- Email: [email protected]
Quantities, composition, and sources of beach debris in Korea from the results of nationwide monitoring
Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul
Quantities, composition, and sources of beach debris in Korea from the results of nationwide monitoring Sunwook Hong a,b, Jongmyoung Lee a,b,⇑, Daeseok Kang b, Hyun-Woo Choi c, Sun-Hwa Ko d a
Korea Marine Litter Institute, Our Sea of East Asia Network, 717 Leadersvill 1570-8, Jukrim, Gwangdo, Tongyeong, Gyeongnam 650-826, South Korea Pukyong National University, 45 Yongso-ro, Nam-Gu, Busan 608-737, South Korea c Oceanographic Data & Information Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology, Ansan 656-834, South Korea d Educational Psychology, Graduate school of education, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Gyeongnam 660-701, South Korea b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Available online 12 June 2014 Keywords: Marine debris Beach monitoring Quantity Composition Source Korea
a b s t r a c t This study assessed the levels of marine debris pollution and identified its main sources in Korea. The surveys were bimonthly conducted by NGO leaders and volunteers on 20 beaches from March 2008 to November 2009. The quantities of marine debris were estimated at 480.9 (±267.7) count 100 m 1 for number, 86.5 (±78.6) kg 100 m 1 for weight, and 0.48 (±0.38) m3 100 m 1 for volume. The level of marine debris pollution on the Korean beaches was comparable to that in the coastal areas of the North Atlantic ocean and South Africa. Plastics and styrofoam occupied the majority of debris composition in terms of number (66.7%) and volume (62.3%). The main sources of debris were fishing activities including commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture (51.3%). Especially styrofoam buoy from aquaculture was the biggest contributor to marine debris pollution on these beaches. Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Marine debris has become a global marine environmental problem that involves multiple stakeholders in many different countries. It is defined as ‘‘any manufactured or processed solid waste material that enters the marine environment from any source’’ (Coe and Rogers, 1997). Marine debris causes problems beyond creating an eyesore for tourists. It is a source of serious damage to marine lives, ecosystems, fisheries, and navigational safety. Transfer of chemicals to marine biota has also been recorded recently (Barnes, 2002; Derraik, 2002; Donohue et al., 2001; Hall, 2000; Hong et al., 2013; Rochman et al., 2013). Numerous efforts have been made worldwide to comprehend the magnitude and extent of the marine debris problem (OSPAR, 2007; Ribic et al., 2010). The majority of research has revealed the abundance, composition, geographical distribution, or occasional sources of marine debris, showing highly temporal or spatial variation even along a beach or during a single day (Eriksson et al., 2013; Kako et al., 2010a; Smith and Markic, 2013; Velander and Mocogni, 1999). The quantitative or qualitative data have been used to understand the influence of wind, ocean or tidal currents, ⇑ Corresponding author at: Korea Marine Litter Institute, Our Sea of East Asia Network, 717 Leadersvill 1570-8, Jukrim, Gwangdo, Tongyeong, Gyeongnam 650-826, South Korea. Tel.: +82 55 649 5224; fax: +82 303 0001 4478. E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Lee). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.05.051 0025-326X/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
proximity to human population, and diverse human activities on marine debris pollution (Edyvane et al., 2004; Ribic et al., 2010; Williams et al., 2003). The Korean government has responded to the marine debris issue since the late 1990s by investing in retrieval programs and research projects. Revision of the Marine Environment Management Act in 2008 provided the legal basis for managing marine debris. These efforts, however, have resulted in limited success because there is no reliable scientific information and data at the national level on the sources, types, spatiotemporal distribution, and impacts of marine debris. Government programs have focused mostly on the retrieval of floating or deposited fishing gear from near-shore coastal waters, fishing grounds, and deep sea beds with government or private vessels. Marine debris research has provided technical solutions only for the collection and treatment of floating and sunken debris (Jung et al., 2010). Even though the removal programs and technical approaches have contributed to some extent to mitigating marine debris pollution, the current marine debris management regime in Korea is insufficient for meeting the future challenges that Korean society faces regarding protection and sustainable use of the local marine ecosystem. This study was aimed at assessing the level of beach debris pollution as well as identifying management priorities for beach debris in Korea. To achieve the aim, we surveyed the quantities, composition, and sources of beach debris through regular, nationwide monitoring for 2 years (2008–2009).
28
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
2. Method 2.1. Study area A total of 20 beaches were monitored along the eastern, western, and southern coasts of Korea (Fig. 1). The beaches selected were composed of sand or pebbles, had moderate to low slopes, and were of sufficient size to encompass 100-m survey lines. Accessibility to sites for regular monitoring and debris removal after surveys was also considered in the site selection. Beaches with other routine cleanup activities and that were located within or close to protected areas were excluded. The three coasts of Korea have very distinct characteristics in morphology and marine economic activities. The east coast of Korea has a relatively straight coastline bordered by a narrow strip
of the continental shelf in the East Sea. No major rivers drain this steep coastal watershed. Well-developed sandy shores attract tourists during the summer, and fishery using gill nets and trawls dominates the fishery sector in the region. In contrast, complex coastlines with inlets, bays, estuaries, and islands characterize the west and south coasts of Korea. The west coast has extensive tidal flats created by high tidal range and sediment supply from big rivers that drain into the Yellow Sea. Encompassing over 60% of the islands in Korea and many inlets and bays, the south coast is the most complex coast, in which the total length of coastline is approximately 28 times that of a straight line (KHOA, 2012). Along the west and south coasts, local economies benefit from intensive tourism, commercial fishing, marine aquaculture, and shipping. More than 70% of aquaculture production in Korea in 2011 (MIFAFF, 2012) was from the south coast area, which
Fig. 1. Location of beach debris monitoring sites in Korea during the period 2008–2009.
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
provides natural aquaculture grounds for oysters, sea squirts, abalones, and seaweeds. The population density is highest in the west coast area and lowest in the east coast area. 2.2. Survey methods A 100-m-long survey line was located with GPS coordinates on each beach. All debris larger than 2.5 cm in diameter that occurred between the low tide mark and the beginning of vegetation on dunes or artificial barriers was collected and classified into 12 categories. Debris in each category was counted and weighed to the nearest 0.1 kg using a portable scale on the survey sites in their wet or dry conditions. Volumes were estimated based on the number of garbage bags of known volume used to collect the beach debris. Debris counted and weighed on the beach was recommended to be removed after the survey. Survey results were recorded on data cards that listed 94 debris categories grouped according to the type of materials (plastic, Styrofoam, processed wood, paper, glass, metal, cloth, and others), usages (smoking/firework and medical/personal hygiene), or foreign origin (foreign items). Forty-two categories were adopted from the International Coastal Cleanup (ICC) data card (Ocean Conservancy, 2007), and an additional 52 categories were added based on the list of debris identified in ICC events from 2001 to 2007 in Korea. Six categories (fishing nets, fishing ropes, strapping bands, plastic sheets for agriculture, Styrofoam buoys, and construction lumber) were subdivided into two size groups: maximum lengths of 2.5–50 cm and larger than 50 cm. A total of 220 surveys were carried out every 2 months (at the end of odd numbered months ± 5 days) from the end of March 2008 until the end of November 2009. A workshop (January 18–19, 2008) was organized to train participating NGOs on how to conduct the survey. Before the survey started, all existing marine debris on the selected beaches was removed at the end of January 2008 in order to remove possible effects accumulated during the past years. The inclusion of quality control is an important requirement to determine the accuracy of the data provided by volunteers (Worthington et al., 2012; Peckenham et al., 2012). To ensure the quality of data collected, we (i) provided a clear protocol with a detailed photo guide (Bonney et al., 2009), (ii) organized a workshop to train volunteers before the monitoring started, (iii) visited individual sites to train NGO leaders and volunteers on the beaches, and (iv) held three workshops to share the results and experiences and to provide re-education opportunities during the entire survey period. During the entire survey period, we reminded volunteers repetitively about the importance of timely surveys and received all raw data immediately after the survey on each survey beach. Consistent monitoring was possible because there was no change in monitoring leaders during the period of survey. An information board was placed at each monitoring site to minimize probable interference by visitors or residents. 2.3. Source identification Sources of debris were identified following two different methods: ICC and Whiting (1998). The ICC method assigns debris into five sources of shoreline/recreational, ocean/waterway, smokingrelated, dumping, and medical/personal hygiene activities. The sources of 42 items included in the ICC data card were determined using the ICC method. The Whiting’s cross-tabulation probability scoring system assigns probability scores of potential sources to each item. In this study, 10 potential sources were considered for the Whiting’s method: household use, beach recreation, smoking, medical/personal hygiene, dumping, agriculture, fisheries (commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture), sports fishing,
29
shipping, and foreign sources. Foreign debris was identified using clues on the surface of debris, such as characteristic alphabets, phone numbers, brand names, bar codes, or recycling marks. A modified scoring system from that of Whiting (1998) was used for this study: 5 for highly probable, 3 for probable, and 1 for possible sources. Miscellaneous items in each material category were not included in the source identification using Whiting’s method. 2.4. Statistical tests Statistical analyses were performed to determine whether the deposition rates of marine debris differed significantly among the survey beaches with respect to geographical location in the coastal area of Korea. The 20 monitoring sites were grouped into the west, south, or east coast beaches. Kruskal–Wallis’ one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) by ranks was used for the statistical analyses, because the sample groups did not show normality and equal variance and differed in the sample sizes. When differences were detected, Tukey’s HSD (Honestly Significant Difference) test was performed to identify the survey beach groups that were significantly different at the 5% level. 3. Results 3.1. Quantities of beach debris A total of 105,797 pieces in 94 debris categories were collected from bimonthly surveys conducted on 20 Korean beaches from March 2008 until November 2009. The total weight and volume were 19,020.5 kg and 104.9 m3, respectively. Average amounts of debris on the survey beaches in number, weight, and volume were 480.9 (±267.7 SD) counts 100 m 1, 86.5 (±78.6 SD) kg 100 m 1, and 0.48 (±0.38 SD) m3 100 m 1, respectively (Table 1). The Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA test revealed significant differences among the beach groups on the three Korean coasts (Fig. 2). The east coast had lower average amounts in weight (v2 = 6.741, df = 2, p = 0.034) and volume (v2 = 9.077, df = 2, p = 0.011), but not in number (v2 = 3.480, df = 2, p = 0.176), compared with the other coasts. The post hoc Tukey’s test (p < 0.05) showed that the east coast was significantly different from the south coast in terms of weight and volume. No clear and systematic difference in the seasonal pattern in quantities was observed among the east, west, and south coasts (Fig. 3). However, the average number of items (±SD) was relatively higher in the summer season (July) in the southern coast but lower in the western coast. The quantities of debris in terms of weight and volume were highly variable, showing no seasonal pattern. 3.2. Composition of beach debris and most common items Plastic items were the most numerous debris item (49.8% of the total number) collected on the beaches during the survey period (Fig. 4a), followed by styrofoam (16.9%) and processed wood (8.4%). If foreign plastic bottles, lids, food wrappers, buoys, and lighters (8.3%) were included, the proportion of plastics reached 58.1%. Wood was the most abundant material in terms of weight, occupying 37.9% of the total weight (Fig. 4b). Plastics (30.3%) were also an important debris item according to weight, followed by styrofoam (12.5%). On a volume basis, styrofoam (31.6%) and plastic (30.7%) were the main contributions to the composition of the survey beaches, followed by wood (23.6%) (Fig. 4c). Styrofoam buoys were the most abundant debris item on the survey beaches in terms of number, comprising 12.8% of the total number (Table 2). Fishing ropes (8.2%), glass beverage bottles (6.9%), plastic bags (6.6%), and plastic food wrappers (6.4%) followed the styrofoam buoys, each comprising more than 6% of
30
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
Table 1 Average quantities of beach debris in number, weight, and volume on the survey beaches in Korea from March 2008 until November 2009. Site No.
Coast
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
West West West West West West West South South South South South South East East East East East East South
(c)
Weight (kg ·100m-1)
(b)
Volume (m3 ·100m -1)
(a)
1
Weight (kg 100 m
Av
SD
Av
SD
Av
SD
700.2 337.4 307.9 269.5 443.1 198.1 345.1 150.0 557.9 607.8 579.5 832.1 1206.8 299.7 248.3 625.9 198.3 294.3 682.3 733.8
484.7 162.1 227.3 119.1 313.2 121.3 195.5 64.2 277.7 371.1 508.6 330.7 453.5 183.3 121.9 224.2 160.8 124.8 280.8 603.6
58.8 17.9 58.5 71.3 180.5 71.0 345.8 44.1 159.5 176.4 82.7 56.6 76.1 18.3 24.5 50.6 19.9 32.0 69.0 115.6
44.1 13.9 90.5 50.6 199.8 56.3 235.4 30.9 101.5 99.1 43.9 25.5 49.3 17.6 24.0 28.5 20.1 22.2 76.6 117.3
0.42 0.09 0.27 0.40 1.30 0.47 0.64 0.33 0.61 1.18 0.43 0.40 0.46 0.10 0.17 0.31 0.08 0.24 0.29 1.34
0.43 0.07 0.37 0.28 1.02 0.31 0.36 0.38 0.46 0.69 0.33 0.19 0.28 0.06 0.17 0.19 0.07 0.15 0.11 1.47
480.9
267.7
86.5
78.6
0.48
0.38
Number (counts·100m -1)
Av
Number (counts 100 m
)
p = 0.176
1
Volume (m3 100 m
)
1
)
62.7% of the total number of debris items collected on the survey beaches. 3.3. Sources of beach debris
p = 0.034
ab
b a
a
p = 0.011
a b
Fig. 2. Quantities of marine debris in terms of (a) number, (b) weight, and (c) volume on the survey beach groups in the west, south, and east coasts of Korea along the coastal line. The east coast had clearly lower quantities and significantly different quantities in terms of weight and volume, but not in number, compared with the other coasts.
the total debris item count. The fishing and shipping industries contributed to much of the debris pollution on beaches in Korea, with styrofoam buoys, fishing ropes, and timber for ships and aquaculture facilities accounting for 24.5% of the total number of items. The most common 10 debris items (Table 2) made up
Sources of 42 categories (a total of 65,384 counts) included in the ICC data card are shown in Fig. 5a. Ocean/waterway activities that produce debris, such as plastic fishing ropes, buoys, and strapping bands, were the largest source of beach debris (49.2%) in Korea. They were closely followed by shoreline/recreational activities (45.1%) related to items such as plastic bags, beverage bottles, and disposable cups. The rest of the beach debris (5.7%) was from smoking-related or dumping activities and medical/personal hygiene. Whiting’s method revealed that fisheries (commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture) were the largest source of beach debris in Korea, accounting for 35.3% of the total number of debris items (33,578 of 95,023 items excluding miscellaneous items) (Fig. 5b). Debris from household uses (20.1%) and beach recreation (12.4%) were the next important sources. Debris from foreign sources occupied 4.7% of the beach debris. Smoking, dumping, and medical/personal hygiene were possible sources of 8.8% of beach debris. Debris originated from fisheries source was predominant in the west (39.2%) and south (40.4%) coasts (Fig. 6). In the east coast, those from fisheries (27.4%) and household use (25.4%) similarly contributed to the quantities. Other debris from beach recreation, smoking, and sports fishing-related debris were relatively abundant in the east coast whereas debris drifted from neighboring countries was more common in the west and south coasts. 4. Discussion 4.1. Assessment of beach debris pollution in Korea This study was the first attempt in Korea to assess beach debris pollution nationwide based on the regular monitoring. There are some studies to understand debris pollution and/or its sources on the basis of regular beach monitoring in the globe (Convey et al., 2002; Eriksson et al., 2013; Madzena and Lasiak, 1997; OSPAR, 2007; Otley and Ingham, 2003; Smith and Markic, 2013;
31
Number (count·100m -1)
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
West South East
1,000
500
0
Weight (kg ·100m-1)
Mar '08 May '08 Jul '08 Sep '08 Nov '08 Jan '09 Mar '09 May '09 Jul '09 Sep '09 Nov '09
200
100
0
Mar '08 May '08 Jul '08 Sep '08 Nov '08 Jan '09 Mar '09 May '09 Jul '09 Sep '09 Nov '09
Volume (m3 ·100m -1)
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
Mar'08 May'08 Jul '08 Sep'08
Nov'08 Jan'09 Mar'09 May'09 Jul'09 Sep'09 Nov '09
Fig. 3. Seasonal variation in quantities (number, weight, and volume) of beach debris on the east, west, and south coasts in Korea from March 2008 to November 2009.
(a) Number (counts ·100m-1) 0
20000
Styrofoam
2000
4000
Cloth
2.4% 7.9%
Rubber
0.6%
Paper
1.7%
Medical/Personal hygiene
0.4%
Smoking/Firework
4.0%
Foreign
4.3% 1.1%
6000
8000
(c) Volume (m 3 ·100m-1) 0
10
20
30 30.7%
30.3%
31.6%
12.5%
23.6%
37.9%
8.4% 2.6%
Miscellaneous
0
16.9%
Metal
Glass
60000
49.8%
Plastic
Wood
40000
(b) Weight (kg·100m-1)
3.9% 2.4%
3.1% 2.6%
2.4%
1.3%
2.9%
1.8%
0.4%
0.8%
0.3%
0.1%
2.8% 4.1%
1.7% 2.5%
Fig. 4. Composition of marine debris collected on 20 Korean beaches from March in 2008 until November in 2009.
32
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
The variety of variables affecting debris number could probably result in no distinct features among the coasts and with seasons. For example, the number of debris was highest in July 2008 and 2009 in the south coast. However, the sites and debris items which mainly contributed to the number were changed each year. In July 2008, plastic food wrappers for Masan (#13, Fig. 1) and styrofoam buoys for Sacheon (#11) were drastically increased but in July 2009, glass beverage bottles for Tongyung (#12) and foreign plastic beverage bottles for Jejudo (#20) were outstandingly frequent. Plastic food wrappers for Masan were due to the input from a river in summer monsoon season (June and July). Styrofoam buoys for Sacheon were possibly carried by southeast wind which is prevailing wind direction in summer. The buoy debris could be more easily accumulated because the beach opens to the south. Glass beverage bottles dominant in Tongyung were littered by beach visitors and foreign plastic beverage bottles for Jejudo were washed ashore by northeastward ocean currents over the East China Sea (Isobe et al., 2009; Kako et al., 2010a,b). Various factors on the survey sites possibly attenuated spatial and seasonal patterns during this study.
Table 2 Most common 10 beach debris items collected on the survey beaches and their proportion of the total debris item number in Korea from March 2008 until November 2009. Rank
Items
Count
%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Styrofoam buoys Fishing ropes Beverage bottles (glass) Plastic bags Plastic food wrappers Plastic caps and lids Beverage bottles (plastic) Plastic strapping bands Miscellaneous plastic items Timber (for ships and aquaculture facilities)
13,588 8703 7326 6974 6819 5176 5065 4737 4223 3676
12.8 8.2 6.9 6.6 6.4 4.9 4.8 4.5 4.0 3.5
66,287
62.7
Total
Tourinho and Fillmann, 2011; Walker et al., 1997, 2006). Smith and Markic (2013) revealed the estimation of beach debris amounts was significantly affected by survey interval. So we compared this study with the previous researches which monthly or seasonally investigated quantities of debris over a certain length of beach (Table 3). The pollution level of Korean beaches by marine debris was comparable to those of European coasts (OSPAR, 2007), Nova Scotia, Canada (Walker et al., 2006), Transkei coast, South Africa (Madzena and Lasiak, 1997), and Casino beach, Brazil (Tourinho and Fillmann, 2011) but one order of magnitude higher than those of Bird Island, South Georgia (Walker et al., 1997) and Volunteer beach, Falkland Islands (Otley and Ingham, 2003). Although the Korean peninsula has distinct characteristics among the east, west, and south coasts, the influence of the characteristics was not consistently evident for the survey sites in this study. River inputs or complex geomorphic condition in the west and south coasts probably caused higher quantities of debris than in the east coast. However, the number of debris (counts 100 m 1) was not significantly higher in the west and south coasts than in the east coast.
4.2. Source identification methods The ICC and the scoring methods showed no significant discrepancy in identifying the sources. The main sources of beach debris in the study were ocean/waterway (49.2% by the ICC method) and fishery-related marine debris (51.3% by the scoring method). The ICC method links individual items to a specific source. Even though there is an oversimplification in assigning sources of debris, it does allow a comparison between the data from various global regions over a period of 25 years. This is a powerful tool when considering the lack of standardized and harmonized monitoring methodologies for beach debris (Cheshire et al., 2009). In this study, the proportion of ocean/waterway sources (49.2%) was much higher than that of the international data (less than 5% for the last 20 years) (Ocean Conservancy, 2007). It suggests that ocean/waterway activities
(a) Shoreline & recreational activities Smoking - related activities
45.1% 5.4%
Dumping activities
0.2%
Medical/personal hygiene
0.1%
Ocean/waterway activities
(b)
49.2%
20.1%
Household use
12.4%
Beach recreation Dumping Smoking Agriculture Medical/hygiene
4.7% 3.7% 2.7% 0.4% 35.3%
Fisheries Sports fishing Shipping Foreign
8.5% 7.5% 4.7%
Fig. 5. Sources of beach debris inferred by (a) the International Coastal Cleanup (ICC) method (Ocean Conservancy, 2007) and (b) the cross-tabulation probability scoring system (Whiting, 1998). Gray bar: land-based sources, black bar: sea-based sources, and white bar: foreign sources.
33
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
40%
West South East
30%
20%
10%
0%
Household Beach use recreation
Smoking
Medical/ Agriculture Fisheries hygiene
Sports fishing
Shipping
Dumping
Foreign
Fig. 6. Sources of beach debris inferred by the cross-tabulation probability scoring system (Whiting, 1998). Fisheries source accounted for the largest proportion of debris in the west and south coasts.
Table 3 Comparison of deposition rates of beach debris with previous reports (counts, weights, volume per one kilometer of beach length). Location sample site
Period (Frequency of surveys)
Sites (No.)
1994– 1995
Monthly (13)
South Atlantic Bird island, South Georgia Volunteer beach, Falkland Islands Cassino beach, Brazil
1995 2002 2003–2006
North Atlantic Europe Nova Scotia, Canada East Asia South Korea
South Africa Transkei coast, South Africa
Year
Unit (km
1
)
References 3
Count (ea)
Weight (kg)
6
1400–9800
3.4–25
Madzena and Lasiak (1997)
Monthly (6) Monthly (4) Monthly (48)
1 1 4
207 77 5300– 10,700
17.3
Walker et al. (1997) Otley and Ingham (2003) Tourinho and Fillmann (2011)
2001–2006 2005
Seasonally (24) Monthly (6)
51 1
5420 5071.4
28.6
2008–2009
Bimonthly (11)
20
4809
865
should be controlled at the source for efficient management of beach debris in Korea. For the scoring method, to assign weights to potential sources can be arbitrary but may allow local, cultural, or social diversity in the interpretation of sources. The scoring method revealed higher proportions of fisheries, shipping, or sports fishing associated items (51.3%) among the beach debris of Korea than those related to household uses and beach recreation (35.3%). This method provided more detailed information on the sources of beach debris, because 52 items not included in the ICC data were used for further identification of sources (i.e. agriculture or foreign sources). This study firstly classified the sources of beach debris in Korea. Fisheries such as commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture contributed to the majority of beach debris in Korea. The most frequent item, styrofoam buoy was interpreted as being originated mostly from marine aquaculture. The second most frequent item, fishing ropes can be originated both commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture, but not possible to differentiate them on the beaches.
