DOCSLIB.ORG

Indirect Effects of Commercial Fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the Foraging of King Shag, Leucocarbo Carunculatus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Indirect Effects of Commercial Fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the Foraging of King Shag, Leucocarbo Carunculatus Indirect effects of commercial fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the foraging of king shag, Leucocarbo carunculatus. Department of Conservation Project BCBC2019-05 Paul Taylor June 2020 Statfishtics PO Box 12067 Hamilton New Zealand 3248 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Indirect effects of commercial fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the foraging of king shag, Leucocarbo carunculatus. Taylor, P.R. 42 p. King shag are a nationally endangered species with a population numbering fewer than 900 individuals, breeding only in the Marlborough Sounds. This research investigated commercial finfish catch taken from a defined study-area in the Marlborough Sounds over the past 30 years. This provides essential information for use in future research, and is as part of a wider body of work to determine potential indirect effects of commercial fishing and the relationship between availability of prey species and changes to king shag population data over the past 30 years. Three effect indicators were identified, and commercial fishing data were used to test for their presence between 1989–90 and 2018–19. Namely, (1) large, short-term changes in harvest levels, (2) changes in fishing effort vs catch rates, and (3) decreased catch rates in one area resulting in increased effort in another. Importantly, catch reporting methods changed in 2007 from fishers reporting only the larger statistical areas (stat-area) in which they fished, to reporting fine-scale latitude and longitude coordinates for each fishing event. The differences between these data were accounted for as a factor in analyses. King shag are believed to range over a foraging distance of 10–20 km from known breeding colonies and are not known to forage in waters deeper than 70 m. Therefore, the feeding range was limited to 20 km circular ranges centred on the breeding colonies and in water depths up to 70 m. Based on this, an approximately rectangular polygon, encompassing the 20 km foraging ranges of the nine documented breeding colonies sites over the last 30 years, was used to define the study-area for the purposes of requesting an initial fine-scale (data post-2007) dataset from Fisheries New Zealand. Fine-scale data were processed to better represent the study-area and the requirements of the study design whereby data were summarised by species and biomass, with species categorised by catch level (low catch levels were removed). Fish species not categorised as either an existing or potential prey species of king shag was removed based on the fishes’ biology, including life history stages, and literature describing king shag prey species. The species list was then used to generate a second Fisheries New Zealand data extract that included a similar set of factors, but at a larger geographical scale based on stat-areas. The time series of these data preceded the post-2007 fine-scale dataset provided in the first request and therefore provided large-scale data to estimate catch and effort over the entire 30-year period. The processed study-area dataset, and the estimated catch and effort, were examined for evidence of the effect indicators. Using fishing duration as a simple measure of fishing effort, a series of x-y plots of annual catch and effort were constructed for the study-area (the processed dataset) and sub-areas. A series of mapped distribution plots were used to examine temporal change in the spatial distribution of catch and effort for the sub-areas. Species catch was tabulated by year-group and the data summarised. There was no evidence of Indicator 1 in either the processed study-area dataset or the estimated catch and effort, and none for Indicator 3 in the distribution plots. There was evidence for Indicator 2 as increasing effort with a lower catch response in two of the study sub-areas; examination of the distribution plots suggest that this could be related to the setnet fishery. Future work should examine the influence of the fishing methods more closely particularly with reference to their relative efficiency in terms of catch per unit effort. Interestingly, a feature observed in the stat-area data suggested a possible interaction between the two data reporting methods that is not yet explained. A breakdown of catch by species in the study sub-areas showed gurnard contributed the highest biomass. Total species catch of all flatfish represented a relatively high proportion (15-37%) of the total in each case. Chondrichthyan species, whose contribution to king shag feeding is unknown, but possibly masked by the absence of otoliths, represented about 30% of the total catch for all sub-areas. 