Haunting the seas: the legacy of ghost gear pollution in marine environments

This spooky season we spoke with M.A. (Anthropology) candidate Oriana Smy who told us about her eerie “ghost gear” collaboration with the Ocean Pollution Research Unit (OPRU) at the Institute of Oceans and Fisheries.

Oriana: My research focuses on the dynamic human dimensions of marine plastic pollution and “ghost” fishing gear from a social science perspective. “Ghost gear” is a specific category of anthropogenic marine debris that contributes to the global marine plastics problem. The much longer and more formally used term, “abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded fishing gear” (ALDFG) is not only a mouth full, but can be problematic. “Abandonment of gear” is not something fishers take lightly and nobody wants to abandon their gear. It’s expensive and a primary component of their livelihood, but they are often forced to weigh the shifting variables of safety and cost when at sea, although the nefarious contribution from illegal fishing is a major concern. The widely but not universally accepted term “ghost gear” is catchy (pardon the pun) and also highlights how haunting this problem truly is.

Can you give us an idea of how much ghost gear is out there?

Oriana: It’s hard to know definitively how much ghost gear is out there because there is a lot of missing data. Some “legacy” gear has been floating around the ocean for decades, whereas much of it sinks or washes ashore. Nearly 10 million tons of plastic is estimated to enter the ocean annually. Of that, approximately 640,000 tons are made up of ghost gear.

What are some of your concerns about how ghost gear “haunts” our oceans?

Oriana: After it becomes disconnected from its originally intended use, ghost gear can catch non-targeted species – such as fish, whales or other marine mammals – through by-catch or entanglement, which impacts biodiversity and contributes to species decline. Small-scale artisanal fishers in Mexico (and other areas as well) are faced with the problem of environmental degradation when nets or ropes dredge sensitive seafloor habitats, which negatively impact fishing grounds and can contribute to shoreline erosion. Human health complications can lso arise because much of the ghost gear is composed of plastics, which can break down into microplastics through exposure to the elements.

Microplastics can be ingested by fish and other species, and enter the seafood chain, which two billion people depend upon as a primary protein source. The ocean does not discriminate where debris gets deposited, but it’s often the most remote and hardest-to-reach places that bear the brunt of this problem, inequitably leaving coastal communities who depend directly on a healthy marine environment on the frontline.

Tell us more about the research you’ve conducted to better understand and address the haunting impacts of ghost gear?

Oriana: This past summer, I conducted my field research in Baja California Sur, Mexico, incorporating qualitative, quantitative, and multimodal methods in my research approach. I collected quantitative data through surveys and shoreline cleanups to identify the types and quantities of marine plastics in this region to compare against regional datasets of the Northeast Pacific. I also interviewed small-scale artisanal fishers and members of the informal waste sector to better understand local priorities and perspectives surrounding this global problem of both ocean-based and land-based sources of marine plastic pollution.

Why did you focus on ghost gear, specifically on the Pacific coast and the Gulf of California?

Oriana: The Great Pacific Garbage Patch and the Kuroshio and California current systems all play significant roles in the transboundary retention and distribution of debris in the Northeast Pacific. As for the Gulf of California in Mexico, there is more of a domestic origin, primarily through commercial vessels from Sinaloa and Sonora, as well as local small-scale fishing activities, particularly related to the illegal totoaba fishery.

Is there anything being done to ‘bust’ ghost gear?

Oriana: Funding, policies, and regulation are huge components to tackling this problem. I was part of the B.C. Clean Coast, Clean Waters initiative beginning in 2020, where hundreds of tons of ghost gear (among many other materials) were retrieved from the shoreline – primarily nets, rope, and floats. The community-based ghost gear project in Mexico, with which I conducted my field research, has recovered more than four tons of mono-filament fishing nets that would have otherwise ended up in the ocean or burned at the landfill. The Global Ghost Gear Initiative, The Ocean Clean-up, and the Center for Marine Debris Research in Hawai’i (among many others!) are all doing amazing work to try and determine just how big this ghost gear problem is and how we can find collaborative long-term solutions. We can all pay close attention to the final round of negotiations on the UN Global Plastics Treaty coming up this month to ensure ghost gear is included as a primary contributor to this problem of marine plastic pollution.

And if you come across ghost gear be sure to report it to the local authorities in your region.

Tags: ghost gear, IOF students, Microplastics, OPRU, plastic, pollution, Shoreline cleanup