Volume (m )
OSPAR (2007) Walker et al. (2006) 480
This study
has designated funds for its removal, the yearly budget for cleanup programs reaching a total of $10 million since 2009 (MLTM et al., 2009). The main targets of the cleanup programs have been derelict fishing gear, such as fishing nets, ropes, and traps deposited on the sea bottom or encountered during fishing activities. However, fishing-related debris still accounts for over 50% of the number of debris items although fishermen accounted for only 0.2% of the total population in 2007. This study shows the current management measures are not effective for reducing fishingrelated debris pollution, especially styrofoam debris from aquaculture which most frequently occur on Korean beaches (Heo et al., 2013; Lee et al., 2013). The Korean government strengthened preventive policies in the 2nd National Plan for Marine Debris Management in Korea which would be implemented from 2014 to 2018 (MOF, 2013). Long-term monitoring of beach debris could be used to evaluate effects of the policies. The results of this study could be used as a baseline to monitor the increase or decrease of marine debris over years and effectiveness of certain policies (e.g., Convey et al., 2002). Acknowledgements
4.3. Marine debris source control The results of source identification in this study showed that fishing-related debris should be a focus for management of debris in Korea. Since the late 1990s, underwater pollution by marine debris has drawn much public attention in the country, as it is recognized as a serious environmental issue. The Korean government
We express our sincere thanks to Dr. Martin Thiel for his useful comments. This paper is a part of Sunwook Hong’s Ph.D. dissertation of Pukyong National University. It would not have been possible without many volunteers and organizations that collected the data. In particular we thank Myeong Rae Cho (Headquarter of Korea Marine Rescue Center, KMRC), Im Cheol Jeong (Echo of
34
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
Nature Love), Bo Kyeong Lee (Machangjin Federation of Environmental Movement), Chool Ee Park (KMRC in Jinsa), Jeong Shik Choi (KMRC in Goheung), Woon Bong Kong (KMRC in Sokcho), Dae Shik Hwang (KMRC in Boryeong), Kyeong Ok Seo (Shiheung Federation of Environmental Movement), Kyeong Shik Jeong (Hanmaeun Charity), Yang Kyu Jeon (Uljin Ocean Guardians), Young Woong Lee (Jeju Federation of Environmental Movement), Young Eup You (Shinan Tidal Flat Meusium), Sun Mee Hwang (Gang-hwa Citizens Coalition), Moo Hee Lee (Environment Keepers’ Organization), Joo Chan Hwang (Gwangyang Bay Environment Institute), Dong Kyo Han (KMRC in Buan), Kyeong Jin Kim (KMRC in Busan), Sang Wook Lee (SCUBA association in Ulsan), Hyuk Seo (KMRC in Haenam), and Sang Wook Jeong (Tongyeong Council of Sea Explorers of Korea). The Department of Marine Conservation, Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries, South Korea funded the survey through Korea Marine Rescue Center that led to the development of the National Marine Debris Monitoring Program (2008–2009). Appendix A. Supplementary material Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014. 05.051. References Barnes, D.K.A., 2002. Biodiversity: invasions by marine life on plastic debris. Nature 416, 808–809. Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V., Shirk, J., 2009. Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. Bioscience 59, 977–984. Cheshire, A.C., Adler, E., Barbière, J., Cohen, Y., Evans, S., Jarayabhand, S., Jeftic, L., Jung, R.T., Kinsey, S., Kusui, E.T., Lavine, I., Manyara, P., Oosterbaan, L., Pereira, M.A., Sheavly, S., Tkalin, A., Varadarajan, S., Wenneker, B., Westphalen, G., 2009. UNEP/IOC Guidelines on Survey and Monitoring of Marine Litter. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies, No. 186; IOC Technical Series No. 83: xii + pp. 120.. Coe, J.M., Rogers, D.B., 1997. Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts and Solutions. Springer, New York, p. 432. Convey, P., Barnes, D., Morton, A., 2002. Debris accumulation on oceanic island shores of the Scotia Arc, Antarctica. Polar Biol. 25, 612–617. Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44, 842–852. Donohue, M.J., Boland, R.C., Sramek, C.M., Antonelis, G.A., 2001. Derelict fishing gear in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands: diving surveys and debris removal in 1999 confirm threat to coral reef ecosystems. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 42, 1301–1312. Edyvane, K.S., Dalgetty, A., Hone, P.W., Higham, J.S., Wace, N.M., 2004. Long-term marine litter monitoring in the remote Great Australian Bight, South Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 48, 1060–1075. Eriksson, C., Burton, H., Fitch, S., Schulz, M., van den Hoff, J., 2013. Daily accumulation rates of marine debris on sub-Antarctic island beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 66 (1), 199–208. Hall, K., 2000. Impacts of Marine Debris and Oil: Economic and Social Costs to Coastal Communities. Kommunenes Internasjonale Miljøorganisasjon, p. 124. Heo, N.W., Hong, S.H., Han, G.M., Hong, S., Lee, J., Song, Y.K., Jang, M., Shim, W.J., 2013. Distribution of small plastic debris in cross-section and high strandline on Heungnam Beach, South Korea. Ocean Sci. J. 48, 225–233.
Hong, S., Lee, J., Jang, Y.C., Kim, Y.J., Kim, H.J., Han, D., Hong, S.H., Kang, D., Shim, W.J., 2013. Impacts of marine debris on wild animals in the coastal area of Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 66, 117–124. Isobe, A., Kako, S., Chang, P.H., Matsuno, T., 2009. Two-way particle tracking model for specifying sources of drifting objects: application to the East China Sea shelf. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 26, 1672–1682. Jung, R.-T., Sung, H.G., Chun, T.-B., Keel, S.-I., 2010. Practical engineering approaches and infrastructure to address the problem of marine debris in Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 1523–1532. Kako, S., Isobe, A., Magome, S., 2010a. Sequential monitoring of beach litter using webcams. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 775–779. Kako, S., Isobe, A., Seino, S., Kojima, A., 2010b. Inverse estimation of drifting-object outflows using actual observation data. J. Oceanogr. 66, 291–297. KHOA (Korea Hydrographic and Oceanographic Administration), 2012. Marine Territory of Korea. Korean Hydrographic and Oceanographic Administration, Incheon, Korea, p. 97. Lee, J., Hong, S., Song, Y.K., Hong, S.H., Jang, Y.C., Jang, M., Heo, N.W., Han, G.M., Lee, M.J., Kang, D., 2013. Relationships among the abundances of plastic debris in different size classes on beaches in South Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 77, 349–354. Madzena, A., Lasiak, T., 1997. Spatial and temporal variations in beach litter on the Transkei coast of South Africa. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 34, 900–907. MIFAFF (Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries), 2012. Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Statistical Yearbook. Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Sejong, Korea, p. 475. MLTM (Ministry of Land, Transport, and Maritime), MOE (Ministry of Environment), MIFAFF (Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries), KCG (Korea Coast Guard), 2009. The 1st National Plan for Marine Litter Management (2009–2013) (in Korean).. MOF (Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries), MOE (Ministry of Environment), KCG (Korea Coast Guard), 2013. The 2nd National Plan for Marine Litter Management (2014–2019) (in Korean).. Ocean Conservancy, 2007. International Coastal Cleanup Report 2006: A World of Difference. Ocean Conservancy, Washington, DC, USA. OSPAR Commission, 2007. Monitoring of marine litter on beaches in the OSPAR region. p. 74.. Otley, H., Ingham, R., 2003. Marine debris surveys at Volunteer Beach, Falkland Islands, during the summer of 2001/02. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 46, 1534–1539. Peckenham, J.M., Thornton, T., Peckenham, P., 2012. Validation of student generated data for assessment of groundwater quality. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 21, 287–294. Ribic, C.A., Sheavly, S.B., Rugg, D.J., Erdmann, E.S., 2010. Trends and drivers of marine debris on the Atlantic coast of the United States 1997–2007. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 1231–1242. Rochman, C.M., Hot, E., Kurobe, T., The, S.J., 2013. Ingested plastic transfers hazardous chemicals to fish and induces hepatic stress. Scientific Reports 3. Article number: 3263 (doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep03263).. Smith, S.D., Markic, A., 2013. Estimates of Marine debris accumulation on beaches are strongly affected by the temporal scale of sampling. PLoS One 8 (12), e83694. Tourinho, Paula S., Fillmann, Gilberto., 2011. Temporal trend of litter contamination at Cassino beach, Southern Brazil. J. Integr. Coast. Zone Manage. 11 (1), 97–102. Velander, K., Mocogni, M., 1999. Beach litter sampling strategies: is there a ‘‘best’’ method?. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 38, 1134–1140. Walker, T.R., Reid, K., Arnould, J.P.Y., Croxall, J.P., 1997. Marine debris surveys at Bird Island, South Georgia 1990–1995. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 34, 61–65. Walker, T.R., Grant, J., Archambault, M.-C., 2006. Accumulation of marine debris on an intertidal beach in an urban park (Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia). Water Qual. Res. J. Can. 41, 256–262. Whiting, S.D., 1998. Types and sources of marine debris in Fog Bay, Northern Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 36, 904–910. Williams, A.T., Tudor, D.T., Randerson, P., 2003. Beach litter sourcing in the Bristol Channel and Wales, UK. Water Air Soil Pollut. 143, 387–408. Worthington, T., Kemp, P.S., Osborne, P.E., Dillen, A., Coeck, J., Bunzel-Drüke, M., Naura, M., Gregory, J., Easton, K., 2012. A spatial analytical approach for selecting reintroduction sites for burbot in English rivers. Freshw. Biol. 57, 602– 611.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul
