Black ( indica) Blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) Blue (Prionace glauca) Opah (Lampris guatus) Shorin mako shark ( oxyrinchus) (Kaijkia audax)

Western Central Pacific, North Pacific, South Pacific Pelagic longline

July 12, 2016 Alexia Morgan, Consulng Researcher

Disclaimer Watch® strives to have all Seafood Reports reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external sciensts with experse in , fisheries science and aquaculture. Scienfic review, however, does not constute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch® program or its recommendaons on the part of the reviewing sciensts. Seafood Watch® is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. Table of Contents

Table of Contents 2 About Seafood Watch 3 Guiding Principles 4 Summary 5 Final Seafood Recommendations 5 Introduction 8 Assessment 10 Criterion 1: Impacts on the under assessment 10 Criterion 2: Impacts on other species 22 Criterion 3: Management Effectiveness 45 Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem 55 Acknowledgements 58 References 59 Appendix A: Extra By Catch Species 69

2 About Seafood Watch Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch® defines sustainable seafood as originang from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase producon in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or funcon of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch® makes its science-based recommendaons available to the public in the form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from www.seafoodwatch.org. The program’s goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservaon issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans. Each sustainability recommendaon on the regional pocket guides is supported by a Seafood Report. Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluates this informaon against the program’s conservaon ethic to arrive at a recommendaon of “Best Choices,” “Good Alternaves” or “Avoid.” The detailed evaluaon methodology is available upon request. In producing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch® seeks out research published in academic, peer-reviewed journals whenever possible. Other sources of informaon include government technical publicaons, fishery management plans and supporng documents, and other scienfic reviews of ecological sustainability. Seafood Watch® Research Analysts also communicate regularly with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture sciensts, and members of industry and conservaon organizaons when evaluang fisheries and aquaculture pracces. Capture fisheries and aquaculture pracces are highly dynamic; as the scienfic informaon on each species changes, Seafood Watch®’s sustainability recommendaons and the underlying Seafood Reports will be updated to reflect these changes. Pares interested in capture fisheries, aquaculture pracces and the sustainability of ocean ecosystems are welcome to use Seafood Reports in any way they find useful. For more informaon about Seafood Watch® and Seafood Reports, please contact the Seafood Watch® program at Monterey Bay Aquarium by calling 1-877- 229-9990.

3 Guiding Principles Seafood Watch defines sustainable seafood as originang from sources, whether fished1 or farmed, that can maintain or increase producon in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or funcon of affected ecosystems. Based on this principle, Seafood Watch had developed four sustainability criteria for evaluang wildcatch fisheries for consumers and businesses. These criteria are: How does fishing affect the species under assessment? How does the fishing affect other, target and non-target species? How effecve is the fishery’s management? How does the fishing affect habitats and the stability of the ecosystem?

Each criterion includes: Factors to evaluate and score Guidelines for integrang these factors to produce a numerical score and rang

Once a rang has been assigned to each criterion, we develop an overall recommendaon. Criteria rangs and the overall recommendaon are color-coded to correspond to the categories on the Seafood Watch pocket guide and online guide: Best Choice/Green: Are well managed and caught in ways that cause lile harm to habitats or other wildlife. Good Alternave/Yellow: Buy, but be aware there are concerns with how they’re caught. Avoid/Red Take a pass on these for now. These items are overfished or caught in ways that harm other marine life or the environment.

1 “” is used throughout this document to refer to finfish, shellfish and other invertebrates

4 Summary (Makaira indica), blue marlin (Makaira nigricans), striped marlin (Kaijkia audax), (Prionace glauca), shorin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus), and opah (Lampris guatus) are caught by a variety of pelagic longline fisheries operang in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), including the North and South Pacific regions.

There are several broadly defined categories of longline fisheries covered in this report. These fisheries may not all directly target the species included in this report but may retain them upon capture. These fisheries include: 1. South Pacific albacore fishery, which comprises domesc vessels from Pacific Island countries that operate in subtropical waters targeng albacore, and distant water vessels from Chinese-Taipei, China, and Vanuatu that fish south of 20° S. 2. South Pacific distant water swordfish fishery, which mostly comprises vessels from Spain. 3. Tropical offshore and distant water fisheries; the offshore fishery includes vessels from Chinese-Taipei and China that are based in the Pacific Island countries, and the distant water fleet comprises vessels from Japan, Korean, Chinese-Taipei, China, and Vanuatu. 4. North Pacific distant water albacore and swordfish fisheries, made up of vessels from Japan, Chinese-Taipei, and Vanuatu. In addion to these fisheries, there are a number of domesc longline fisheries operang in the sub-tropical and temperate areas of the WCPO {SPC 2014}. We have included in this report the North and South Pacific pelagic longline fisheries along with more tropical (WCPO in this report) pelagic longline fisheries.

Populaons of striped marlin in the North Pacific Ocean are overfished and undergoing overfishing, but are healthy in the Southwest Pacific region. Blue marlin populaons are healthy throughout their range in the Pacific Ocean. Blue shark populaons in the North Pacific are healthy but their status in the South Pacific is unknown. The statuses of striped and black marlin, opah, and shorin mako shark are unknown. These fisheries interact with a number of bycatch species including other , sea turtles, and seabirds. These species are typically highly suscepble to fishing pressure, and many have been negavely affected by this fishing pressure and are listed as Endangered or Near Threatened by the Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN).

The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) manages tuna and tuna-like species, including billfish and sharks, in the WCPO. There are few management measures in place for target species included in this report, and no formally adopted reference points or harvest control rules are currently in place.

Management of bycatch species is also of concern because best-pracce bycatch migaon techniques are not always required.

Pelagic longline gears typically have lile to no contact with boom habitats but do interact with ecologically important species, which could cause negave effects to the ecosystem.

Final Seafood Recommendaons CRITERION CRITERION 2: 1: IMPACTS IMPACTS ON CRITERION 3: CRITERION 4: ON THE OTHER MANAGEMENT HABITAT AND OVERALL SPECIES/FISHERY SPECIES SPECIES EFFECTIVENESS ECOSYSTEM RECOMMENDATION Blue marlin Green (3.831) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.962) Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline Black marlin Yellow (2.644) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.788) Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline

5 Striped marlin Red (1.414) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.529) Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline Shorin mako Red (1.414) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.529) shark Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline Opah Yellow (2.644) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.788) South Pacific, Pelagic longline Opah Yellow (2.644) Crical (0.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (0.000) North Pacific, Pelagic longline Blue marlin Green (3.831) Crical (0.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (0.000) North Pacific, Pelagic longline Black marlin Yellow (2.644) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.788) South Pacific, Pelagic longline Blue marlin Green (3.831) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.962) South Pacific, Pelagic longline Opah Yellow (2.644) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.788) Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline Shorin mako Red (1.414) Crical (0.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (0.000) shark North Pacific, Pelagic longline Shorin mako Red (1.414) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.529) shark South Pacific, Pelagic longline Striped marlin Red (1.414) Crical (0.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (0.000) North Pacific, Pelagic longline Black marlin Yellow (2.644) Crical (0.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (0.000) North Pacific, Pelagic longline Striped marlin Green (3.318) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.893) South Pacific, Pelagic longline Blue Green (3.831) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.962) shark:Northern stock 6 Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline Blue Red (1.414) Red (1.000) Red (1.000) Green (3.873) Avoid (1.529) shark:Southern stock Western Central Pacific, Pelagic longline

Summary Large pelagic species caught in the Western and Central Pacific longline fishery (blue marlin, black marlin, striped marlin, shorin mako shark, and opah) have an overall recommendaon of “Avoid.”