2 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 2 1. SCOPE........................................................................................................................................... 5 2. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Objective of the study .......................................................................................................... 5 2.2 King shag prey species ....................................................................................................... 5 2.2 The area of interest — spatial and temporal considerations ......................................... 6 3. METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 The data ................................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Processing the fine-scale data—defining the study-area ............................................... 9 3.2.1 Relevant features of the dataset ........................................................................................... 9 3.2.2 Removing fishing events deeper than 70 m .......................................................................... 9 3.2.3 Removing fishing events occurring outside the intended study-area ................................... 9 3.2.4 Fine scale spatio-temporal groupings within the study-area ................................................ 9 3.2.5 Finalising the species list ...................................................................................................... 11 3.3 Processing the stat-area data—defining the final dataset ........................................... 16 3.4 Other considerations .......................................................................................................... 16 3.4.1 Data constraints ................................................................................................................... 16 3.4.2 Fishing effort ........................................................................................................................ 16 3.4 The Analyses ...................................................................................................................... 17 3.4.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 17 3.4.2 Preliminary data exploration ............................................................................................... 17 3.4.3 Catch and effort ................................................................................................................... 17 3.4.4 Spatial distributions ............................................................................................................. 18 3.4.5 Temporal changes ................................................................................................................ 18 4. RESULTS .................................................................................................................................... 18 4.1 Preliminary data exploration of the study-area .............................................................. 18 4.2 Catch and effort .................................................................................................................. 21 4.3 Spatial distributions ............................................................................................................ 23 4.3 Temporal changes ................................................................................................................... 25 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................... 36 5.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 36 5.2 Examining indicators of a commercial fishery effect ..................................................... 36 3 5.2.1 Changes in the level of extractions ...................................................................................... 36 5.2.2 Changes in the harvest rate:fishing effort relationship ....................................................... 37 5.2.3 Spatial changes in fishing activity ........................................................................................ 37 5.2.4 Possible impacts on prey species ......................................................................................... 38 5.2.5 Future work .......................................................................................................................... 38 5.3 Effects of changes in reporting of commercial