Quantities, composition, and sources of beach debris in Korea from the results of nationwide monitoring Sunwook Hong a,b, Jongmyoung Lee a,b,⇑, Daeseok Kang b, Hyun-Woo Choi c, Sun-Hwa Ko d a
Korea Marine Litter Institute, Our Sea of East Asia Network, 717 Leadersvill 1570-8, Jukrim, Gwangdo, Tongyeong, Gyeongnam 650-826, South Korea Pukyong National University, 45 Yongso-ro, Nam-Gu, Busan 608-737, South Korea c Oceanographic Data & Information Center, Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology, Ansan 656-834, South Korea d Educational Psychology, Graduate school of education, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Gyeongnam 660-701, South Korea b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Available online 12 June 2014 Keywords: Marine debris Beach monitoring Quantity Composition Source Korea
a b s t r a c t This study assessed the levels of marine debris pollution and identified its main sources in Korea. The surveys were bimonthly conducted by NGO leaders and volunteers on 20 beaches from March 2008 to November 2009. The quantities of marine debris were estimated at 480.9 (±267.7) count 100 m 1 for number, 86.5 (±78.6) kg 100 m 1 for weight, and 0.48 (±0.38) m3 100 m 1 for volume. The level of marine debris pollution on the Korean beaches was comparable to that in the coastal areas of the North Atlantic ocean and South Africa. Plastics and styrofoam occupied the majority of debris composition in terms of number (66.7%) and volume (62.3%). The main sources of debris were fishing activities including commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture (51.3%). Especially styrofoam buoy from aquaculture was the biggest contributor to marine debris pollution on these beaches. Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Marine debris has become a global marine environmental problem that involves multiple stakeholders in many different countries. It is defined as ‘‘any manufactured or processed solid waste material that enters the marine environment from any source’’ (Coe and Rogers, 1997). Marine debris causes problems beyond creating an eyesore for tourists. It is a source of serious damage to marine lives, ecosystems, fisheries, and navigational safety. Transfer of chemicals to marine biota has also been recorded recently (Barnes, 2002; Derraik, 2002; Donohue et al., 2001; Hall, 2000; Hong et al., 2013; Rochman et al., 2013). Numerous efforts have been made worldwide to comprehend the magnitude and extent of the marine debris problem (OSPAR, 2007; Ribic et al., 2010). The majority of research has revealed the abundance, composition, geographical distribution, or occasional sources of marine debris, showing highly temporal or spatial variation even along a beach or during a single day (Eriksson et al., 2013; Kako et al., 2010a; Smith and Markic, 2013; Velander and Mocogni, 1999). The quantitative or qualitative data have been used to understand the influence of wind, ocean or tidal currents, ⇑ Corresponding author at: Korea Marine Litter Institute, Our Sea of East Asia Network, 717 Leadersvill 1570-8, Jukrim, Gwangdo, Tongyeong, Gyeongnam 650-826, South Korea. Tel.: +82 55 649 5224; fax: +82 303 0001 4478. E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Lee). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.05.051 0025-326X/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
proximity to human population, and diverse human activities on marine debris pollution (Edyvane et al., 2004; Ribic et al., 2010; Williams et al., 2003). The Korean government has responded to the marine debris issue since the late 1990s by investing in retrieval programs and research projects. Revision of the Marine Environment Management Act in 2008 provided the legal basis for managing marine debris. These efforts, however, have resulted in limited success because there is no reliable scientific information and data at the national level on the sources, types, spatiotemporal distribution, and impacts of marine debris. Government programs have focused mostly on the retrieval of floating or deposited fishing gear from near-shore coastal waters, fishing grounds, and deep sea beds with government or private vessels. Marine debris research has provided technical solutions only for the collection and treatment of floating and sunken debris (Jung et al., 2010). Even though the removal programs and technical approaches have contributed to some extent to mitigating marine debris pollution, the current marine debris management regime in Korea is insufficient for meeting the future challenges that Korean society faces regarding protection and sustainable use of the local marine ecosystem. This study was aimed at assessing the level of beach debris pollution as well as identifying management priorities for beach debris in Korea. To achieve the aim, we surveyed the quantities, composition, and sources of beach debris through regular, nationwide monitoring for 2 years (2008–2009).
28
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
2. Method 2.1. Study area A total of 20 beaches were monitored along the eastern, western, and southern coasts of Korea (Fig. 1). The beaches selected were composed of sand or pebbles, had moderate to low slopes, and were of sufficient size to encompass 100-m survey lines. Accessibility to sites for regular monitoring and debris removal after surveys was also considered in the site selection. Beaches with other routine cleanup activities and that were located within or close to protected areas were excluded. The three coasts of Korea have very distinct characteristics in morphology and marine economic activities. The east coast of Korea has a relatively straight coastline bordered by a narrow strip
of the continental shelf in the East Sea. No major rivers drain this steep coastal watershed. Well-developed sandy shores attract tourists during the summer, and fishery using gill nets and trawls dominates the fishery sector in the region. In contrast, complex coastlines with inlets, bays, estuaries, and islands characterize the west and south coasts of Korea. The west coast has extensive tidal flats created by high tidal range and sediment supply from big rivers that drain into the Yellow Sea. Encompassing over 60% of the islands in Korea and many inlets and bays, the south coast is the most complex coast, in which the total length of coastline is approximately 28 times that of a straight line (KHOA, 2012). Along the west and south coasts, local economies benefit from intensive tourism, commercial fishing, marine aquaculture, and shipping. More than 70% of aquaculture production in Korea in 2011 (MIFAFF, 2012) was from the south coast area, which
Fig. 1. Location of beach debris monitoring sites in Korea during the period 2008–2009.
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
provides natural aquaculture grounds for oysters, sea squirts, abalones, and seaweeds. The population density is highest in the west coast area and lowest in the east coast area. 2.2. Survey methods A 100-m-long survey line was located with GPS coordinates on each beach. All debris larger than 2.5 cm in diameter that occurred between the low tide mark and the beginning of vegetation on dunes or artificial barriers was collected and classified into 12 categories. Debris in each category was counted and weighed to the nearest 0.1 kg using a portable scale on the survey sites in their wet or dry conditions. Volumes were estimated based on the number of garbage bags of known volume used to collect the beach debris. Debris counted and weighed on the beach was recommended to be removed after the survey. Survey results were recorded on data cards that listed 94 debris categories grouped according to the type of materials (plastic, Styrofoam, processed wood, paper, glass, metal, cloth, and others), usages (smoking/firework and medical/personal hygiene), or foreign origin (foreign items). Forty-two categories were adopted from the International Coastal Cleanup (ICC) data card (Ocean Conservancy, 2007), and an additional 52 categories were added based on the list of debris identified in ICC events from 2001 to 2007 in Korea. Six categories (fishing nets, fishing ropes, strapping bands, plastic sheets for agriculture, Styrofoam buoys, and construction lumber) were subdivided into two size groups: maximum lengths of 2.5–50 cm and larger than 50 cm. A total of 220 surveys were carried out every 2 months (at the end of odd numbered months ± 5 days) from the end of March 2008 until the end of November 2009. A workshop (January 18–19, 2008) was organized to train participating NGOs on how to conduct the survey. Before the survey started, all existing marine debris on the selected beaches was removed at the end of January 2008 in order to remove possible effects accumulated during the past years. The inclusion of quality control is an important requirement to determine the accuracy of the data provided by volunteers (Worthington et al., 2012; Peckenham et al., 2012). To ensure the quality of data collected, we (i) provided a clear protocol with a detailed photo guide (Bonney et al., 2009), (ii) organized a workshop to train volunteers before the monitoring started, (iii) visited individual sites to train NGO leaders and volunteers on the beaches, and (iv) held three workshops to share the results and experiences and to provide re-education opportunities during the entire survey period. During the entire survey period, we reminded volunteers repetitively about the importance of timely surveys and received all raw data immediately after the survey on each survey beach. Consistent monitoring was possible because there was no change in monitoring leaders during the period of survey. An information board was placed at each monitoring site to minimize probable interference by visitors or residents. 