Advertisement

Senckenbergiana maritima

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 147–151 | Cite as

Marine litter on the Kachelotplate, Lower Saxonian Wadden Sea

  • Gerd Liebezeit
Article

Abstract

Beach surveys were carried out from May to November 2007 in monthly intervals to assess the occurrence of marine litter along a 2.5 km stretch of beach on the Kachelotplate, an emerging sandbank island W of Juist, Lower Saxonian Wadden Sea, southern North Sea. A total of 683 items were recorded with an average 60.4 % plastics, 24.5 % wood, 0.9 % glass, 1.6 % metal and 5.3 % other material. Material of natural origin accounted for another 4.3 %. Within the plastics compartment fishery related items were dominant accounting for 36.3 % of total plastics. A source consideration shows that most fishery related items must have originated from the open North Sea while a second major source is the neighbouring island of Borkum. Heavier material such as concretions, stones or bricks most likely must have been originally deposited in shallow waters along the western margin of the Kachelotplate as these must have been transported as bedload. Despite the aesthetically unpleasant nature of debris it fulfils an important role in island build-up, i.e. it acts to trap sand which will remain on the island even after the trapping debris has been removed by flooding.

Keywords

Wadden Sea beach litter Kachelotplate 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allsopp, M.,Walters, A.,Santillo, D. &Johnston, P., no date. Plastic debris in the world’s oceans. Greenpeace Report: — 43 pp. (http://www.greenpeace.org; visited 4.02.2008).Google Scholar
  2. Callaway, R., Engelhard, G.H., Dann, J., Cotter, J. &Rumohr, H. (2007): A century of North Sea epibenthos and trawling: comparison between 1902–1912, 1982–1985 and 2000. — Marine Ecology Progress Series,346: 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carr, A. (1987): Impact of non degradable marine debris on the ecology and survival outlook of sea turtles. — Marine Pollution Bulletin,18: 352–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Claereboudt, M.R. (2004): Shore litter along sandy beaches of the Gulf of Oman. — Marine Pollution Bulletin,49: 770–777.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coe, J.M. (1990): A review of marine debris research, education, and mitigation in the North Pacific. — In:Shomura, R.S &Godfrey, M.L.(Eds.): Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Marine Debris. 19–49, US Dept of Commerce. NOAA-TM-NMFSSWFSC-154, (Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  6. Coe, J.M.;Rogers, D.B. (Eds.) (1997): Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts, and Solutions. — 432 pp., Springer Series on Environmental Management. Springer-Verlag (New York).Google Scholar
  7. Ducrotoy, J.-P., Elliott, M. &de Jonge, V.N. (2000): The North Sea. — Marine Pollution Bulletin,41: 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duineveld, G.,Bergman, M.,Witbaard, R. &Amaro, T. (2002): Population dynamics of large bivalves in offshore southern North Sea (BIVALFF). — Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Annual Report: 14–15. (http://www.nioz.nl/public/annual_report/2002/noordzee4.pdf; 04.02.2008)Google Scholar
  9. Fanshawe, T. &Everard, M. (2002): The impacts of marine litter. — Report of the Marine Litter Task Team: 1–43.Google Scholar
  10. Hall, K., 2000. Impacts of marine debris and oils. Economic & social coasts to coastal communities. Report Kommunenes Internasjonale Miljøorganisasjon, c/o Shetland Islands Council, Environment & Transportation Department,: 1–97.Google Scholar
  11. Harms, J. (1993): Checklist of species (algae, invertebrates and vertebrates) found in the vicinity of the vicinity of the island of Helgoland (North Sea, German Bight) — a review of recent records. — Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen,47: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. HELCOM —Helsinki Commission (2007): Assessment of the marine litter problem in the Baltic region and priorities for response. — 21 pp. (http://www.helcom.org; 04.02.2008)Google Scholar