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Zealand Fishes a Field Guide to Common Species Caught by Bottom, Midwater, and Surface Fishing Cover Photos: Top – Kingfish (Seriola Lalandi), Malcolm Francis
    New Zealand fishes A field guide to common species caught by bottom, midwater, and surface fishing Cover photos: Top – Kingfish (Seriola lalandi), Malcolm Francis. Top left – Snapper (Chrysophrys auratus), Malcolm Francis. Centre – Catch of hoki (Macruronus novaezelandiae), Neil Bagley (NIWA). Bottom left – Jack mackerel (Trachurus sp.), Malcolm Francis. Bottom – Orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus), NIWA. New Zealand fishes A field guide to common species caught by bottom, midwater, and surface fishing New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No: 208 Prepared for Fisheries New Zealand by P. J. McMillan M. P. Francis G. D. James L. J. Paul P. Marriott E. J. Mackay B. A. Wood D. W. Stevens L. H. Griggs S. J. Baird C. D. Roberts‡ A. L. Stewart‡ C. D. Struthers‡ J. E. Robbins NIWA, Private Bag 14901, Wellington 6241 ‡ Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, PO Box 467, Wellington, 6011Wellington ISSN 1176-9440 (print) ISSN 1179-6480 (online) ISBN 978-1-98-859425-5 (print) ISBN 978-1-98-859426-2 (online) 2019 Disclaimer While every effort was made to ensure the information in this publication is accurate, Fisheries New Zealand does not accept any responsibility or liability for error of fact, omission, interpretation or opinion that may be present, nor for the consequences of any decisions based on this information. Requests for further copies should be directed to: Publications Logistics Officer Ministry for Primary Industries PO Box 2526 WELLINGTON 6140 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 00 83 33 Facsimile: 04-894 0300 This publication is also available on the Ministry for Primary Industries website at http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-and-resources/publications/ A higher resolution (larger) PDF of this guide is also available by application to: [email protected] Citation: McMillan, P.J.; Francis, M.P.; James, G.D.; Paul, L.J.; Marriott, P.; Mackay, E.; Wood, B.A.; Stevens, D.W.; Griggs, L.H.; Baird, S.J.; Roberts, C.D.; Stewart, A.L.; Struthers, C.D.; Robbins, J.E.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Final LOFF W/ Ref and Detailed Info
    Final List of Foreign Fisheries Rationale for Classification ** (Presence of mortality or injury (P/A), Co- Occurrence (C/O), Company (if Source of Marine Mammal Analogous Gear Fishery/Gear Number of aquaculture or Product (for Interactions (by group Marine Mammal (A/G), No RFMO or Legal Target Species or Product Type Vessels processor) processing) Area of Operation or species) Bycatch Estimates Information (N/I)) Protection Measures References Detailed Information Antigua and Barbuda Exempt Fisheries http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/ATG/body.htm http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y5402e/y5402e06.htm,ht tp://www.tradeboss.com/default.cgi/action/viewcompan lobster, rock, spiny, demersal fish ies/searchterm/spiny+lobster/searchtermcondition/1/ , (snappers, groupers, grunts, ftp://ftp.fao.org/fi/DOCUMENT/IPOAS/national/Antigua U.S. LoF Caribbean spiny lobster trap/ pot >197 None documented, surgeonfish), flounder pots, traps 74 Lewis Fishing not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented A/G AndBarbuda/NPOA_IUU.pdf Caribbean mixed species trap/pot are category III http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/interactions/fisheries/tabl lobster, rock, spiny free diving, loops 19 Lewis Fishing not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented A/G e2/Atlantic_GOM_Caribbean_shellfish.html Queen conch (Strombus gigas), Dive (SCUBA & free molluscs diving) 25 not applicable not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented A/G U.S. trade data Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean snapper- handline, hook and grouper and other reef fish bottom longline/hook-and-line/ >5,000 snapper line 71 Lewis Fishing not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented N/I, A/G U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook Version 12