Scoring Guide Scores range from zero to five where zero indicates very poor performance and five indicates the fishing operaons have no significant impact. Final Score = geometric mean of the four Scores (Criterion 1, Criterion 2, Criterion 3, Criterion 4). Best Choice/Green = Final Score >3.2, and no Red Criteria, and no Crical scores Good Alternave/Yellow = Final score >2.2-3.2, and neither Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) nor Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) are Very High Concern2, and no more than one Red Criterion, and no Crical scores Avoid/Red = Final Score ≤2.2, or either Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern or two or more Red Criteria, or one or more Crical scores.

2 Because effecve management is an essenal component of sustainable fisheries, Seafood Watch issues an Avoid recommendaon for any fishery scored as a Very High Concern for either factor under Management (Criterion 3).

7 Introducon

Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendaon Black marlin (Makaira indica), blue marlin (Makaira nigricans), striped marlin (Kaijkia audax), blue shark (Prionace glauca), shorin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus), and opah (Lampris guatus) are caught by a variety of pelagic longline fisheries operang in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), including the North and South Pacific regions.

Species Overview Black marlin is found in tropical and subtropical waters of the Indian and Pacific Oceans. It is found in surface waters and oen close to land. Black marlin is highly migratory and an apex predator, feeding on fish, , octopods, and other prey (Froese and Pauly 2013).

Blue marlin is a circumglobal species found in tropical and semitropical waters. It is a highly migratory species and apex predator that feeds on small tuna and , among other prey. There is believed to be a single populaon of blue marlin in the Pacific Ocean (BWG 2013).

Striped marlin is the most abundant and widely distributed Isophorid billfish species. It is an epipelagic species found across the 85° latude in the Pacific Ocean, with the largest abundance found in the Eastern and North Central Pacific Ocean. Striped marlin is an apex predator, feeding on fish, squid, and other prey (Davies et al. 2012) (ISCBWG 2015).

Blue sharks is a highly migratory species of shark found throughout the world’s oceans in epipelagic and mesopelagic waters. It is considered the most widely distributed shark species and most abundant, with abundance increasing with latude. Blue shark is an apex predator, consuming a variety of fish and squid species (Rice et al. 2013).

Shorin mako shark is a highly migratory species of shark found in coastal and oceanic epipelagic waters worldwide. Shorin mako shark is found from 20° S to 40° N in the Pacific Ocean. This species is an apex predator, feeding on fish and , among other prey (Froese and Pauly 2015).

Opah is found worldwide in bathypelagic tropical and temperate waters. It is most commonly found in waters from 100 m to 500 m in depth. Opah is a top predator, feeding on fish and squid among other prey (Froese and Pauly 2015).

The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) is in charge of management of these species.

Producon Stascs The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission reported that during 2014, 15,756 t of blue marlin, 1,872 t of black marlin, and 3,165 t of striped marlin were caught by longline vessels operang in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO). Blue marlin longline catches have declined since peaks during the early to mid-2000s. Black marlin longline catches have been variable over me, and in recent years have been lower than peak catches aained during the early to mid-2000s (peaks also occurred during the 1970s).

Striped marlin longline catches have also been variable over me. Peak catches occurred during the 1960s and again during 1993. In recent years, catches have been low compared to catches from the 1990s and 2000s (WCPFC 2015).

The WCPFC collects catch data on some shark species, including blue and mako sharks. There is underreporng of shark catches, so the values reported may not be accurate. In the North Pacific, catches of blue sharks peaked between 1976 and 1989 (113,000 t in 1981). Catches have since declined but remained fairly steady for the past 10 years, averaging about 46,000 t annually. The majority of blue sharks are caught by longlines (ISCSWG 2014). Informaon on shorin mako catches is more limited in the region. 8 According to the Food and Agriculture Organizaon (FAO), 191 t of shorin mako shark were caught in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean during 2013, 451 t during 2012, and 1,460 t during 2011 (FAO 2015). Member countries of the WCPFC reported around 3,700 t of shorin mako sharks caught during 2013, but these data are considered very uncertain (WCPFC 2014c).

Importance to the US/North American market. Species-specific informaon on import and exports of sharks is not available through the Naonal Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). During 2014, imports of fresh shark primarily came from Mexico, with smaller amounts imported from Canada, China, Costa Rica, and Spain. Shark fins were imported from New Zealand and China (NMFS 2015). Informaon on import and exports of other species included in this report is not available through the Naonal Marine Fisheries Service.

Common and market names. Blue, black, and striped marlin are also known as “marlin.” Opah has no other common names associated with it. Blue shark is also known as “shark” and shorin mako shark as “mako.”

Primary product forms Black, blue and striped marlin, blue and shorin mako sharks, and opah are sold in fresh and frozen forms.

9 Assessment This secon assesses the sustainability of the fishery(s) relave to the Seafood Watch Criteria for Fisheries, available at hp://www.seafoodwatch.org.

Criterion 1: Impacts on the species under assessment This criterion evaluates the impact of fishing mortality on the species, given its current abundance. The inherent vulnerability to fishing rang influences how abundance is scored, when abundance is unknown. The final Criterion 1 score is determined by taking the geometric mean of the abundance and fishing mortality scores. The Criterion 1 rang is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and ≤3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score ≤2.2=Red or High Concern

Rang is Crical if Factor 1.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Crical

Criterion 1 Summary

BLACK MARLIN Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score Western Central Pacific Pelagic 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 2.33: Moderate Yellow longline Concern Concern (2.644) South Pacific Pelagic longline 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 2.33: Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644)

BLACK MARLIN Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score North Pacific Pelagic 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 2.33: Moderate Yellow longline Concern Concern (2.644)

BLUE MARLIN Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score Western Central Pacific Pelagic 2.00: Medium 4.00: Low 3.67: Low Green longline Concern Concern (3.831) North Pacific Pelagic longline 2.00: Medium 4.00: Low 3.67: Low Green Concern Concern (3.831) South Pacific Pelagic longline 2.00: Medium 4.00: Low 3.67: Low Green Concern Concern (3.831)

BLUE SHARK Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score Western Central Pacific Pelagic 1.00: High 4.00: Low 3.67: Low Green longline Concern Concern (3.831) Western Central Pacific Pelagic 1.00: High 2.00: High 1.00: High Red (1.414) longline Concern Concern 10 OPAH Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score South Pacific Pelagic longline 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 2.33: Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) North Pacific Pelagic longline 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 2.33: Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Western Central Pacific Pelagic 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 2.33: Moderate Yellow longline Concern Concern (2.644)

SHORTFIN MAKO SHARK Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score Western Central Pacific Pelagic 1.00: High 2.00: High 1.00: High Red longline Concern Concern (1.414) North Pacific Pelagic longline 1.00: High 2.00: High 1.00: High Red Concern Concern (1.414) South Pacific Pelagic longline 1.00: High 2.00: High 1.00: High Red Concern Concern (1.414)

STRIPED MARLIN Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score Western Central Pacific Pelagic 2.00: Medium 2.00: High 1.00: High Red longline Concern Concern (1.414) North Pacific Pelagic longline 2.00: Medium 2.00: High 1.00: High Red Concern Concern (1.414)

STRIPED MARLIN Inherent Region / Method Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score South Pacific Pelagic 2.00: Medium 3.00: Moderate 3.67: Low Green longline Concern Concern (3.318)

The populaons of blue marlin and blue sharks are healthy and fishing mortality rates are sustainable in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. The statuses of opah and black marlin are unknown. Although no assessment has been conducted on shorin mako shark in the Pacific, there is concern over its status due to its high suscepbility to fishing pressure. Striped marlin in the North Pacific is overfished and undergoing overfishing; however, in the South Pacific, fishing pressure appears to be much less.

