How will New Zealand fishermen respond to Hookpods—insights from a fisherman.

However, the nature of diving seabirds in the North Pacific is different than in other parts of the world. Tori lines work well in the North Pacific because birds there do not dive as deep as other species. Seabirds in other regions of the world are much more aggressive and dive to greater depths than the bird species with which I am familiar in the North Pacific… hence the need for ‘The Hookpod’.

While the action taken in the 1990’s to reduce seabird bycatch was driven by political/environmental forces – that is, the threat of fishery closure, the Hookpod and other hook shielding devices address those forces as well as an additional economic force affecting fishermen – loss of gear effectiveness, or operational loss. Hooks that catch seabirds lose money.

At first glance, and without testing them myself, I’m guessing that many New Zealand fishermen with hook turnover rates in the range of 3,000 hooks per day will invest in the Hookpod at $6/unit. I can see where a $18,000 investment might pencil out an operational loss and may be manageable in New Zealand.

In Alaskan fisheries, much higher hook turnover rates are the norm (e.g., 20,000 hooks/day for my vessel and >50,000 hooks/day in the P. cod fishery). Alaskan fishermen don’t experience a significant operational loss due to seabird activity. Given the success of tori lines in Alaska in mitigating seabird bycatch, and given initial investments that could exceed $300,000 (not counting maintenance costs), it remains to be seen if Hookpods have a place in the North Pacific.

However, Hookpods seem to be a clever and effective solution for reducing mortality in Southern Ocean seabird populations, while at the same time increasing catch production for fishery target species. I could envision a public/private subsidy for assisting fishermen to invest in these devices.