    A handbook of diseases of importance to aquaculture in New Zealand B. K. Diggles P. M. Hine S. Handley N. C. Boustead NIWA Science and Technology Series No. 49 2002 Published by NIWA Wellington 2002 Edited and produced by Science Communication, NIWA, PO Box 14-901, Wellington, New Zealand ISSN 1173-0382 ISBN 0-478-23248-9 © NIWA 2002 Citation: Diggles, B.K.; Hine, P.M.; Handley, S.; Boustead, N.C. (2002). A handbook of diseases of importance to aquaculture in New Zealand. NIWA Science and Technology Series No. 49. 200 p. Cover: Eggs of the monogenean ectoparasite Zeuxapta seriolae (see p. 102) from the gills of kingfish. Photo by Ben Diggles. The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research is New Zealand’s leading provider of atmospheric, marine, and freshwater science Visit NIWA’s website at http://www.niwa.co.nz 2 Contents Introduction 6 Disclaimer 7 Disease and stress in the aquatic environment 8 Who to contact when disease is suspected 10 Submitting a sample for diagnosis 11 Basic anatomy of fish and shellfish 12 Quick help guide 14 This symbol in the text denotes a disease is exotic to New Zealand Contents colour key: Black font denotes disease present in New Zealand Blue font denotes disease exotic to New Zealand Red font denotes an internationally notifiable disease exotic to New Zealand Diseases of Fishes Freshwater fishes 17 Viral diseases Epizootic haematopoietic necrosis (EHN) 18 Infectious haematopoietic necrosis (IHN) 20 Infectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN)* 22 Infectious salmon anaemia (ISA) 24 Oncorhynchus masou
    [Show full text]
  • FAMILY Rhombosoleidae Regan, 1910
    FAMILY Rhombosoleidae Regan, 1910 - righteye flounders, Southern flounders [=Oncopterinae, Solei-pleuronectinae, Rhombosoleinae K, Rhombosoleinae R, Achiropsettidae E, Achiropsettidae H] GENUS Achiropsetta Norman, 1930 - Southern flounders Species Achiropsetta tricholepis Norman, 1930 - finless flounder [=argentina, heterolepis] GENUS Ammotretis Gunther, 1862 - righteye flounders [=Tapirisolea] Species Ammotretis brevipinnis Norman, 1926 - shortfin flounder Species Ammotretis elongatus McCulloch, 1914 - elongate flounder Species Ammotretis lituratus (Richardson, 1844) - Tudor's flounder [=tudori] Species Ammotretis macrolepis McCulloch, 1914 - largescale flounder Species Ammotretis rostratus Gunther, 1862 - longsnout flounder [=adspersus, bassensis, macleayi, ovalis, uncinata, zonatus] GENUS Azygopus Norman, 1926 - righteye flounders Species Azygopus flemingi Nielsen, 1961 - Fleming's flounder Species Azygopus pinnifasciatus Norman, 1926 - banded-fin flounder GENUS Colistium Norman, 1926 - righteye flounders Species Colistium guntheri (Hutton, 1873) - New Zealand brill Species Colistium nudipinnis (Waite, 1911) - New Zealand turbot GENUS Mancopsetta Gill, 1881 - Southern flounders [=Lepidopsetta] Species Mancopsetta maculata (Gunther, 1880) - Antarctic armless flounder [=antarctica, slavae] GENUS Neoachiropsetta Kotlyar, 1978 - Southern flounders [=Apterygopectus] Species Neoachiropsetta milfordi (Penrith, 1965) - armless flounder [=avilesi] GENUS Oncopterus Steindachner, 1874 - righteye flounders [=Curioptera] Species Oncopterus darwinii
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned Using Fujitsu 6670 Scanner and Scandall Pro Ver 1.7 Software
    1097 1995/214 THE FISHERIES (AUCKLAND AND KERMADEC AREAS COMMERCIAL FISHING) REGULATIONS 1986, AMENDMENT NO. 11 CA THERINE A. TIZARD, Governor-General ORDER IN COUNCIL At Wellington this 9th day of October 1995 Present: HER EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL IN COUNCIL PURSUANT to section 89 of the Fisheries Act 1983, Her ExcellenC}' the Governor-General, acting by and with the advice and consent of the Executive Council, hereby nlakes the following regulations. REGULATIONS 1. Tide and commencement-{I) These regulations may be cited as the Fisheries (Auckland and Kermadec Areas Commercial Fishing) Ree:u1ations 1986, Amendment No. 11, and shall be read together with and deemed part of the Fisheries (Auckland and Kermadec Areas Commercial Fishing) Regulations 1986* (hereinafter referred to as the principal regulations). ·S.R. 1986/216 Amendment No. 1: S.R. 1986/251 Amendment No. 2: S.R. 1988/5 Amendment No. 8: S.R. 1989/291 Amendment No. 4: (Rl1Ioud 6, S.R. 199'/))) Amendment No. 5: S.R. 1991/161 Amendment No. 6: S.R. 1992/210 Amendment No. 7: S.R. 1998/279 Amendment No. 8: S.R. 1994/181 Amendment No. 9: S.R. 1995/88 Amendment No. 10: S.R. 1995/158 1098 Fisheries {Auckland and Kermadec Areas 1995/214 Commercial Fishing} Regulations 1986, Amendment No. 11 (2) These regulations shall come into force on the day after the date of their notification in the Gazette. 2. Interpretation-Regulation 2 of the principal regulations (as substituted by regulation 2 of the Fisheries (Auckland and Kermadec Areas Commercial Fisliing) Regulations 1986, Amendment No.
