Building on my earlier post about effort creep (primarily driven by eFADs), I will focus on other aspects of FADs, including plastics, stranding, and entangling, as detailed in the papers presented to the WCPFC SC.
Now, I’m not assuming that most of you are as old as I am, or that you have been familiar with tuna purse seining before the eFAD era (i.e., with sonar and satellite connectivity). Believe me… It was a different world, as different as being good at drawing to being drawn by numbers. Finding tuna was part generational and learnt knowledge, part understanding of environmental variables (with limited technology) and a lot of luck… Today, most of it is informed by eFADs.
Scheme of the newly developed “cylinder jelly-FAD”.
While it is a fallacious thesis (since there is no going back to non-FADs fishing), I believe that if we don’t have them, half the fleet will be out of business.
Yet, this post focuses on what happens to FADs when they are no longer used, when they get lost, or when they go too far, you cannot pick them up… or literally is not worth retrieving them, since there is no cost to you for not doing it… and at 3 to 5000 USD per unit… just the fuel bill will be bigger.
So the 1st paper that interested me addresses the Regional database of stranded drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (dFADs) in the Pacific Ocean: a 2024 update
The report provides an update on the stranding events of drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (dFADs) in the Pacific Ocean, highlighting their environmental impacts and the collaborative data collection efforts across Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs).
A total of 3,591 stranding events recorded from 2006 to 2025.
43.8% of events involved a buoy alone, 30.7% a FAD alone, and 21.6% a FAD with a buoy.
Most stranding events occurred on beaches (37.2%) and were previously collected by local communities (32.3%).
Environmental damage was noted, particularly coral damage (3.1% of all dFADs).
Stranded dFADs originated more from vessels in the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) area (47.0%) than from the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) area (34.1%).
Most stranded objects were buoys (43.8%) and dFADs (30.7%).
The number of stranding events has increased over the years, with 1,075 reported in 2022.
The majority of buoys found were from three brands: Satlink (44.3%), Marine Instruments (28.7%), and Zunibal (14.3%).
Stranding events were concentrated in French Polynesia, Wallis and Futuna, and Tonga
41.2% of FADs were found without submerged appendages, while 35.3% had them.
Most FADs were made from a mix of synthetic and natural materials (26.2%).
The condition of FADs varied, with 28.6% found fallen apart.
The most common materials for FAD structures were bamboo and plastic flotation(42%)
37.2% of stranding events occurred on beaches, while 4.3% were found on coral reefs.
FADs with submerged appendages were more likely to cause environmental damage.
The data indicates that many stranded FADs were found in sensitive environments, posing risks to marine habitats.
The next one interests me in particular, since I contributed to the questionnaires on which it was based: Stakeholders view and economic and feasibility analysis on options to mitigate dFAD loss and abandonments and their impacts: preliminary results
The document discusses a project assessing the environmental impacts of drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (dFADs) in the Pacific Islands and explores strategies for mitigating their loss and abandonment.
Assessment of dFAD Loss and Abandonment
The project aims to evaluate the impacts of drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (dFADs) on the marine environment and propose mitigation strategies.
The project runs from 2024 to 2026, focusing on dFAD loss, abandonment, and environmental impacts.
Key tasks include monitoring dFAD drifts, reviewing regulatory frameworks, and evaluating economic viability of mitigation measures.
Preliminary findings suggest regulatory actions for Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) to consider, such as clarifying ownership and establishing retrieval responsibilities.
Stakeholder Consultation Results
The stakeholder consultation gathered insights on dFAD use and potential mitigation strategies.
72 stakeholders participated, including government representatives, industry members, and NGOs.
Most respondents estimated 20,000 to 60,000 dFAD deployments annually, aligning with previous estimates.
The feasibility ranking of options varied among stakeholders, with retrieval by purse seiners ranked highest by the industry and at-sea collection from non-purse seiners favored by others.
Options to Reduce dFAD Loss and Abandonment
The study identifies and ranks various strategies to decrease the loss and abandonment of drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (dFADs) in the Pacific Ocean.
The most feasible and cost-effective options include:
At-sea collection from non-purse seine vessels (ranked 4th).
Greater emphasis on retrieval by purse seine vessels (ranked 2nd).
'FAD watch' systems for community collection (ranked 5th).
Dedicated vessels for at-sea collection (ranked 3rd).
Modification of deployment areas (ranked 1st).
Dedicated cleaning vessels and modification of deployment areas were considered the least cost-effective.
Stakeholder perspectives varied, with government representatives and NGOs differing in their views on cost-effectiveness.