Criterion 1 Assessment SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability Low—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 0-35, OR species exhibits life history characteriscs that make it resilient to fishing, (e.g., early maturing).

11 Medium—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 36-55, OR species exhibits life history characteriscs that make it neither parcularly vulnerable nor resilient to fishing, (e.g., moderate age at sexual maturity (5-15 years), moderate maximum age (10-25 years), moderate maximum size, and middle of food chain). High—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 56-100, OR species exhibits life history characteriscs that make is parcularly vulnerable to fishing, (e.g., long-lived (>25 years), late maturing (>15 years), low reproducon rate, large body size, and top-predator). Note: The FishBase vulnerability scores is an index of the inherent vulnerability of marine fishes to fishing based on life history parameters: maximum length, age at first maturity, longevity, growth rate, natural mortality rate, fecundity, spaal behaviors (e.g., schooling, aggregang for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or reproducon) and geographic range.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance 5 (Very Low Concern)—Strong evidence exists that the populaon is above target abundance level (e.g., biomass at maximum sustainable yield, BMSY) or near virgin biomass. 4 (Low Concern)—Populaon may be below target abundance level, but it is considered not overfished 3 (Moderate Concern) —Abundance level is unknown and the species has a low or medium inherent vulnerability to fishing. 2 (High Concern)—Populaon is overfished, depleted, or a species of concern, OR abundance is unknown and the species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing. 1 (Very High Concern)—Populaon is listed as threatened or endangered.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality 5 (Very Low Concern)—Highly likely that fishing mortality is below a sustainable level (e.g., below fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield, FMSY), OR fishery does not target species and its contribuon to the mortality of species is negligible (≤ 5% of a sustainable level of fishing mortality). 3.67 (Low Concern)—Probable (>50%) chance that fishing mortality is at or below a sustainable level, but some uncertainty exists, OR fishery does not target species and does not adversely affect species, but its contribuon to mortality is not negligible, OR fishing mortality is unknown, but the populaon is healthy and the species has a low suscepbility to the fishery (low chance of being caught). 2.33 (Moderate Concern)—Fishing mortality is fluctuang around sustainable levels, OR fishing mortality is unknown and species has a moderate-high suscepbility to the fishery and, if species is depleted, reasonable management is in place. 1 (High Concern)—Overfishing is occurring, but management is in place to curtail overfishing, OR fishing mortality is unknown, species is depleted, and no management is in place. 0 (Crical)—Overfishing is known to be occurring and no reasonable management is in place to curtail overfishing.

BLACK MARLIN

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Medium FishBase assigned a moderate vulnerability score of 44 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2015). Black marlin reaches a maximum length of 465 cm but its maximum age is unknown. Black marlin reaches sexual maturity at 140 cm for males and 230 cm for females. Informaon on the age at sexual maturity is unknown. It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2015) (Collee et al. 2011a). These life history characteriscs also suggest a moderate vulnerability to fishing. 12 Factor 1.2 - Abundance WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern No assessment for black marlin has been conducted in the Pacific Ocean. The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) has classified this species as Data Deficient with an unknown populaon trend (Collee et al. 2011). We have awarded a “moderate” score because it has an unknown stock status and is not considered to have high inherent vulnerability.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern Although no stock assessment has been conducted for black marlin in the Pacific Ocean, there is informaon on catches and discard rates from observer programs operang in some regions. The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) notes that this species could be threatened by capture in longline fisheries, but fishing mortality rates in the Pacific are not available (Collee et al. 2011a). Reported catches of black marlin in longline fisheries operang in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) ranged from 1,296 t to 2,289 t between 2000 and 2011 (OFP 2012). These catches of black marlin represented between 4% and 7% of the total catch in the WCPO longline fisheries during this period (OFP 2012). In the South Pacific albacore fishery, 45% of black marlin were discarded between 1992 and 2009, and of these, 60% were dead. Discard rates of black marlin in the tropical longline fishery, which targets tropical tuna species (bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin) ranged from 0% to 6%, with a mortality rate of 35%–73% (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because fishing mortality rates are unknown and the species suffers high discard mortality rates.

BLACK MARLIN

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Medium FishBase assigned a moderate vulnerability score of 44 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2015). Black marlin reaches a maximum length of 465 cm but its maximum age is unknown. Black marlin reaches sexual maturity at 140 cm for males and 230 cm for females. Informaon on the age at sexual maturity is unknown. It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2015) (Collee et al. 2011a). These life history characteriscs also suggest a moderate vulnerability to fishing.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern No assessment for black marlin has been conducted in the Pacific Ocean. The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) has classified this species as Data Deficient with an unknown populaon trend (Collee et al. 2011). We have awarded a “moderate” score because it has an unknown stock status and is not considered to have high inherent vulnerability.

13 Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE

Moderate Concern Although no stock assessment has been conducted for black marlin in the Pacific Ocean, there is informaon on catches and discard rates from observer programs operang in some regions. The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) notes that this species could be threatened by capture in longline fisheries, but fishing mortality rates in the Pacific are not available (Collee et al. 2011a). Reported catches of black marlin in longline fisheries operang in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) ranged from 1,296 t to 2,289 t between 2000 and 2011 (OFP 2012). These catches of black marlin represented between 4% and 7% of the total catch in the WCPO longline fisheries during this period (OFP 2012). In the South Pacific albacore fishery, 45% of black marlin were discarded between 1992 and 2009, and of these, 60% were dead. Discard rates of black marlin in the tropical longline fishery, which targets tropical tuna species (bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin) ranged from 0% to 6%, with a mortality rate of 35%–73% (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because fishing mortality rates are unknown and the species suffers high discard mortality rates.

BLUE MARLIN

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Medium FishBase assigned a moderate to high score of 52 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2015). Blue marlin reaches sexual maturity between 179 cm and 234 cm and around 5 years of age. Blue marlin reaches a maximum size of 400 cm and lives up to 15 years. Blue marlin is a broadcast spawner and top predator (BWG 2013). These life history characteriscs suggest a moderate vulnerability to fishing according to the Seafood Watch producvity and suscepbility table (PSA = 1.83). Raonale: Life history characterisc Paramater Score Age at maturity <5 years 3 Average size at maturity >200 cm 1 Average maximum size >300 cm 1 Average maximum age 10-25 years 2 Reproducve strategy Broadcast spawner 3 Trophic level >3.25 1

Factor 1.2 - Abundance WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Low Concern There is one populaon of blue marlin in the Pacific Ocean and the most recent populaon assessment was completed in 2013. Despite long-term declines in the total biomass of the populaon, the populaon has been increasing from the maximum sustainable levels (MSY) since the mid-2000s and the spawning stock biomass is esmated to be 29% above maximum sustainable yield levels. The populaon is not considered overfished (BWG 2013). We have awarded a “low” concern and not very low concern score to account for the long-term declines and uncertainty associated with the assessment.

14 Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Low Concern The last assessment for blue marlin in the Pacific, a single populaon, was conducted in 2013. Fishing mortality rates (F = 0.26) esmated in this assessment are currently below the levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (FMSY = 0.32). Based on these results, blue marlin is currently not subject to overfishing (BWG 2013). There is a large degree of uncertainty surrounding these results, so we have awarded a “low” concern instead of very low concern score.

