Increase visual detectability of fishing gear for mammals

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    55%
  • Certainty
    45%
  • Harms
    5%

Study locations

Key messages

  • Two studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of increasing the visual detectability of fishing gear for mammals. One study was in the Gulf of St. Lawrence (Canada) and one was in Cape Cod Bay (USA).

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES)

  • Behaviour change (2 studies): One study in the Gulf of St. Lawrence found that minke whales approached white ropes more slowly and changed their bearing more when approaching black ropes compared to ropes of other colours. One study in Cape Cod Bay found that simulated ropes painted red or orange were detected by North Atlantic right whales at greater distances than green but not black ropes, and more whales collided with green ropes than the other three rope colours.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A study in 2010 of a pelagic area in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada (Kot et al. 2012) reported that white ropes were approached more slowly by minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata than ropes of other colours, and whales changed their bearing more when approaching black ropes. Results are not based on assessments of statistical significance. Minke whales had greater reductions in swimming speed when approaching white ropes (average -1 m/s) than black, yellow, orange, green or blue ropes (combined average -0.5 m/s). Minke whales changed their bearing more when approaching black ropes (average 91°) than white, yellow, orange, green or blue ropes (combined average 55°). In June–August 2010, experimental trials were carried out with white, black, yellow, orange, green and blue polypropylene ropes (1.5 cm diameter) suspended in water 8–14 m deep. During each trial, 5–10 ropes of the same colour were spaced 15 m apart perpendicular to the shore. Ropes were attached to a buoy and moored to the sea floor. Observers in a boat anchored 100 m away recorded the speed and bearing of 7–12 individual whales passing the ropes of each colour.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A study in 2013 at a pelagic site in Cape Cod Bay, USA (Kraus et al. 2014) found that simulated ropes painted red or orange were detected by North Atlantic right whales Eubalaena glacialis at greater distances than ropes painted green but not black, and more whales collided with green ropes than the other three rope colours. Changes in the behaviour of right whales approaching the ropes occurred at greater average distances from red ropes (3.9 m) and orange ropes (4.1 m) than green ropes (1.9 m). The difference was not significant between black ropes (3 m) and the other three rope colours. More whales collided with green ropes (total seven whales) than the other three rope colours (total 2–3 whales), although the difference was not tested for statistical significance.  A row of four simulated vertical ropes (spaced 25 m apart) were placed 75–100 m in front of whales travelling near the water surface. Ropes consisted of 10-foot sections of rigid PVC pipe (1-inch diameter) painted red, orange, green or black and suspended between a weight and a buoy. Whales were observed from a stationary boat. Changes in the behaviour of whales (including respiration, mouth closures, submergence times, and turning angles) within 10 m of the ropes were recorded by video 52 times during nine days in 2013. Distances were measured with a laser range finder.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Berthinussen, A., Smith, R.K. and Sutherland, W.J. (2021) Marine and Freshwater Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Marine and Freshwater Mammal Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marine and Freshwater Mammal Conservation
Marine and Freshwater Mammal Conservation

Marine and Freshwater Mammal Conservation - Published 2021

Marine and Freshwater Mammal Synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust