicable No limit 1

Set Longlines (Targeting Demersal Fish <1000 hooks) 886 Not Applicable 20001 10001,2 Nº Hooks * 2000/1000

Set Longlines (Targeting Demersal Fish <24 m LOA) 214 Not Applicable 20001 45001,2 Nº Hooks * 2000/4500

1
Decreto 212/2000 de 24 de octubre, por el que se regula el ejercicio de la pesca con artes menores en el litoral de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco

2
Real Decreto 2001 & Orden 2001
 2009 2010 09+10

Boundaries Area Covered CV Area Covered CV Area Covered CV

(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Hand & Pole Lines Cantabria-Matxitxako 2.64 60.00 2.11 62.30 4.22 130.00
Getaria-Higer 0.00 0.00 3.60 142.55 3.60 142.22
Mompás-Pasaia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Matxitxako-Getaria 1.72 150.00 4.74 48.57 7.76 95.45
Up to 12 nm 9.03 233.33 8.35 117.74 13.38 150.98
Up to 24 nm 1.05 228.57 1.20 114.29 2.11 147.73
Pots & Traps Cantabria-Matxitxako 7.39 66.67 6.33 100.00 9.50 114.29
Getaria-Higer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mompás-Pasaia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Matxitxako-Getaria 5.17 70.00 12.50 127.27 14.22 140.00
Up to 12 nm 4.12 127.78 4.99 80.10 7.44 144.64
Up to 24 nm 0.62 0.00 1.16 50.00 1.16 50.00
Set Gillnets <99 mm Cantabria-Matxitxako 98.14 38.46 98.14 48.16 98.14 40.44
Getaria-Higer 96.49 104.65 98.65 116.26 98.65 67.66
Mompás-Pasaia 100.00 28.25 100.00 16.67 100.00 27.13
Matxitxako-Getaria 91.81 88.04 100.00 68.37 100.00 74.63
Up to 12 nm 37.30 120.93 54.96 125.33 59.99 132.81
Up to 24 nm 0.00 0.00 12.89 172.73 12.89 171.43
Set Gillnets >280 mm Cantabria-Matxitxako 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Getaria-Higer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mompás-Pasaia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Matxitxako-Getaria 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Up to 12 nm 10.97 122.22 31.64 71.43 34.41 74.19
Up to 24 nm 38.11 115.52 39.02 57.93 50.82 61.29
Set Longlines <1000 Cantabria-Matxitxako 61.20 100.00 56.46 107.41 71.23 117.65
Getaria-Higer 40.32 115.00 50.40 137.50 66.96 134.09
Mompás-Pasaia 100.00 0.00 66.67 116.00 100.00 112.50
Matxitxako-Getaria 31.03 122.73 68.97 104.55 77.16 105.56
Up to 12 nm 26.92 168.75 29.18 140.68 42.56 175.68
Up to 24 nm 3.63 134.68 2.72 107.41 5.55 160.34
Set Longlines <24 m Cantabria-Matxitxako 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LOA
Getaria-Higer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mompás-Pasaia 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Matxitxako-Getaria 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Up to 12 nm 6.34 51.11 5.82 86.36 11.25 75.00
Up to 24 nm 2.69 60.23 3.59 122.68 5.34 97.14
All Métiers Cantabria-Matxitxako 98.14 38.89 98.14 57.14 98.14 47.73
Getaria-Higer 96.49 107.41 98.65 100.00 98.65 69.70
Mompás-Pasaia 100.00 25.76 100.00 100.00 100.00 30.00
Matxitxako-Getaria 93.97 81.25 100.00 64.10 100.00 69.44
Up to 12 nm 63.31 160.00 82.16 95.65 88.85 100.00
Up to 24 nm 39.96 150.00 49.11 77.27 57.35 76.92

Table 2. Percentage (%) of covered areas and coefficient of variation (CV) for the delimited
boundaries of the main Basque water bodies (Cantabria-Matxitxako; Matxitxako-Getaria;
1 Getaria-Higer and Mompás-Pasaia); waters up to 12 nm and waters up to 24 nm miles. (LOA
2 = Length overall).
3
Figure 1
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 2
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 3a-b_colour
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 3a-b_BW
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 3c-d_colour
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 3c-d_BW
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 3e-f_colour
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 3e-f_BW
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 4
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 5_colour
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 5_BW
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 6
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 7_colour
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 7_BW
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure 8
Click here to download high resolution image
Figure Caption

Figure Captions:

Figure 1. Study area and 1 x 1 km2 grid of the Spanish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
waters offshore from the Basque Country (southeastern Bay of Biscay) showing main
fishing ports, coastal water bodies, and the 12 and 24 nm boundaries.

Figure 2. Flowchart for calculating the Total Fishing Pressure (TFP) value.

Figure 3. Total fishing pressure (TFP) maps (ranging from Very Low = 1 to Very High
= 5) per métier unit: (a) = Hand and pole lines; (b) = Pots and traps; (c) = Set Gillnets
<99 mm mesh size (d) = Set Gillnets >280 mm mesh size; (e) = Set Longlines < 1,000
hooks; (f) = Set Longlines <24 m length overall (LOA) for years 2009, 2010 and the
aggregate between 2009 and 2010.

Figure 4. Average and standard deviation TFP per métier: (a) = Hand and pole lines; (b)
= Pots and traps; (c) = Set Gillnets <99 mm mesh size; (d) = Set Gillnets >280 mm
mesh size; (e) = Set Longlines < 1,000 hooks; (f) = Set Longlines <24 m length overall
(LOA); (g) = All métiers—per year for the delimited boundaries of the main Basque
water bodies (Cantabria-Matxitxako; Matxitxako-Getaria; Getaria-Higer and Mompás-
Pasaia); waters up to 12 nm and waters up to 24 nm (VH = Very High; H = High; M =
Moderate; L = Low; VL = Very Low).

Figure 5. Average TFP (AvgTFP) maps (ranging from Very low = 1 to Very High = 5)
of all métiers for 2009, 2010 and the sum of 2009 and 2010.

Figure 6. Total caught biomass, summed for 2009 and 2010; average price per kg and
total economic revenues per commercially relevant species: (a) Mackerel; (b) European
Hake; (c) Conger; (d) Red Mullet; (e) Anglerfish; (f) Sole and Sand Sole; (g) Bass; and
(h) Scorpion fish.

Figure 7. Average trophic guild catch per 1 x 1 km grid cell of all métiers for years 2009
and 2010 in the Spanish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) waters offshore of the Basque
Country.

Figure 8. Summary figure: TFP, main métiers used (the most important are bolded), and
main artisanal fishing grounds (offshore 100 m depth) (the most important are bolded)
within the Basque Country water bodies (Cantabria-Matxitxako; Matxitxako-Getaria;
Getaria-Higer and Mompás-Pasaia); waters up to 12 nm and up to 24 nm.