BLUE SHARK

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High FishBase assigned a high to very high vulnerability score of 67 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2015). Blue shark reaches sexual maturity between 4 and 7 years and between 170 cm and 190 cm in size. Blue shark lives up to 16 years and can aain a maximum size of about 380 cm. Blue shark is a top predator and gives birth to live young (ISCSWG 2014). These life history characteriscs also suggest a high inherent vulnerability to fishing pressure.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Low Concern There are two populaons of blue shark in the Pacific: North and South Pacific. An updated assessment of blue sharks in the North Pacific (a single populaon) was completed during 2014. Two different models were used in the assessment. The base case results of the two models indicated that the populaon (biomass (B) and spawning stock biomass (SSB)) is not overfished (B2011 /BMSY = 1.65 and SSB2011 /SSBMSY = 1.621), and that the populaon will remain above the level necessary to maintain the maximum sustainable yield (BMSY ) in the future (ISCSWG 2014). But evidence including declines in median size and catch rates suggest declines in abundance of blue shark in recent years (Clarke 2011), and there is uncertainty in the assessment of blue shark. We have therefore awarded a “low” concern rather than very low concern score.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern No assessment for blue shark has been conducted in the South Pacific region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) (WCPFC 2013h). Based on tagging data, differences in abundance, and evidence of pregnant females in high latudes in both the North and South Pacific Ocean, this is likely a separate populaon from that in the North Pacific (Kleiber et al. 2009). Some trends in catch rates for various fisheries have been analyzed. In the South Pacific, catch rates declined unl 2003 and have since increased to mid- 1990s levels. There has been no trend in the size or sex of blue shark in any part of the WCPO over me (Walsh and Clarke 2011) (Clarke 2011). The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) considers blue shark to be Near Threatened globally (Stevens 2009). We have awarded a “high” concern score because no assessment has been conducted, combined with the fact they have a high vulnerability score.

15 Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Low Concern Blue shark is widely distributed throughout the North Pacific (a single populaon) and it dominates shark catches in that region. According to the 2014 updated assessment, the fishing mortality rate esmated in 2011 (F2011 ) was around 34% of that needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (FMSY ) (ISCSWG 2014). Therefore overfishing is not occurring. But there is uncertainty surrounding these results, and previous assessments have indicated some issues with the data (e.g., unreported and underreported catch and effort data along with size informaon). We have therefore awarded a “low” concern instead of very low concern score.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern Blue shark is widely distributed throughout the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, including in the South Pacific region. No stock assessments have been conducted on this species in the South Pacific region (Kleiber et al. 2009). Some informaon on catch levels is available. The esmated average annual longline catch between 1992 and 2009 was 1,611 t (Lawson 2011) (Clarke 2011), and from 1992 to 2009, blue shark made up 10% of the total bycatch in the South Pacific albacore tuna longline fishery (OFP 2010). During this period, 30% of blue sharks were observed discarded in this fishery, and of those, only 7% were dead (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “high” concern score because it is highly suscepble to longline capture and there are no management measures in place.

OPAH Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Medium Recent research suggests that two species of opah may be present in the Pacific: Lineages 3 and 5 (Hyde et al. 2014). Around 90% of the Hawaiian catch is made up of Lineage 3 (Hyde et al. 2014). FishBase assigned a very high vulnerability of 82 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). Opah reaches a maximum length of 200 cm and lives at least 11 years (Froese and Kesner-Reyes 2002). There is no informaon on its age at maturity. It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2015). These life history characteriscs suggest a moderate level of vulnerability (PSA score = 2). Based on the PSA score, widespread distribuon of this species, and because it is not targeted in many fisheries, we have adjusted the score to a “moderate” concern.

Raonale: Life history trait Paramater Score /verage Maximum size 100-300 years 2 Average maximum age 10-25 years 2 Reproducve strategy Broadcast spawner 3 Trophic level >3.25 1

Factor 1.2 - Abundance SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern

16 The status of opah in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean is unknown. We have awarded a “moderate” score because of this and its moderate inherent vulnerability score.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern There is no informaon on fishing mortality rates for opah in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Between 1987 and 2001, observers recorded a total of 6,569 opah caught by longliners in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, primarily around Australia and New Zealand, represenng 9.3% of the “other fish” catch. “Other fish” represented 7.6% of the total catch (Lawson 2001). From 1992 to 2009, 23% of opah caught in the South Pacific longline fishery were discarded, and of these, 25% were dead (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score due to a lack of informaon.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern There is no informaon on fishing mortality rates for opah in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Some informaon on catches and discards is available through observer programs. For example, from 1992 to 2009, 3% of opah caught in longline fisheries operang north of 10° N were discarded, and of these, 35% were dead (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because the status of the populaon is unknown.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern There is no informaon on fishing mortality rates for opah in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Between 1987 and 2001, observers recorded a total of 6,569 opah caught by longliners in this region, represenng 9.3% of the “other fish” catch (Lawson 2001). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because the status of the populaon is unknown.

SHORTFIN MAKO SHARK

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High FishBase assigned a very high vulnerability of 86 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). Shorin mako shark reaches sexual maturity between 180 cm and 300 cm in size and reproduces every 2 to 3 years. The maximum size aained by shorin mako shark is around 325–375 cm in size and 25–40 years of age. Shorin mako shark is a top predator and gives birth to live young (Froese and Pauly 2015).

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern There has been some queson about the stock structure of shorin mako shark in the Pacific Ocean. Currently, the consensus is that there is a single populaon in the North Pacific (PIFSC 2014). A stock-wide assessment was aempted in 2015; previously, an assessment of shorin mako shark was conducted in the Northwest Pacific in 2009. The 2015 assessment used four indicators (proporon of posive sets, abundance, 17 sex rao, and size components) to determine the status of shorin mako shark. Trends for the proporon of posive sets varied by fishery, as did the abundance indices. The Japanese abundance indices, which were considered the best, showed a flat trend through 2004, followed by a sharp increase through 2013. The Hawaii shallow-set and deep-set abundance indices showed contrasng trends. No trends in sex rao were evident, but the size composion appeared to remain stable across fleets. Stock status could not be determined due to an overall lack of data (ISC 2015). The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature has assessed this species globally as Vulnerable (Cailliet et al. 2009). No populaon assessment for shorin mako shark in the South Pacific has been conducted. We have awarded a “high” concern score because the stock status of North Pacific shorin mako shark is unknown and the South Pacific populaon is not assessed. In addion, shorin mako shark has a high vulnerability score and is listed as vulnerable by the IUCN.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern There has been some queson about the stock structure of shorin mako shark in the Pacific Ocean. Currently, the consensus is that there is a single populaon in the North Pacific (PIFSC 2014). A stock-wide assessment was aempted in 2015; previously, an assessment of shorin mako shark was conducted in the Northwest Pacific in 2009. The 2015 assessment used four indicators (proporon of posive sets, abundance, sex rao, and size components) to determine the status of shorin mako shark. Trends for the proporon of posive sets varied by fishery, as did the abundance indices. The Japanese abundance indices, which were considered the best, showed a flat trend through 2004, followed by a sharp increase through 2013. The Hawaii shallow-set and deep-set abundance indices showed contrasng trends. No trends in sex rao were evident, but the size composion appeared to remain stable across fleets. Stock status could not be determined due to an overall lack of data (ISC 2015). The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature has assessed this species globally as Vulnerable (Cailliet et al. 2009). We have awarded a “high” concern score because the status is unknown and shorin mako shark has a high inherent vulnerability score.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern No populaon assessment of shorin mako shark in the South Pacific region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean has been conducted. The center of abundance for this species appears to be northwest of New Zealand (Lawson 2011). The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature has assessed this species globally as Vulnerable (Cailliet et al. 2009). We have awarded a “high” concern score because the populaon status is unknown and because of its high vulnerability score.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern The 2009 assessment of shorin mako shark conducted in the Northwest Pacific suggested that fishing mortality should be reduced by 32% (Chang and Liu 2009). Esmated average annual longline catches between 1992 and 2009 were 71 t, although catch esmates have declined by 50% over the past decade. A separate analysis, not a stock assessment, indicated that there is no evidence for the impact of fishing on shorin mako shark in the North Pacific (Lawson 2011) (Clarke 2011). No assessment of shorin mako shark has been conducted in the South Pacific region; however, some informaon on catch and discard rates is available. For example, between 1994 and 2009, 1,047 t of mako sharks were observed caught in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean longline fisheries, represenng 2.2% of the total catch. During this period, 26% of shorin mako sharks were discarded, and of these, 24% were dead (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “high” concern score because informaon on fishing mortality rates in the South Pacific is not available, the populaon is depleted and suscepble to longline gear, and no management is in place to protect the species.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern

18 The 2015 assessment was unable to calculate fishing mortality rates due to a lack of data (ISC 2015). The previous 2009 assessment of shorin mako shark conducted in the Northwest Pacific suggested that fishing mortality should be reduced by 32% (Chang and Liu 2009). Esmated average annual longline catches between 1992 and 2009 were 71 t, although catch esmates have declined by 50% over the past decade. A separate analysis, not an assessment, indicated no evidence for the impact of fishing on shorin mako shark in the North Pacific (Lawson 2011) (Clarke 2011). There is some indicaon that shorin mako shark has high post-release survivorship rates (French et al. 2015). There are no management measures in place and fishing mortality rates are unknown, so we have awarded a “high” concern score.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern No assessment of shorin mako shark has been conducted in the South Pacific region; however, some informaon on catch and discard rates is available. For example, between 1994 and 2009, 1,047 t of mako shark were observed caught in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean longline fisheries, represenng 2.2% of the total catch. During this period, 26% of shorin mako sharks were discarded, and of these, 24% were dead (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “high” concern score because informaon on fishing mortality rates in the South Pacific is not available, the populaon is depleted and suscepble to longline gear, and no management is in place to protect the species.

STRIPED MARLIN

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Medium FishBase assigned a high vulnerability score of 56 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2015). Sexual maturity is reached between 140 cm and 180 cm and around 2 years of age. It can aain a maximum size of 300 cm and live 10–12 years (ISC 2014). It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2015). Striped marlin’s aggregaon behavior in surface waters makes it suscepble to capture in some fisheries. But its life history characteriscs are more indicave of a moderate vulnerability to fishing, according to the Seafood Watch producvity and suscepbility table (PSA = 2), so we have adjusted the score. Raonale: Life history trait Paramater Score

Average size at sexual maturity 40-200 2 Average Maximum size 100-300 years 2 Average maximum age 10-25 years 2 Reproducve strategy Broadcast spawner 3 Trophic level >3.25 1

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern The most recent populaon assessment of striped marlin in the Southwest Pacific Ocean was conducted in 2012. According to this assessment, both the total and spawning biomass declined to at least half of their virgin levels by 1970, but declines for total (36%) and spawning (29%) biomass have been smaller since. Biomass declined to levels below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) aer 1970, although biomass has increased since 2004. There was a large amount of uncertainty surrounding the biomass esmates, primarily during the 1970s and 1980s. Two biomass-based reference points are used to determine the status of the populaon: Bcurrent/BMSY = 0.96 (0.37–1.96) and SBcurrent/SBMSY = 1.09 (0.32–2.89). There is a 50% probability that SBcurrent is less than SBMSY, and 6 out of 10 model runs resulted in a rao less than 1, 19 suggesng that striped marlin is approaching an overfished state (Davies et al. 2012). Striped marlin in the Western and Central North Pacific Ocean was assessed in 2011. The results of this assessment show a long- term decline in biomass, with the populaon in 2010 being at only 15% of the unfished biomass. There are no target or limit reference points, but compared to maximum sustainable yield (MSY)-based reference points, the spawning biomass in 2010 was 65% below that needed to aain MSY. Therefore striped marlin is overfished (ISCBWG 2015). We have awarded a “high” concern score due to the populaon status in the North Pacific.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern Striped marlin in the Western and Central North Pacific Ocean was assessed in 2015. The results of this model show a long-term decline in biomass with the populaon in 2013 being at only 15% of the unfished biomass. There are no target or limit reference points, but compared to maximum sustainable yield (MSY)- based reference points, the spawning biomass in 2013 was 61% below that needed to aain MSY. Therefore striped marlin is overfished (ISCBWG 2015), so we have awarded a “high” concern score.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern There has been a long-term decline in catches of striped marlin in the Western and Central North Pacific Ocean. Since the 1990s, longline fishing has accounted for over 60% of the total striped marlin catches in this region. Fishing mortality rates are high: F = 0.76 from 2007–2009, about 24% above the levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (FMSY ). Fishing mortality rates have been higher than FMSY for most of the me series (1975–2010). There are no target or limit reference points, but compared to MSY-based reference points, overfishing is occurring (ISCBWG 2015).

A populaon assessment of striped marlin in the Southwest Pacific Ocean was conducted in 2012. The enre longline fleet has substanally affected the populaon size of striped marlin in the Southwest Pacific Ocean. Catches during recent years were 20% below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) (2,182 MT), but catches appear to be approaching MSY levels because of recent low recruitment levels. The fishing mortality-based reference point Fcurrent /F MSY = 0.58 (0.08–2.53), so overfishing is not occurring (Davies et al. 2012).

We have awarded a “high” concern score based high fishing mortality rates in the North Pacific.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE High Concern There has been a long-term decline in catches of striped marlin in the Western and Central North Pacific Ocean. Since the 1990s, longline fishing has accounted for over 60% of the total striped marlin catches in this region. Fishing mortality rates are high: F = 0.94 from 2010–2012, about 49% above the levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (FMSY ). Fishing mortality rates have been higher than FMSY for most of the me series (1975–2013). There are no target or limit reference points, but compared to MSY-based reference points, overfishing is occurring (ISCBWG 2015). We have awarded a “high” concern score.

STRIPED MARLIN

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Medium

FishBase assigned a high vulnerability score of 56 out of20 100 (Froese and Pauly 2015). Sexual maturity is reached between 140 cm and 180 cm and around 2 years of age. It can aain a maximum size of 300 cm and live 10–12 years (ISC 2014). It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2015). Striped marlin’s aggregaon behavior in surface waters makes it suscepble to capture in some fisheries. But its life history characteriscs are more indicave of a moderate vulnerability to fishing, according to the Seafood Watch producvity and suscepbility table (PSA = 2), so we have adjusted the score. Raonale: Life history trait Paramater Score Average size at sexual maturity 40-200 2 Average Maximum size 100-300 years 2 Average maximum age 10-25 years 2 Reproducve strategy Broadcast spawner 3 Trophic level >3.25 1

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderate Concern The most recent populaon assessment of striped marlin in the Southwest Pacific Ocean was conducted in 2012. According to this assessment, both the total and spawning biomass declined to at least half of their virgin levels by 1970, but declines for total (36%) and spawning (29%) biomass have been smaller since. Biomass declined to levels below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) aer 1970, although biomass has increased since 2004. There was a large amount of uncertainty surrounding the biomass esmates, primarily during the 1970s and 1980s. Two biomass-based reference points are used to determine the status of the populaon: Bcurrent/BMSY = 0.96 (0.37–1.96) and SBcurrent /SB MSY = 1.09 (0.32–2.89). There is a 50% probability that SBcurrent is less than SBMSY , and 6 out of 10 model runs resulted in a rao less than 1, suggesng that striped marlin is approaching an overfished state (Davies et al. 2012). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because of uncertainty in its populaon status.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Low Concern A populaon assessment of striped marlin in the Southwest Pacific Ocean was conducted in 2012. The enre longline fleet has substanally affected the populaon size of striped marlin in the Southwest Pacific Ocean. Catches during recent years were 20% below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) (2,182 MT), but catches appear to be approaching MSY levels because of recent low recruitment levels. The fishing mortality-based reference point Fcurrent /F MSY = 0.58 (0.08–2.53), so overfishing is not occurring (Davies et al. 2012). We have awarded a “low” concern and not very low concern score to account for uncertaines in the model.