2.3. Source identification Sources of debris were identified following two different methods: ICC and Whiting (1998). The ICC method assigns debris into five sources of shoreline/recreational, ocean/waterway, smokingrelated, dumping, and medical/personal hygiene activities. The sources of 42 items included in the ICC data card were determined using the ICC method. The Whiting’s cross-tabulation probability scoring system assigns probability scores of potential sources to each item. In this study, 10 potential sources were considered for the Whiting’s method: household use, beach recreation, smoking, medical/personal hygiene, dumping, agriculture, fisheries (commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture), sports fishing,
29
shipping, and foreign sources. Foreign debris was identified using clues on the surface of debris, such as characteristic alphabets, phone numbers, brand names, bar codes, or recycling marks. A modified scoring system from that of Whiting (1998) was used for this study: 5 for highly probable, 3 for probable, and 1 for possible sources. Miscellaneous items in each material category were not included in the source identification using Whiting’s method. 2.4. Statistical tests Statistical analyses were performed to determine whether the deposition rates of marine debris differed significantly among the survey beaches with respect to geographical location in the coastal area of Korea. The 20 monitoring sites were grouped into the west, south, or east coast beaches. Kruskal–Wallis’ one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) by ranks was used for the statistical analyses, because the sample groups did not show normality and equal variance and differed in the sample sizes. When differences were detected, Tukey’s HSD (Honestly Significant Difference) test was performed to identify the survey beach groups that were significantly different at the 5% level. 3. Results 3.1. Quantities of beach debris A total of 105,797 pieces in 94 debris categories were collected from bimonthly surveys conducted on 20 Korean beaches from March 2008 until November 2009. The total weight and volume were 19,020.5 kg and 104.9 m3, respectively. Average amounts of debris on the survey beaches in number, weight, and volume were 480.9 (±267.7 SD) counts 100 m 1, 86.5 (±78.6 SD) kg 100 m 1, and 0.48 (±0.38 SD) m3 100 m 1, respectively (Table 1). The Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA test revealed significant differences among the beach groups on the three Korean coasts (Fig. 2). The east coast had lower average amounts in weight (v2 = 6.741, df = 2, p = 0.034) and volume (v2 = 9.077, df = 2, p = 0.011), but not in number (v2 = 3.480, df = 2, p = 0.176), compared with the other coasts. The post hoc Tukey’s test (p < 0.05) showed that the east coast was significantly different from the south coast in terms of weight and volume. No clear and systematic difference in the seasonal pattern in quantities was observed among the east, west, and south coasts (Fig. 3). However, the average number of items (±SD) was relatively higher in the summer season (July) in the southern coast but lower in the western coast. The quantities of debris in terms of weight and volume were highly variable, showing no seasonal pattern. 3.2. Composition of beach debris and most common items Plastic items were the most numerous debris item (49.8% of the total number) collected on the beaches during the survey period (Fig. 4a), followed by styrofoam (16.9%) and processed wood (8.4%). If foreign plastic bottles, lids, food wrappers, buoys, and lighters (8.3%) were included, the proportion of plastics reached 58.1%. Wood was the most abundant material in terms of weight, occupying 37.9% of the total weight (Fig. 4b). Plastics (30.3%) were also an important debris item according to weight, followed by styrofoam (12.5%). On a volume basis, styrofoam (31.6%) and plastic (30.7%) were the main contributions to the composition of the survey beaches, followed by wood (23.6%) (Fig. 4c). Styrofoam buoys were the most abundant debris item on the survey beaches in terms of number, comprising 12.8% of the total number (Table 2). Fishing ropes (8.2%), glass beverage bottles (6.9%), plastic bags (6.6%), and plastic food wrappers (6.4%) followed the styrofoam buoys, each comprising more than 6% of
30
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
Table 1 Average quantities of beach debris in number, weight, and volume on the survey beaches in Korea from March 2008 until November 2009. Site No.
Coast
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
West West West West West West West South South South South South South East East East East East East South
(c)
Weight (kg ·100m-1)
(b)
Volume (m3 ·100m -1)
(a)
1
Weight (kg 100 m
Av
SD
Av
SD
Av
SD
700.2 337.4 307.9 269.5 443.1 198.1 345.1 150.0 557.9 607.8 579.5 832.1 1206.8 299.7 248.3 625.9 198.3 294.3 682.3 733.8
484.7 162.1 227.3 119.1 313.2 121.3 195.5 64.2 277.7 371.1 508.6 330.7 453.5 183.3 121.9 224.2 160.8 124.8 280.8 603.6
58.8 17.9 58.5 71.3 180.5 71.0 345.8 44.1 159.5 176.4 82.7 56.6 76.1 18.3 24.5 50.6 19.9 32.0 69.0 115.6
44.1 13.9 90.5 50.6 199.8 56.3 235.4 30.9 101.5 99.1 43.9 25.5 49.3 17.6 24.0 28.5 20.1 22.2 76.6 117.3
0.42 0.09 0.27 0.40 1.30 0.47 0.64 0.33 0.61 1.18 0.43 0.40 0.46 0.10 0.17 0.31 0.08 0.24 0.29 1.34
0.43 0.07 0.37 0.28 1.02 0.31 0.36 0.38 0.46 0.69 0.33 0.19 0.28 0.06 0.17 0.19 0.07 0.15 0.11 1.47
480.9
267.7
86.5
78.6
0.48
0.38
Number (counts·100m -1)
Av
Number (counts 100 m
)
p = 0.176
1
Volume (m3 100 m
)
1
)
62.7% of the total number of debris items collected on the survey beaches. 3.3. Sources of beach debris
p = 0.034
ab
b a
a
p = 0.011
a b
Fig. 2. Quantities of marine debris in terms of (a) number, (b) weight, and (c) volume on the survey beach groups in the west, south, and east coasts of Korea along the coastal line. The east coast had clearly lower quantities and significantly different quantities in terms of weight and volume, but not in number, compared with the other coasts.
the total debris item count. The fishing and shipping industries contributed to much of the debris pollution on beaches in Korea, with styrofoam buoys, fishing ropes, and timber for ships and aquaculture facilities accounting for 24.5% of the total number of items. The most common 10 debris items (Table 2) made up
Sources of 42 categories (a total of 65,384 counts) included in the ICC data card are shown in Fig. 5a. Ocean/waterway activities that produce debris, such as plastic fishing ropes, buoys, and strapping bands, were the largest source of beach debris (49.2%) in Korea. They were closely followed by shoreline/recreational activities (45.1%) related to items such as plastic bags, beverage bottles, and disposable cups. The rest of the beach debris (5.7%) was from smoking-related or dumping activities and medical/personal hygiene. Whiting’s method revealed that fisheries (commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture) were the largest source of beach debris in Korea, accounting for 35.3% of the total number of debris items (33,578 of 95,023 items excluding miscellaneous items) (Fig. 5b). Debris from household uses (20.1%) and beach recreation (12.4%) were the next important sources. Debris from foreign sources occupied 4.7% of the beach debris. Smoking, dumping, and medical/personal hygiene were possible sources of 8.8% of beach debris. Debris originated from fisheries source was predominant in the west (39.2%) and south (40.4%) coasts (Fig. 6). In the east coast, those from fisheries (27.4%) and household use (25.4%) similarly contributed to the quantities. Other debris from beach recreation, smoking, and sports fishing-related debris were relatively abundant in the east coast whereas debris drifted from neighboring countries was more common in the west and south coasts. 4. Discussion 4.1. Assessment of beach debris pollution in Korea This study was the first attempt in Korea to assess beach debris pollution nationwide based on the regular monitoring. There are some studies to understand debris pollution and/or its sources on the basis of regular beach monitoring in the globe (Convey et al., 2002; Eriksson et al., 2013; Madzena and Lasiak, 1997; OSPAR, 2007; Otley and Ingham, 2003; Smith and Markic, 2013;
31
Number (count·100m -1)
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
West South East
1,000
500
0
Weight (kg ·100m-1)
Mar '08 May '08 Jul '08 Sep '08 Nov '08 Jan '09 Mar '09 May '09 Jul '09 Sep '09 Nov '09
200
100
0
Mar '08 May '08 Jul '08 Sep '08 Nov '08 Jan '09 Mar '09 May '09 Jul '09 Sep '09 Nov '09
Volume (m3 ·100m -1)
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
Mar'08 May'08 Jul '08 Sep'08
Nov'08 Jan'09 Mar'09 May'09 Jul'09 Sep'09 Nov '09
Fig. 3. Seasonal variation in quantities (number, weight, and volume) of beach debris on the east, west, and south coasts in Korea from March 2008 to November 2009.