  13. Howson, C.M. &Picton, B.E. (Eds.) (1997): The species directory of the marine fauna and flora of the British Isles and surrounding seas. — Ulster Museum Publication,276: 1–508. The Ulster Museum (Belfast).Google Scholar
  14. Laist, D.W. (1987) Overview of the biological effects of lost and discarded plastic debris in the marlne environment. — Marine Pollution Bulletin,18: 319–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Laist, D.W. (1996): Marine debris entanglement and ghost fishing: A cryptic and significant type of bycatch? — In: Proceedings of the Solving Bycatch Workshop: Considerations for Today and Tomorrow, Report Alaska Sea Grant College Program,96-03: 33–39.Google Scholar
  16. Laist, D.W. (1997): Impacts of marine debris: Entanglement of marine life in marine debris including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records. — In: Coe, J.M. & Rogers, D.B. (Eds.) Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts and Solutions. Springer (Berlin).Google Scholar
  17. Liebezeit, G., Wöstmann, R. &Wolters, S. (2008): Sources of allochthonous organic matter for the Kachelotplate, Lower Saxonian Wadden Sea. — Senckenbergiana maritima,38 (2): 153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liebezeit, G., Wehrmann, A. &Hamacher, S. (2003):. Modern concretions in intertidal flats of the Lower Saxonian Wadden Sea, southern North Sea. — Senckenbergiana maritima,32: 147–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Masó, M., Garcés, E., Pagès, F. &Camp, J. (2003): Drifting plastic debris as a potential vector for dispersing Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB) species. — Scientia Marina Barcelona,67: 107–111.Google Scholar
  20. Müller, Y. (2004): Faune et flore du littoral du Nord, du Pas-de-Calais et de la Belgique: inventaire. — pp. 307, Commission Régionale de Biologie Région Nord Pas-de-Calais: France.Google Scholar
  21. Möhring, T. (2003): Organisch-geochemische Charakterisierung von Wachsen und Asphalten von Ständen der Deutschen Bucht und aus dem südlichen Kalifornien. — 174 pp., Ph.D. Thesis Oldenburg University.Google Scholar
  22. Santos, I.R., Friedrich, A.C. &Barretto, F.P. (2005): Overseas garbage pollution on beaches of northeast Brazil. — Marine Pollution Bulletin,50: 778–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stefatos, A., Charalampakis, M., Papatheodorou, G. &Ferentinos, G. (1999): Marine debris on the seafloor of the Mediterranean Sea: Examples from two enclosed gulfs in western Greece. — Marine Pollution Bulletin,38: 389–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thiel, M. &Gutow, L. (2005): The ecology of rafting in the marine environment: I. The floating substrata. — Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review,42: 181–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. OSPAR —Oslo Paris Commission (2000): Quality Status Report 2000 Region II — Greater North Sea. 1–136.Google Scholar
  26. OSPAR —Oslo Paris Commission (2007): OSPAR Pilot Project on Monitoring Marine Beach Litter Monitoring of marine litter in the OSPAR region. — Assessment and Monitoring Series: 74 pp. (http://www.ospar.org; 04.02.2008)Google Scholar
  27. UNEP —United Nations Environmental Program (2005): Marine litter, an analytical overview. — 47 pp. (http://www.unep.org; 04.02.2008)Google Scholar
  28. Witbaard, R. &Bergman, M.J.N. (2003): The distribution and population structure of the bivalveArctica islandica L. in the North Sea: what possible factors are involved? — J. Sea Res.,50: 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zühlke, R., Alvsvåg, J., de Boois, I., Cotter, J., Ehrich, S., Ford, A., Hinz, H., Jarre-Teichmann, A., Jennings, S.;Kröncke, I., Lancaster, J., Piet, G. &Prince, P. (2001): Epibenthic diversity in the North Sea. — Senckenbergiana Maritima,31: 269–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerd Liebezeit
    • 1
  1. 1.Forschungszentrum TerramareWilhelmshavenGermany

Personalised recommendations