21 Criterion 2: Impacts on other species All main retained and bycatch species in the fishery are evaluated in the same way as the species under assessment were evaluated in Criterion 1. Seafood Watch® defines bycatch as all fisheries-related mortality or injury to species other than the retained catch. Examples include discards, endangered or threatened species catch, and ghost fishing. To determine the final Criterion 2 score, the score for the lowest scoring retained/bycatch species is mulplied by the discard rate score (ranges from 0-1), which evaluates the amount of non-retained catch (discards) and bait use relave to the retained catch. The Criterion 2 rang is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and ≤3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score ≤2.2=Red or High Concern

Rang is Crical if Factor 2.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Crcal

Criterion 2 Summary Only the lowest scoring main species is/are listed in the table and text in this Criterion 2 secon; a full list and assessment of the main species can be found in Appendix B. BLACK MARLIN - NORTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 0.000 Discard Rate: 0.95 C2 Rate: 0.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Pacific bluefin tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Crical Crical (0.000) Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern black-footed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) laysan albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) 22 BLACK MARLIN - SOUTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Southern bluefin tuna 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 3.67:Low Concern Red (1.916) Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Salvin's albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern wandering albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern grey petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern white-chinned petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) black-browed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) light-mantled albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) flesh-footed shearwater 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 3.67:Low Concern Green Concern (3.318) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very Low Green Concern (4.472) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) 23 BLACK MARLIN - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Blue shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue shark 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

BLUE MARLIN - NORTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 0.000 Discard Rate: 0.95 C2 Rate: 0.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Pacific bluefin tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Crical Crical (0.000) Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern black-footed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414)

24 Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) laysan albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

BLUE MARLIN - SOUTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Southern bluefin tuna 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 3.67:Low Concern Red (1.916) Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Salvin's albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern wandering albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern grey petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern white-chinned petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow 25 Concern Concern (2.644) black-browed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) light-mantled albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) flesh-footed shearwater 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 3.67:Low Concern Green Concern (3.318) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very Low Green Concern (4.472) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

BLUE MARLIN - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Blue shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue shark 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) 26 BLUE SHARK - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Blue shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

BLUE SHARK - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414)

27 Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue shark 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

OPAH - NORTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 0.000 Discard Rate: 0.95 C2 Rate: 0.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Pacific bluefin tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Crical Crical (0.000) Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern black-footed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) laysan albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) 28 OPAH - SOUTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Southern bluefin tuna 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 3.67:Low Concern Red (1.916) Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Salvin's albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern wandering albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern grey petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern white-chinned petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) black-browed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) light-mantled albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) flesh-footed shearwater 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 3.67:Low Concern Green Concern (3.318) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very Low Green Concern (4.472) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) 29 OPAH - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Blue shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue shark 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

SHORTFIN MAKO SHARK - NORTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 0.000 Discard Rate: 0.95 C2 Rate: 0.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Pacific bluefin tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Crical Crical (0.000) Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern black-footed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414)

30 Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) laysan albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

SHORTFIN MAKO SHARK - SOUTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Southern bluefin tuna 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 3.67:Low Concern Red (1.916) Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Salvin's albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern wandering albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern grey petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern white-chinned petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow 31 Concern Concern (2.644) black-browed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) light-mantled albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) flesh-footed shearwater 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 3.67:Low Concern Green Concern (3.318) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very Low Green Concern (4.472) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

SHORTFIN MAKO SHARK - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Striped marlin 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Blue shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue shark 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green 32 (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

STRIPED MARLIN - NORTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 0.000 Discard Rate: 0.95 C2 Rate: 0.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Pacific bluefin tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Crical Crical (0.000) Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern black-footed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) laysan albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

STRIPED MARLIN - SOUTH PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414)

33 Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Southern bluefin tuna 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 3.67:Low Concern Red (1.916) Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Salvin's albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern wandering albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern grey petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern white-chinned petrel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) black-browed albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) light-mantled albatross 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow (2.709) flesh-footed shearwater 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Swordfish 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern (3.053) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Albacore tuna 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very Low Green Concern (4.472) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

STRIPED MARLIN - WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC - PELAGIC LONGLINE Subscore: 1.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore Leatherback turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Hawksbill turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 1.00:High Concern Red (1.000) Concern 34 Silky shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Shorin mako shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Bigeye tuna 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Oceanic whitep shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Blue shark 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.414) Green sea turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very High 2.33:Moderate Red (1.526) Concern Concern Olive ridley turtle 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:Moderate Red (2.159) Concern Black marlin 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Opah 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow Concern Concern (2.644) Blue marlin 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Blue shark 1.00:High 4.00:Low Concern 3.67:Low Concern Green (3.831) Yellowfin tuna 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green Concern Concern (5.000)

In the North Pacific longline fishery that operates in the Western and Central Pacific region, informaon on bycatch is limited due to low observer coverage (0.1%) in most fisheries, although some fisheries have substanally higher coverage rates. , billfish, other fish, sharks, seabirds, sea turtles, and marine mammals have been reported {OFP 2010}. According to observer records north of 10° N, the majority of tuna species are kept, although skipjack tuna had a discard rate of 35% between 1994 and 2009. Swordfish is the most commonly discarded billfish species (44%), while blue and black marlin are primarily retained. Discard rates for sharks in the North Pacific are very high for the majority of species {ODP 2010}. Laysan and black- footed albatross are incidentally captured in the North Pacific region, where they have a high breeding and non-breeding overlap {Clarke et al. 2013} {ACP 2008}. The area of most concern for seabird interacons in this region is between 20° and 40° N. Informaon on bycatch of sea turtles in the North Pacific longline fishery is limited {Work and Balazs 2002}. The majority of sea turtles are observed caught in the tropical longline fisheries outside of the North Pacific region {Molony 2005}. The worst scoring species in this fishery include Pacific bluefin tuna, as well as leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles (1.00) because of their low populaon sizes and high fishing mortality rates.

In the South Pacific, informaon on bycatch interacons is available through observer programs, primarily those of Australia and New Zealand, along with MSC assessments for several fisheries (e.g., Fiji and Cook Islands). Seabird interacons with pelagic longline gear are mostly recorded in Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) waters in the South Pacific around New Zealand and Australia between 20° S and 50° S {Clarke et al. 2013} {Baker and Wise 2005} {Baker and Finley 2008} {Anderson et al. 2011}. It was noted that observers had a difficult me idenfying birds to the species level, so esmates may underreport interacons {Molony 2005}. In the WCPO, the majority of sea turtles are observed caught in the tropical longline fisheries that occur west of 180°, and interacon rates are considered much less than in other ocean basins {Clarke et al. 2014}. Marine mammal interacons and associated mortality rates with the South Pacific albacore tuna longline fishery are reported to be very low {Molony 2005}. The worst scoring species in this fishery are loggerhead and leatherback sea turtles (1.00) due to their low populaon sizes and high mortality rates.