    [Show full text]
  • Age and Growth of Greenback Flounder (Rhombosolea Tapirina ) from Southern New Zealand
    Age and growth of greenback flounder ( Rhombosolea tapirina ) from southern New Zealand C. P. Sutton 1 D. J. MacGibbon 2 D. W. Stevens 2 1NIWA P O Box 893 Nelson 7040 2NIWA Private Bag 14901 Wellington 6241 New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2010/48 December 2010 Published by Ministry of Fisheries Wellington 2010 ISSN 1175-1584 (print) ISSN 1179-5352 (online) © Ministry of Fisheries 2010 Sutton, C.P.; MacGibbon, D.J.; Stevens, D.W. (2010). Age and growth of greenback flounder ( Rhombosolea tapirina ) from southern New Zealand. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2010/48.. This series continues the informal New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Research Document series which ceased at the end of 1999. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Sutton, C.P.; MacGibbon, D.J.; Stevens, D.W. (2010). Age and growth of greenback flounder (Rhombosolea tapirina ) from southern New Zealand. New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2010/48. Two hundred and seventy-five greenback flounder were sampled from southern New Zealand waters. Biological data, including fish length, weight, sex, and gonad maturity were collected from all specimens. Regression equations for defining length-weight relationships were calculated and presented for male and female fish separately and for both sexes combined. Counts of growth zones in unprepared whole otoliths and prepared thin-sectioned otoliths were used to determine ages, von Bertalanffy growth parameters, and natural mortality. Growth is rapid throughout the lifespan of greenback flounder. Females reached a slightly greater maximum length than males, but the difference was not significant at the 95% level of confidence. Differences in growth rate were also not significant at this level.
    [Show full text]
  • Inshore Trawl Survey of the Canterbury Bight and Pegasus Bay December 1999-January 2000
    Taihoro Nukurangi Inshore trawl survey of the Canterbury Bight and Pegasus Bay December 1999-January 2000 M.L. Stevenson, M.P. Beentjes Final Research Report for Ministry of Fisheries Research Project INT1999/01 National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research August 2000 Final Research Report Report Title: Inshore trawl survey of the Canterbury Bight and Pegasus Bay December 1999-January 2000-08-10 Authors: M.L.Stevenson, M.P.Beentjes Date: 10 August 2000 2. Contractor: NIWA Project Title: Estimation of inshore fish abundance along the east coast of the South Island from Kaikoura to Shag Point using trawl surveys. 4. Project Code: INT 1999/01 5. Project Leader: Michael Beentjes 6. Duration of Project: Start Date: 1 October 1999 Completion date: 30 July 2000 7. Executive Summary: The results of the fourth in a series of summer inshore trawl surveys along the east coast of the South Island from the Waiau River to Shag Point in the depth range 10-400 m by RV Kaharoa are reported. In addition, the results of a concurrent survey by FV Compass Rose in the 5-30 m depth range are included and compared to Kaharoa results. The Kaharoa survey was a two-phase design optimised for elephantfish (Callorhinchus milii), giant stargazer (Kathetostoma spp.), red gurnard (Chelidonichthys kumu), and 0+ and 1+ red cod (Pseudophycis bachus). Biomass estimates, catch distribution, and population length frequencies for the major species are described. Coefficients of variation associated with biomass indices for the target species were all within the specified target range, except 1+ red cod (target c.v.
