382 
Fishery Bulletin 117(4) 
Pamlico Sound, North Carolina (NCDMF 16 ). A proclama¬ 
tion was issued for these requirements, which went into 
effect by July 2019. 
Although we cannot attribute observed reductions in fin- 
fish bycatch to one element, all 4 gears that achieved the 
target of greater than 40% bycatch reduction (Tables 3-5) 
used a combination of increased codend mesh size and 
larger finfish escape openings relative to the control con¬ 
figuration. The simple use of 2 federal fisheyes provided 
a combined opening size of 516 cm 2 , almost 4 times the 
opening of the industry-standard state fisheye (131 cm 2 ). 
In addition to allowing larger fish to escape the trawl, the 
larger escape openings likely create a larger area for the 
flow of disturbed water, a difference that has been shown 
to result in higher rates of escape (Wardle, 1986; Engaas 
et al., 1999; Watson et al., 1999; Winger et al., 2010). The 
use of each of these 4 gears did not result in a significant 
decrease in shrimp catch relative to that from the use of 
the control net, but the use of the gear with the double fed¬ 
eral fisheyes and a 4.45-cm codend produced a reduction 
in shrimp catch that was greater than the 5% threshold 
for shrimp loss identified by workgroup members from 
industry (Table 4). 
The use of a reduced-bar TED in several gear config¬ 
urations also appears to have contributed to overall fin- 
fish bycatch reduction. The reduction of finfish bycatch 
achieved with this gear was more substantial after the 
mesh size of the codend was increased, following a week- 
long trial of just a reduced-bar TED. The increase in 
codend mesh size may have resulted in increased water 
flow through the codend, allowing smaller finfish species 
to escape (Isaksen et al., 1992; Engaas et al., 1999). 
Similar improvements in bycatch reduction from the 
use of reduced-bar TEDs have been found in the Gulf 
of Mexico (Hataway et al., 2017), Australia (Noell et al., 
2018), and the nearshore waters of coastal North Carolina 
(Broome et al. 17 ). Broome et al. 1 ' documented that the use 
of a trawl equipped with a TED with 5.08-cm bar spacing 
and a state fisheye reduced total bycatch weight by 40% 
with insignificant loss of shrimp catch (6%) in 43 paired 
tows conducted in nearshore waters of the Atlantic Ocean, 
compared with the reduction achieved with a control trawl 
that was similar to the control gear in this study: an otter 
trawl equipped with a TED with standard 10.16-cm bar 
spacing and a state fisheye. Although the gear tested by 
Broome et al. 17 met the bycatch reduction target that was 
set for our study, a majority of the workgroup members felt 
that such a reduction in TED bar spacing would not be fea¬ 
sible for use in the estuarine fishery because of potential 
16 NCDMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2018. 
Marine Fisheries Commission briefing book for business meet¬ 
ing; New Bern, NC, 16-17 May, 659 p. Div. Mar. Fish., North 
Carolina Dep. Environ. Nat. Resour., Morehead City, NC. 
[Available from website.] 
17 Broome, J. D., J. W. Anderson, and D. W. Anderson. 2011. By- 
catch volume reduction through turtle excluder device (TED) 
reduced grid spacing, 37 p. Final report for North Carolina Sea 
Grant proj. 10-FEG-03. [Available from North Carolina Sea 
Grant, 303 College Circle, Morehead City, NC 28557.] 
clogging associated with debris and grasses that are typ¬ 
ically found in the estuarine waters of North Carolina. In 
fisheries outside of this test area, similar improvements 
in bycatch reduction have been observed when the mesh 
or grid size of the Nordmore grates have been reduced 
(Broadhurst, 2000; Silva et al., 2011, 2012). 
The use of a radial escape panel in conjunction with a 
funnel behind the TED (both versions of the Virgil Potter 
gear) also showed great promise. Perhaps most encourag¬ 
ing is that this gear was developed by a local fisherman 
(V. Potter) that participated in the workgroup process. 
Use of the Virgil Potter BRD with a 3.81-cm mesh codend 
resulted in lower bycatch reduction, relative to that from 
the use of the Virgil Potter BRD with a 4.45-cm codend, 
but resulted in a gain in shrimp catch, on average, com¬ 
pared with the average loss in shrimp catch from use of 
the version with the codend that has the larger mesh size 
(Table 4). 
Testing in 2017 focused on smaller vessels (<14 m) and 
the nearshore waters of North Carolina. Unlike the out¬ 
come of previous testing in 2015 and 2016 (Brown et al. 9 ), 
the results from testing in 2017 fell short of achieving 
the additional 40% reduction in finfish bycatch with the 
gear combinations used. Although the catch was not sepa¬ 
rated by species during trials, we did observe that striped 
anchovy (Anchoa hepsetus) made up the majority of the 
finfish catch for several tows conducted in ocean waters 
but were not observed in catch of tows conducted during 
the inshore testing in Pamlico Sound. Differences in spe¬ 
cies composition were likely a contributing factor in the 
underperformance of similar gears that had reached the 
40% reduction goal during testing in inshore waters in 
previous years. Although the target for reduction of fin¬ 
fish bycatch was not achieved with the gears tested in our 
study in 2017, the use of a TED with 7.62-cm bar spac¬ 
ing in conjunction with 2 state fisheyes did show prom¬ 
ise during testing in the summer on a small vessel. On 
the basis of results from testing in 2015 and 2016, it is 
anticipated that testing of a gear composed of a TED with 
7.62-cm bar spacing, 2 state fisheyes, and a codend with a 
larger stretch mesh (4.45-cm) would result in reductions 
in finfish bycatch greater than the 40% target. Further 
testing with this gear combination is needed in the small- 
boat fleet to accurately assess this expectation. 
Study design 
The use of a workgroup throughout this project played a 
critical role in achieving the finfish reduction goal set forth 
by the NCMFC. The fact that international trawl experts 
provided all participants with a basic understanding of 
trawl gear dynamics, fish behavior in trawls, results from 
recent research, and an overview of the scientific testing 
protocol to be used was instrumental in these achieve¬ 
ments (Brown et al. 9 ; NMFS 11 ). Workgroup members from 
the fishing industry then provided ideas to be tested that 
they believed would work best within the parameters of 
Pamlico Sound, a shallow, muddy-bottom estuarine envi¬ 
ronment. Finally, facilitated discussion techniques were 