In the Western and Central Pacific (WCPO) longline fishery, tunas, billfish, other fish, sharks, seabirds, sea turtles, and marine mammals are caught as bycatch. Discard rates of these species vary from only 5% for tunas to 96% for sea turtles {OFP 2010} {OFP 2012a}. Common shark species include blue, shorin mako, silky, and oceanic whitep sharks. Blue sharks represented 19.5%, silky shark 3.5%, mako shark 2.2%, and 35 oceanic whitep shark 1.4% of the total observed catch between 1994 and 2009 {OFP 2010}. Sharks in this region are primarily affected by longline fisheries and are considered priority species {Rice and Harley 2012a}. Some shark species, such as blue and shorin mako, may be retained and are therefore covered in this report. An ecological risk assessment of seabirds in the WCPO indicated that populaons of 10 species (combined) of large and small albatross and petrels were most likely to be affected by bycatch in this region, primarily in the northern and southern regions (separated in this report) {Waugh et al. 2012}. The majority of sea turtles are observed caught in the tropical longline fisheries that occur west of 180°, with the highest catch rates occurring in the tropical shallow longline fishery. The majority of these are released alive, compared to the tropical deep-water longline fishery, where most turtles are returned dead {Molony 2005}. Overall, between 4,000 and 15,000 turtles (all species) are esmated to have been caught annually by these longline fisheries. Mortality rates for sea turtles are low (less than 26% in all years), and total annual mortalies for all turtle species ranged from 500 to 3,000 between 1980 and 2004 {Molony 2005}. Marine mammal catch rates are very low, although in general the tropical shallow longline fishery has the highest catch rates. Observer records from 1980 to 2004 indicated many years where no marine mammal interacons with longline fisheries occurred. But when observer esmates were extrapolated out to the enre fishery (not just the proporon observed), up to 2,200 marine mammal interacons were esmated to occur per year. Between 2000 and 2004, both catch and mortality rates of marine mammals declined. In general, less than 200 marine mammal mortalies were esmated to occur between 2000 and 2004 {Molony 2005} {Molony 2007}. The worst scoring species in this fishery are hawksbill, leatherback, and loggerhead sea turtles (1.00) due to their low populaon size and high fishing mortality rates. North Pacific Species Jusficaon Source Oceanic Whitep Overfished Rice and Harley 2012b shark Bigeye tuna Target species Silky shark Overfished Rice and Harley 2012a Pacific bluefin tuna Overfished ISCPBWG 2014

Swordfish Target species Albacore Target species

Yellowfin tuna Target species

Leatherback sea IUCN lisng Crically Endangered; ESA lisng, Marnez 2000; NMFS turtle CITES Appendix I 2012 Loggerhead sea MTSG 2006; NMFS IUCN lisng Endangered; ESA lisng turtle 2012 Longline fisheries may threaten populaon, Black-footed Birdlife Internaonal IUCN status recently updated from Endangered albatross 2012b to Vulnerable Birdlife Internaonal Laysan albatross IUCN lisng Near Threatened 2012f

South Pacific Species Jusficaon Source Oceanic whitep Overfished Rice and Harley 2012b shark Bigeye tuna Target 36 silky shark Overfished Rice and Harley 2012a

Swordfish Target

Albacore Target

Yellowfin Target

Swordfish Target

Leatherback sea IUCN lisng Crically Endangered; ESA Marnez 2000; NMFS 2012 turtle lisng, CITES Appendix I Loggerhead sea IUCN lisng Endangered MTSG 2006 turtle Black-browed IUCN Endangered and observed in Birdlife Internaonal 2012a, albatross (only S fishery Molony 2005 pacific ocean) Grey petrel IUCN lisng Near Threatened Birdlife Internaonal 2012d Flesh-footed High interacon rates and discard rates Mollony 2005; OFP 2010 shearwater Light manteled IUCN lisng Near Threatened Birdlife Internaonal 2012s albatross Common in New Zealand longline Salvin's albatross Birdlife Internaonal 2012h fisheries IUCN lisng Vulnerable and decreasing; Wandering albatross Birdlife Internaonal 2012l large foraging range IUCN lisng Vulnerable and White-chinned petrel Birdlife Internaonal 2012o decreaseing

WCPO Species Jusficaon Source Oceanic whitep Overfished Rice and Harley 2012b shark Bigeye tuna Target

Silky shark Overfished Rice and Harley 2012a

Swordfish Target

Yellowfin tuna Target

Green sea turtle IUCN lisng Endangered; CITES Appendix I Semioff 2004

IUCN lisng Crically Endangered;37 CITES Hawksbill sea turtle Appendix I Mormer and Donnelly 2008 Leatherback sea IUCN lisng Crically Endangered; ESA Marnez 2000; NMFS 2012 turtle lisng, CITES Appendix I Olive ridley sea Abreu-grobois and Plotkin 2008; IUCN Vulnerabile; ESA lisng turtle NMFS 2012

Criterion 2 Assessment SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability (same as Factor 1.1 above)

Factor 2.2 - Abundance (same as Factor 1.2 above)

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality (same as Factor 1.3 above)

Pacific bluefin tuna

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

NORTH PACIFIC Medium FishBase assigned a high vulnerability score of 60 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). Pacific bluefin tuna begins reaching sexual maturity around 150 cm in size and reaches sexual maturity between 3 and 5 years of age (PBTWG 2012). A maximum size and age of 300 cm and 15 years, respecvely, have been reported. Pacific bluefin tuna is a broadcast spawner and has a high trophic level according to FishBase (Froese and Pauly 2013). According to these life history characteriscs, Pacific bluefin tuna has a moderate level of vulnerability, so we have adjusted the score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

NORTH PACIFIC High Concern The most recent stock assessment for Pacific bluefin tuna was conducted in 2014. There are no accepted target or limit reference points for Pacific bluefin tuna, but the rao of spawning stock biomass (SSB) in 2012 to virgin levels is low, indicang that the SSB is currently only 2%–5% of the unfished level. The populaon of Pacific bluefin tuna is therefore considered overfished (ISCPBWG 2014) and we have awarded a “high” concern score.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

NORTH PACIFIC Crical There are no target or limit reference points for Pacific bluefin tuna but the current F (2009–2011 average) is higher than all target and biological reference points commonly used in other fisheries (Fmax , F med , and F 20% ). It is currently thought that overfishing is occurring (ISCPBWG 2014). Addional management measures have recently been agreed upon that will help reduce fishing mortality rates for this species; however, the agreed upon measures will not be enough, according to the scienfic advice, to rebuild the populaon within 10 years 38 (WCPFC 2014) (ISCPBWG 2014). We have therefore awarded a “crical.”