    [Show full text]
  • FOS Approved Customers & Suppliers & Retailers
    FOS Approved Customers & Suppliers & Retailers : Country Account Name Production Chain FOS certified species .Albania (1) Coral shpk Fishery - Processor;Fishery - Ship Owner European anchvy-engraulis Encrasicolus .Australia (22) EYRE PENINSULA SEAFOODS PTY LTD Aquaculture - Processor;Aquaculture - Mediterranean Mussel-Mytilus Aquaculture site galloprovincialis . Health World Limited Omega3 - Distributor Anchoveta-Engraulis ringens . Spring Bay Seafoods Pty Ltd Aquaculture - Aquaculture site Blue Mussel-Mytilus galloprovincialis . Clean Seas Aquaculture - Aquaculture site Yellowtail Amberjack-Seriola lalandi . A Raptis and Son Pty Ltd Fishery - Ship Owner;Fishery - End Banana Prawn-Fenneropenaeus Processing;Fishery - Exporter merguiensis . Direct Wellbeing Pty Ltd Omega3 - Distributor Japanese Flying Squid-Todarodes pacificus, Argentine Shortfin Squid-Illex argentinus, Jumbo Flying Squid-Dosidicus gigas . Angel Oysters Australia Pty Ltd Aquaculture - Aquaculture site Giant Cupped Oyster-Crassostrea gigas . Tasman Pacific Holding Pty Ltd Omega3 - Producer Anchoveta-Engraulis ringens, Atlantic Chub Mackerel-Scomber colias . Ferngrove Pharmaceuticals Australia Pty Ltd Krill Oil - Distributor Antarctic Krill-Euphausia superba . Australian Southern Bluefin Tuna Industry Aquaculture - Distributor;Aquaculture - Southern Bluefin Tuna-Thunnus maccoyii Association Ltd Exporter;Fishery - Ship Owner;Aquaculture - Aquaculture site . Myti Blue Aquaculture - Processor Blue Mussel-Mytilus galloprovincialis . Australian Fishing Enterprises Pty Ltd (Sarin
    [Show full text]
  • Native Fish and Fisheries Don J
    EdEdittede by KEKENNN ETTH F.D.D. HUH GHG EYY anand KEKENNNETETH J.J.W.W TAYA LOOR TE WAIHORA/LAKE ELLESMERE Sf Edited by KENNETH F.D. HUGHEY and KENNETH J.W. TAYLOR Lincoln University Environment Canterbury HAPTERH EXCERPT ECOLOGY Copyright © Lincoln University, 2008 All rights reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any means without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. All images supplied by the Department of Conservation remain under Crown Copyright. All other images remain the copyright of the credited photographer, and may not be reproduced without their prior written permission. ISBN 978-0-473-14962-8 Published in New Zealand by EOS Ecology P.O. Box 4262 Christchurch 8140 Design and layout by EOS Ecology, Christchurch Printed by Croft Print, Christchurch Reference information We suggest this publication be referenced as: Hughey, K.F.D. and Taylor K.J.W. (eds). 2009. Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere: State of the Lake and Future Management. EOS Ecology, Christchurch. 150pp. Obtaining further copies Further copies of this document may be obtained from: Waihora Ellesmere Trust PO Box 116, Lincoln, New Zealand Phone:+64 (03) 353 9712 Email: [email protected] SHELLELLLEYY McMURTRIT E WE FIRSTT NEED TO THANK THE SPONSORS/SUPPORTERS OF THHE 202 07 LIVVING LAKE SYMPOSIUM: ■ Environment Canterbury ■ National Parks and Conservation Fund ■ Department of Conservation ■ NIWA ■ Christchurch City Council ■ Selwyn District Council ■ Fish and Game North Canterbury ■ Waihora Ellesmere Trust ■ Biodiversity Advice Fund ■ Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu ■ Independent Fisheries ■ Taumutu Runanga ■ Lincoln University ■ Southern Woods Nursery ■ Lottery Grants Board ■ Anonymous donors The Canterbury Community Trust sponsorship helped greatly with publication of this book and we greatly appreciate that support.