Stakeholder Perspectives on dFAD Recovery
Different stakeholders have varying opinions on the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of dFAD recovery programs.
Government representatives and purse seine industry stakeholders ranked at-sea collection by non-purse vessels as highly cost-effective.
Purse seine industry stakeholders viewed higher recoveries by purse seiners and modifying deployment areas as the second and third most cost-effective options.
FAD watch initiatives were ranked low by purse seine representatives but highly by scientists.
Main limitations for recovery programs include cost, logistical issues, and lack of industry collaboration.
Current dFAD Recovery Programs and Initiatives
The survey reveals existing dFAD recovery programs and the need for increased awareness and participation among stakeholders.
Over 40% of respondents were aware of recovery programs like TNC FAD watch and TUNACONS in the Pacific.
Many stakeholders are not aware of existing initiatives to reuse buoys recovered from dFADs.
The circular economy concept for reusing buoys is not widely implemented, despite existing projects by buoy companies.
Challenges in dFAD Recovery Implementation
The implementation of dFAD recovery programs faces several challenges that hinder their effectiveness.
Logistical issues, costs, and lack of coordination are the main barriers to higher recovery rates.
Regulations complicate dFAD recovery, particularly in Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs).
Stakeholders suggest that RFMOs should consider recovery requirements and regulations on buoy deactivation to enhance recovery efforts.
Future Steps and Recommendations
The project aims to further analyse dFAD loss and abandonment while engaging stakeholders in upcoming workshops.
Additional surveys and analyses are planned to gather more data on dFAD recovery options.
A regional workshop is scheduled for February 2026 to discuss findings and strategies for mitigating dFAD loss.
The project will develop recommendations for managing dFAD impacts in the Pacific Ocean, with a final report due in 2026.
Finally, Progress Report of Project 110 and 110a: Non-entangling and Biodegradable FAD Trial in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. This one interests me, as it is the only viable option… Purse seiners discard enough plastic already (as we determined in this study), and it is great to see it is happening, and the results are similar to the non-biodegradable ones.
Non-entangling and Biodegradable dFAD Trials
The trials aim to assess the effectiveness and sustainability of non-entangling and biodegradable Fish Aggregation Devices (dFADs) in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO).
Projects 110 and 110a focus on non-entangling and biodegradable dFADs to provide data for the WCPFC and the tuna fishing industry.
Collaboration involves five fleets with over 56 vessels testing 665 jelly-FADs.
A total of 645 jelly-FADs constructed, with 321 deployed to date.
The jelly-FAD design includes a 3D cubic structure and a new cylindrical design, using materials like bamboo, cotton, and a cellulose-based material called "Suncell."
Performance monitoring shows similar drift speeds and biomass aggregation patterns between jelly-FADs and conventional dFADs.
Performance Monitoring and Data Collection
The performance of jelly-FADs is monitored through direct observations and satellite buoy data, providing insights into their effectiveness and longevity.
Average monitoring duration for jelly-FADs is 269 days, similar to 260 days for conventional dFADs.
Drift speeds are comparable, with jelly-FADs averaging 1.15 knots and conventional dFADs at 1.11 knots.
Tuna aggregation patterns show maximum biomass at around 2 months for both types of dFADs
Performance Comparison of Jelly-FADs and Conventional FADs
The trial results indicate that jelly-FADs have a catch performance comparable to conventional dFADs, with some limitations in data robustness.
20 sets performed on jelly-FADs with total catch ranging from 0 to 185 tons, average catch of 53.6 tons.
50 sets on conventional FADs with catch ranging from 5 to 260 tons, average catch of 71.3 tons.
Jelly-FADs' average catch is higher than the WCPO 2023 average of 46.3 tons but lower than conventional FADs.
Limited sets may bias results; fishers may prefer conventional FADs over experimental ones.
Degradation of Jelly-FAD Materials Over Time
The condition of jelly-FAD materials after six months at sea shows varying levels of degradation, necessitating further observations.
Main rope of recycled cotton remained in good condition after 6 months.
Submerged raft and attractors required repairs or were missing after 6 months.
The cube structure was destroyed in a single observation after six months.
More data is needed to assess the lifespan and stressors affecting dFADs
Key Findings and Recommendations for Future Trials
The findings emphasise the importance of large-scale deployment and monitoring of biodegradable FADs for effective results.
Deploying a large number of jelly-FADs is crucial for meaningful results.
Drift speed and monitoring periods are similar for both jelly-FADs and conventional dFADs.
Aggregation patterns show a peak biomass at 2 months post-deployment.
Outreach and awareness are essential for encouraging broader fleet participation in biodegradable FAD initiatives.