(a) Number (counts ·100m-1) 0
20000
Styrofoam
2000
4000
Cloth
2.4% 7.9%
Rubber
0.6%
Paper
1.7%
Medical/Personal hygiene
0.4%
Smoking/Firework
4.0%
Foreign
4.3% 1.1%
6000
8000
(c) Volume (m 3 ·100m-1) 0
10
20
30 30.7%
30.3%
31.6%
12.5%
23.6%
37.9%
8.4% 2.6%
Miscellaneous
0
16.9%
Metal
Glass
60000
49.8%
Plastic
Wood
40000
(b) Weight (kg·100m-1)
3.9% 2.4%
3.1% 2.6%
2.4%
1.3%
2.9%
1.8%
0.4%
0.8%
0.3%
0.1%
2.8% 4.1%
1.7% 2.5%
Fig. 4. Composition of marine debris collected on 20 Korean beaches from March in 2008 until November in 2009.
32
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
The variety of variables affecting debris number could probably result in no distinct features among the coasts and with seasons. For example, the number of debris was highest in July 2008 and 2009 in the south coast. However, the sites and debris items which mainly contributed to the number were changed each year. In July 2008, plastic food wrappers for Masan (#13, Fig. 1) and styrofoam buoys for Sacheon (#11) were drastically increased but in July 2009, glass beverage bottles for Tongyung (#12) and foreign plastic beverage bottles for Jejudo (#20) were outstandingly frequent. Plastic food wrappers for Masan were due to the input from a river in summer monsoon season (June and July). Styrofoam buoys for Sacheon were possibly carried by southeast wind which is prevailing wind direction in summer. The buoy debris could be more easily accumulated because the beach opens to the south. Glass beverage bottles dominant in Tongyung were littered by beach visitors and foreign plastic beverage bottles for Jejudo were washed ashore by northeastward ocean currents over the East China Sea (Isobe et al., 2009; Kako et al., 2010a,b). Various factors on the survey sites possibly attenuated spatial and seasonal patterns during this study.
Table 2 Most common 10 beach debris items collected on the survey beaches and their proportion of the total debris item number in Korea from March 2008 until November 2009. Rank
Items
Count
%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Styrofoam buoys Fishing ropes Beverage bottles (glass) Plastic bags Plastic food wrappers Plastic caps and lids Beverage bottles (plastic) Plastic strapping bands Miscellaneous plastic items Timber (for ships and aquaculture facilities)
13,588 8703 7326 6974 6819 5176 5065 4737 4223 3676
12.8 8.2 6.9 6.6 6.4 4.9 4.8 4.5 4.0 3.5
66,287
62.7
Total
Tourinho and Fillmann, 2011; Walker et al., 1997, 2006). Smith and Markic (2013) revealed the estimation of beach debris amounts was significantly affected by survey interval. So we compared this study with the previous researches which monthly or seasonally investigated quantities of debris over a certain length of beach (Table 3). The pollution level of Korean beaches by marine debris was comparable to those of European coasts (OSPAR, 2007), Nova Scotia, Canada (Walker et al., 2006), Transkei coast, South Africa (Madzena and Lasiak, 1997), and Casino beach, Brazil (Tourinho and Fillmann, 2011) but one order of magnitude higher than those of Bird Island, South Georgia (Walker et al., 1997) and Volunteer beach, Falkland Islands (Otley and Ingham, 2003). Although the Korean peninsula has distinct characteristics among the east, west, and south coasts, the influence of the characteristics was not consistently evident for the survey sites in this study. River inputs or complex geomorphic condition in the west and south coasts probably caused higher quantities of debris than in the east coast. However, the number of debris (counts 100 m 1) was not significantly higher in the west and south coasts than in the east coast.
4.2. Source identification methods The ICC and the scoring methods showed no significant discrepancy in identifying the sources. The main sources of beach debris in the study were ocean/waterway (49.2% by the ICC method) and fishery-related marine debris (51.3% by the scoring method). The ICC method links individual items to a specific source. Even though there is an oversimplification in assigning sources of debris, it does allow a comparison between the data from various global regions over a period of 25 years. This is a powerful tool when considering the lack of standardized and harmonized monitoring methodologies for beach debris (Cheshire et al., 2009). In this study, the proportion of ocean/waterway sources (49.2%) was much higher than that of the international data (less than 5% for the last 20 years) (Ocean Conservancy, 2007). It suggests that ocean/waterway activities
(a) Shoreline & recreational activities Smoking - related activities
45.1% 5.4%
Dumping activities
0.2%
Medical/personal hygiene
0.1%
Ocean/waterway activities
(b)
49.2%
20.1%
Household use
12.4%
Beach recreation Dumping Smoking Agriculture Medical/hygiene
4.7% 3.7% 2.7% 0.4% 35.3%
Fisheries Sports fishing Shipping Foreign
8.5% 7.5% 4.7%
Fig. 5. Sources of beach debris inferred by (a) the International Coastal Cleanup (ICC) method (Ocean Conservancy, 2007) and (b) the cross-tabulation probability scoring system (Whiting, 1998). Gray bar: land-based sources, black bar: sea-based sources, and white bar: foreign sources.
33
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
40%
West South East
30%
20%
10%
0%
Household Beach use recreation
Smoking
Medical/ Agriculture Fisheries hygiene
Sports fishing
Shipping
Dumping
Foreign
Fig. 6. Sources of beach debris inferred by the cross-tabulation probability scoring system (Whiting, 1998). Fisheries source accounted for the largest proportion of debris in the west and south coasts.
Table 3 Comparison of deposition rates of beach debris with previous reports (counts, weights, volume per one kilometer of beach length). Location sample site
Period (Frequency of surveys)
Sites (No.)
1994– 1995
Monthly (13)
South Atlantic Bird island, South Georgia Volunteer beach, Falkland Islands Cassino beach, Brazil
1995 2002 2003–2006
North Atlantic Europe Nova Scotia, Canada East Asia South Korea
South Africa Transkei coast, South Africa
Year
Unit (km
1
)
References 3
Count (ea)
Weight (kg)
6
1400–9800
3.4–25
Madzena and Lasiak (1997)
Monthly (6) Monthly (4) Monthly (48)
1 1 4
207 77 5300– 10,700
17.3
Walker et al. (1997) Otley and Ingham (2003) Tourinho and Fillmann (2011)
2001–2006 2005
Seasonally (24) Monthly (6)
51 1
5420 5071.4
28.6
2008–2009
Bimonthly (11)
20
4809
865
should be controlled at the source for efficient management of beach debris in Korea. For the scoring method, to assign weights to potential sources can be arbitrary but may allow local, cultural, or social diversity in the interpretation of sources. The scoring method revealed higher proportions of fisheries, shipping, or sports fishing associated items (51.3%) among the beach debris of Korea than those related to household uses and beach recreation (35.3%). This method provided more detailed information on the sources of beach debris, because 52 items not included in the ICC data were used for further identification of sources (i.e. agriculture or foreign sources). This study firstly classified the sources of beach debris in Korea. Fisheries such as commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture contributed to the majority of beach debris in Korea. The most frequent item, styrofoam buoy was interpreted as being originated mostly from marine aquaculture. The second most frequent item, fishing ropes can be originated both commercial fisheries and marine aquaculture, but not possible to differentiate them on the beaches.