    [Show full text]
  • Heavy Metal Accumulation in Marine Fishes in Porirua Harbour
    HEAVY METAL ACCUMULATION IN MARINE FISHES IN PORIRUA HARBOUR A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Marine Biology Liana Cook-Auckram 2019 School of Biological Sciences Victoria University of Wellington 1 Acknowledgments I would firstly like to acknowledge my primary supervisor Nicole Philips and my secondary supervisor Matt Dunn, I could not have asked for more supportive supervisors. Your endless advice and encouragement, together with thorough proof-reading of my thesis has been appreciated. A special thank you to the NIWA scientists, especially Warrick Lyon whom went out of his way to provide advice on rig shark and field techniques. I would also like to acknowledge Darren Stevens and Peter Mcmillan for their expert assistance in flatfish aging and identification. I would also like to extend my gratitude to PhD candidate of the University of Waikato, Helen Cadwallader for her expert advice on stingrays and sending me biopsy tools to collect samples from the lower North Island for her thesis. I would also like to thank the Victoria University Coastal Ecology (VUCEL), especially the tehnicians John Van der Sman and Daniel McNaughtan, who were always eager to provide me with resource and advice on laboratory procedures. I would also like to thank the VUCEL community (primarily Alison Duncan, Andrea Fagetti & Paul Wolf) for being welcoming and providing statistics tutorials. I would also like to thank all my field volunteers, in particular my brother, who helped me collect data in the field. Without them, I wouldn’t have been able to complete my research to such a high standard.
    [Show full text]
  • Indirect Effects of Commercial Fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the Foraging of King Shag, Leucocarbo Carunculatus
    Indirect effects of commercial fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the foraging of king shag, Leucocarbo carunculatus. Department of Conservation Project BCBC2019-05 Paul Taylor July 2020 Statfishtics PO Box 12067 Hamilton New Zealand 3248 1 The king shag colony at Duffers Reef, Marlborough Sounds (Photo: Karen Middlemiss). 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Indirect effects of commercial fishing in the Marlborough Sounds on the foraging of king shag, Leucocarbo carunculatus. Taylor, P.R. 47 p. King shag are a nationally endangered species with a population numbering fewer than 900 individuals, breeding only in the Marlborough Sounds. This research investigated commercial finfish catch taken from a defined study-area in the Marlborough Sounds over the past 30-years. This provides essential information for use in future research and is part of a wider body of work to determine potential indirect effects of commercial fishing and the relationship between availability of prey species and changes to king shag population data over the past 30-years. Three effect indicators were identified and commercial fishing data were used to test for their presence between 1989–90 and 2018–19: namely, (1) large, short-term changes in harvest levels, (2) changes in fishing effort vs catch rates, and (3) decreased catch rates in one area resulting in increased effort in another. It is important to note that catch reporting methods changed in 2007 from fishers reporting only the larger statistical areas (stat-area), to reporting fine-scale latitude and longitude coordinates for fishing events. Differences between fine- and large-scale data were accounted for as a factor in data analyses.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft List of Foreign Fisheries
    Classification ** (Presence of mortality or injury (P/A), Co- Company (if Marine Mammal Occurrence (C/O), Fishery/Gear Number of aquaculture or Interactions (by group Marine Mammal Analogous Gear Target Species or Product Type Vessels processor) Area of Operation or species) Bycatch Estimates (A/G), No Antigua and Barbuda Exempt Fisheries lobster, rock, spiny, demersal fish (snappers, groupers, grunts, surgeonfish), flounder pots, traps 74 Lewis Fishing Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented A/G lobster, rock, spiny free diving, loops 19 Lewis Fishing Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented A/G Queen conch (Strombus gigas), Dive (SCUBA & free molluscs diving) 25 not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented A/G handline, hook and snapper line 71 Lewis Fishing Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented N/I, A/G Off-shore pelagic spp. (tunas, dolphinfish, wahoo, etc.) Drop line 6 not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented N/I, A/G Coastal pelagic spp. (southern sennets, jacks, mullets, herrings, etc.) Beach seine 1 not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented N/I, A/G Coastal pelagic spp. (herrings, ballyhoo, etc.) Bait net 1 not applicable Antigua & Barbuda EEZ none documented none documented N/I, A/G Export Fisheries Marine mammals susceptible to gillnet gear in coastal waters of the Caribbean: tucuxi, pygmy sperm whale, Risso's dolphin, bottlenose dolphin, Atlantic spotted Demersal spp. (grunts, parrotfish, dolphin, killer
    [Show full text]