Volume (m )
OSPAR (2007) Walker et al. (2006) 480
This study
has designated funds for its removal, the yearly budget for cleanup programs reaching a total of $10 million since 2009 (MLTM et al., 2009). The main targets of the cleanup programs have been derelict fishing gear, such as fishing nets, ropes, and traps deposited on the sea bottom or encountered during fishing activities. However, fishing-related debris still accounts for over 50% of the number of debris items although fishermen accounted for only 0.2% of the total population in 2007. This study shows the current management measures are not effective for reducing fishingrelated debris pollution, especially styrofoam debris from aquaculture which most frequently occur on Korean beaches (Heo et al., 2013; Lee et al., 2013). The Korean government strengthened preventive policies in the 2nd National Plan for Marine Debris Management in Korea which would be implemented from 2014 to 2018 (MOF, 2013). Long-term monitoring of beach debris could be used to evaluate effects of the policies. The results of this study could be used as a baseline to monitor the increase or decrease of marine debris over years and effectiveness of certain policies (e.g., Convey et al., 2002). Acknowledgements
4.3. Marine debris source control The results of source identification in this study showed that fishing-related debris should be a focus for management of debris in Korea. Since the late 1990s, underwater pollution by marine debris has drawn much public attention in the country, as it is recognized as a serious environmental issue. The Korean government
We express our sincere thanks to Dr. Martin Thiel for his useful comments. This paper is a part of Sunwook Hong’s Ph.D. dissertation of Pukyong National University. It would not have been possible without many volunteers and organizations that collected the data. In particular we thank Myeong Rae Cho (Headquarter of Korea Marine Rescue Center, KMRC), Im Cheol Jeong (Echo of
34
S. Hong et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 84 (2014) 27–34
Nature Love), Bo Kyeong Lee (Machangjin Federation of Environmental Movement), Chool Ee Park (KMRC in Jinsa), Jeong Shik Choi (KMRC in Goheung), Woon Bong Kong (KMRC in Sokcho), Dae Shik Hwang (KMRC in Boryeong), Kyeong Ok Seo (Shiheung Federation of Environmental Movement), Kyeong Shik Jeong (Hanmaeun Charity), Yang Kyu Jeon (Uljin Ocean Guardians), Young Woong Lee (Jeju Federation of Environmental Movement), Young Eup You (Shinan Tidal Flat Meusium), Sun Mee Hwang (Gang-hwa Citizens Coalition), Moo Hee Lee (Environment Keepers’ Organization), Joo Chan Hwang (Gwangyang Bay Environment Institute), Dong Kyo Han (KMRC in Buan), Kyeong Jin Kim (KMRC in Busan), Sang Wook Lee (SCUBA association in Ulsan), Hyuk Seo (KMRC in Haenam), and Sang Wook Jeong (Tongyeong Council of Sea Explorers of Korea). The Department of Marine Conservation, Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries, South Korea funded the survey through Korea Marine Rescue Center that led to the development of the National Marine Debris Monitoring Program (2008–2009). Appendix A. Supplementary material Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014. 05.051. References Barnes, D.K.A., 2002. Biodiversity: invasions by marine life on plastic debris. Nature 416, 808–809. Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V., Shirk, J., 2009. Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. Bioscience 59, 977–984. Cheshire, A.C., Adler, E., Barbière, J., Cohen, Y., Evans, S., Jarayabhand, S., Jeftic, L., Jung, R.T., Kinsey, S., Kusui, E.T., Lavine, I., Manyara, P., Oosterbaan, L., Pereira, M.A., Sheavly, S., Tkalin, A., Varadarajan, S., Wenneker, B., Westphalen, G., 2009. UNEP/IOC Guidelines on Survey and Monitoring of Marine Litter. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies, No. 186; IOC Technical Series No. 83: xii + pp. 120.. Coe, J.M., Rogers, D.B., 1997. Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts and Solutions. Springer, New York, p. 432. Convey, P., Barnes, D., Morton, A., 2002. Debris accumulation on oceanic island shores of the Scotia Arc, Antarctica. Polar Biol. 25, 612–617. Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44, 842–852. Donohue, M.J., Boland, R.C., Sramek, C.M., Antonelis, G.A., 2001. Derelict fishing gear in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands: diving surveys and debris removal in 1999 confirm threat to coral reef ecosystems. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 42, 1301–1312. Edyvane, K.S., Dalgetty, A., Hone, P.W., Higham, J.S., Wace, N.M., 2004. Long-term marine litter monitoring in the remote Great Australian Bight, South Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 48, 1060–1075. Eriksson, C., Burton, H., Fitch, S., Schulz, M., van den Hoff, J., 2013. Daily accumulation rates of marine debris on sub-Antarctic island beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 66 (1), 199–208. Hall, K., 2000. Impacts of Marine Debris and Oil: Economic and Social Costs to Coastal Communities. Kommunenes Internasjonale Miljøorganisasjon, p. 124. Heo, N.W., Hong, S.H., Han, G.M., Hong, S., Lee, J., Song, Y.K., Jang, M., Shim, W.J., 2013. Distribution of small plastic debris in cross-section and high strandline on Heungnam Beach, South Korea. Ocean Sci. J. 48, 225–233.
Hong, S., Lee, J., Jang, Y.C., Kim, Y.J., Kim, H.J., Han, D., Hong, S.H., Kang, D., Shim, W.J., 2013. Impacts of marine debris on wild animals in the coastal area of Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 66, 117–124. Isobe, A., Kako, S., Chang, P.H., Matsuno, T., 2009. Two-way particle tracking model for specifying sources of drifting objects: application to the East China Sea shelf. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 26, 1672–1682. Jung, R.-T., Sung, H.G., Chun, T.-B., Keel, S.-I., 2010. Practical engineering approaches and infrastructure to address the problem of marine debris in Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 1523–1532. Kako, S., Isobe, A., Magome, S., 2010a. Sequential monitoring of beach litter using webcams. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 775–779. Kako, S., Isobe, A., Seino, S., Kojima, A., 2010b. Inverse estimation of drifting-object outflows using actual observation data. J. Oceanogr. 66, 291–297. KHOA (Korea Hydrographic and Oceanographic Administration), 2012. Marine Territory of Korea. Korean Hydrographic and Oceanographic Administration, Incheon, Korea, p. 97. Lee, J., Hong, S., Song, Y.K., Hong, S.H., Jang, Y.C., Jang, M., Heo, N.W., Han, G.M., Lee, M.J., Kang, D., 2013. Relationships among the abundances of plastic debris in different size classes on beaches in South Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 77, 349–354. Madzena, A., Lasiak, T., 1997. Spatial and temporal variations in beach litter on the Transkei coast of South Africa. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 34, 900–907. MIFAFF (Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries), 2012. Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Statistical Yearbook. Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Sejong, Korea, p. 475. MLTM (Ministry of Land, Transport, and Maritime), MOE (Ministry of Environment), MIFAFF (Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries), KCG (Korea Coast Guard), 2009. The 1st National Plan for Marine Litter Management (2009–2013) (in Korean).. MOF (Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries), MOE (Ministry of Environment), KCG (Korea Coast Guard), 2013. The 2nd National Plan for Marine Litter Management (2014–2019) (in Korean).. Ocean Conservancy, 2007. International Coastal Cleanup Report 2006: A World of Difference. Ocean Conservancy, Washington, DC, USA. OSPAR Commission, 2007. Monitoring of marine litter on beaches in the OSPAR region. p. 74.. Otley, H., Ingham, R., 2003. Marine debris surveys at Volunteer Beach, Falkland Islands, during the summer of 2001/02. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 46, 1534–1539. Peckenham, J.M., Thornton, T., Peckenham, P., 2012. Validation of student generated data for assessment of groundwater quality. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 21, 287–294. Ribic, C.A., Sheavly, S.B., Rugg, D.J., Erdmann, E.S., 2010. Trends and drivers of marine debris on the Atlantic coast of the United States 1997–2007. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 60, 1231–1242. Rochman, C.M., Hot, E., Kurobe, T., The, S.J., 2013. Ingested plastic transfers hazardous chemicals to fish and induces hepatic stress. Scientific Reports 3. Article number: 3263 (doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep03263).. Smith, S.D., Markic, A., 2013. Estimates of Marine debris accumulation on beaches are strongly affected by the temporal scale of sampling. PLoS One 8 (12), e83694. Tourinho, Paula S., Fillmann, Gilberto., 2011. Temporal trend of litter contamination at Cassino beach, Southern Brazil. J. Integr. Coast. Zone Manage. 11 (1), 97–102. Velander, K., Mocogni, M., 1999. Beach litter sampling strategies: is there a ‘‘best’’ method?. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 38, 1134–1140. Walker, T.R., Reid, K., Arnould, J.P.Y., Croxall, J.P., 1997. Marine debris surveys at Bird Island, South Georgia 1990–1995. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 34, 61–65. Walker, T.R., Grant, J., Archambault, M.-C., 2006. Accumulation of marine debris on an intertidal beach in an urban park (Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia). Water Qual. Res. J. Can. 41, 256–262. Whiting, S.D., 1998. Types and sources of marine debris in Fog Bay, Northern Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 36, 904–910. Williams, A.T., Tudor, D.T., Randerson, P., 2003. Beach litter sourcing in the Bristol Channel and Wales, UK. Water Air Soil Pollut. 143, 387–408. Worthington, T., Kemp, P.S., Osborne, P.E., Dillen, A., Coeck, J., Bunzel-Drüke, M., Naura, M., Gregory, J., Easton, K., 2012. A spatial analytical approach for selecting reintroduction sites for burbot in English rivers. Freshw. Biol. 57, 602– 611.