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

Leatherback turtle

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Sea turtles have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria, based on their life history characteriscs that include being long-lived, aaining sexual maturity at a later age, and having a low reproducve rate (Seafood Watch 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Very High Concern Leatherback sea turtle has been listed as Endangered by the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) since 1970 (NMFS 2012). The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) classified leatherback turtle as Crically Endangered with a decreasing populaon trend in 2000 (Marnez 2000). Wallace et al. (2013) idenfied leatherback in the Western Pacific to be at a high risk. Leatherback turtle has been listed on the Convenon on Internaonal Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) since 1975 and is currently listed on CITES Appendix I, meaning that it is threatened with exncon and that internaonal trade is prohibited. Over the past 25 years, the populaon of leatherback in the Pacific Ocean has decreased significantly (Spola et al. 1996). Recent esmates from the Eastern and Western Central Pacific Ocean suggest a populaon size of 294,068 turtles, and out of these, 6,199 are adults (Jones et al. 2012). We have awarded a “very high” concern score based on the ESA, IUCN, and CITES lisngs.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

39 WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern Fishing mortality is thought to be a major threat to leatherback turtles, especially for juveniles and adults that can be incidentally captured in fisheries along their migraon routes (Marnez 2000) (Zug and Parham 1996) (Roe et al. 2014). The available data in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean are spoy, due to low reporng by some naons and low observer coverage. In addion, due to this low reporng, there is a high amount of uncertainty surrounding current esmates (Brouwer and Bertram 2009) (Williams et al. 2013). Interacons with leatherback are typically higher in sub-tropical and temperate areas (Williams et al. 2013). For example, a recent study indicated that nesng leatherback turtles have a high risk of bycatch in several areas within the North and Central Pacific Ocean (Roe et al. 2014). Other research has esmated that leatherback turtles suffer a 12% annual mortality rate from pelagic longline fisheries in the WCPO, and based on these esmates, bycatch mortality in longline fisheries (along with other factors such as coastal mortality) should be reduced to avoid exncon (Kaplan 2005). Other esmates suggest that 20,000 leatherback turtles were caught in longlines throughout the enre Pacific Ocean during 2000, with 1,000 to 3,200 of these being killed as a result. These results also suggest that connued bycatch in longline fisheries will have major consequences for leatherback turtles in the Pacific Ocean and that the mortality threshold for this species in the Pacific may have been exceeded (Lewison et al. 2004). Other analyses have suggested that leatherback turtle has a high populaon risk but low bycatch threat throughout the Western Pacific Ocean (Wallace et al. 2013). Some fleets within the WCPO have adopted management measures to aid in reducing the incidental capture of sea turtles, but others have not complied with mandated bycatch migaon methods (Clarke et al. 2014). We have awarded a “high” concern score because the populaon is depleted, bycatch mortality appears to be a factor in this depleon, and management measures may not be currently effecve.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central 40 Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Hawksbill turtle

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Sea turtles have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria, based on their life history characteriscs that include being long-lived, aaining sexual maturity at a later age, and having a low reproducve rate (Seafood Watch 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC Very High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) has classified hawksbill turtle as Crically Endangered with a decreasing populaon trend (Mormer and Donnelly 2008). In the North Central Pacific Ocean, hawksbill populaons are considered at a high risk (Wallace et al. 2013). Hawksbill turtle has been listed on CITES since 1977 and is currently listed on CITES Appendix I, meaning that it is threatened with exncon and that internaonal trade is prohibited. It has been esmated that populaons in the Pacific Ocean have declined by over 75% over three generaons (Mormer and Donnelly 2008). In the Western Pacific, 7 out of 10 nesng locaons have depleted or declining populaons (Mormer and Donnelly 2008). We have awarded a “very high” concern score based on the IUCN lisng.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC High Concern Interacons between hawksbill turtles and pelagic longline gear in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) do occur but do not appear to be frequent in nature. Recorded interacons are more frequent in tropical and subtropical waters compared to temperate (Williams et al. 2009). Between 1980 and 2004, only 12 hawksbill turtles were observed incidentally caught in tuna longline fisheries in the WCPO (Molony 2005), 41 although mortality rates associated with this capture are high (OFP 2010). A meta-data analysis indicated that this populaon had a high risk but low bycatch impact (Wallace et al. 2013). There are bycatch migaon measures being used by some fleets, but there are issues with compliance (Clarke et al. 2014). We have awarded a “high” concern score because the populaon is depleted, the fishery impact is not fully known, and migaon methods may not be effecve.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

Loggerhead turtle

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Sea turtles have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria, based on their life history characteriscs that include being long-lived, aaining sexual maturity at a later age, and having a low reproducve rate (Seafood Watch 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC Very High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) classified loggerhead turtle as Endangered in 1996, although it has been suggested that this needs to be updated (MTSG 2006). Wallace et al. (2013) determined that loggerhead is at a high risk in the North and South Pacific Ocean. Loggerhead is listed on Appendix I of the Convenon on Internaonal Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). In the North Pacific Ocean, loggerhead has been listed as Endangered on the U.S. Endangered Species Act since 1978 (NMFS 2012). We have therefore awarded a “very high” concern score.

42 Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

NORTH PACIFIC High Concern The incidental capture of loggerhead turtle has historically been considered a primary threat to its populaons (MTSG 2006). Juvenile loggerheads are suscepble to bycatch in the North Pacific region, especially by shallow-set longline fisheries targeng swordfish (Lewison and Crowder 2013). But data related to incidental captures are typically scarce, due to low reporng by some countries and low observer coverage rates (≈1%) (Brouwer and Bertram 2009) (Williams et al. 2009). Some esmates, based on extrapolaon from data sets from the enre Pacific Ocean, suggested that 67,000 loggerhead sea turtles were incidentally captured throughout the Pacific Ocean during 2000, and of these, 2,600 to 6,000 were killed by this incidental capture. Based on these esmates, it is possible that its mortality threshold was exceeded in this region (Lewison et al. 2004). Other studies from the North Pacific Ocean suggest that there is a low impact from bycatch but a high risk to the populaon (Wallace et al. 2013) (Clarke et al. 2014). Bycatch migaon methods are mandated by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, but their effecveness is unknown and there are issues with compliance with these measures (Clarke et al. 2014). We have therefore awarded a “high” concern score.

SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The incidental capture of loggerhead turtles is considered a primary threat to their populaons (MTSG 2006). But data related to incidental captures are scarce, due to low reporng by some countries and low observer coverage rates (≈1%) (Brouwer and Bertram 2009) (Williams et al. 2009). Some esmates from the enre Pacific Ocean suggested that 67,000 loggerhead sea turtles were incidentally captured throughout the Pacific Ocean during 2000, and of these, 2,600 to 6,000 were killed by this incidental capture. Based on these esmates, it is possible that its mortality threshold has been exceeded in this region (Lewison et al. 2004). Loggerhead catch rates tend to increase in sub-tropical regions (Williams et al. 2013).

A meta-data analysis ranked loggerhead turtle caught by longline in the South Pacific Ocean as a high risk and high bycatch impact (Wallace et al. 2013). Other studies have also suggested that loggerhead populaons in the South Pacific are at the greatest risk to interacons with longline fisheries (Clarke et al. 2014). Bycatch migaon methods have been adopted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, but the effecveness and use of these techniques is unknown. We have therefore awarded a “high” concern score.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC High Concern The incidental capture of loggerhead turtle has historically been considered a primary threat to its populaons (MTSG 2006). Juvenile loggerheads are suscepble to bycatch in the North Pacific region, especially by shallow-set longline fisheries targeng swordfish (Lewison and Crowder 2013). But data related to incidental captures are typically scarce, due to low reporng by some countries and low observer coverage rates (≈1%) (Brouwer and Bertram 2009) (Williams et al. 2009). Some esmates, based on extrapolaon from data sets from the enre Pacific Ocean, suggested that 67,000 loggerhead sea turtles were incidentally captured throughout the Pacific Ocean during 2000, and of these, 2,600 to 6,000 were killed by this incidental capture. Based on these esmates, it is possible that its mortality threshold was exceeded in this region (Lewison et al. 2004). Other studies from the Pacific Ocean suggest that there is a low impact from bycatch but a high risk to the populaon (Wallace et al. 2013) (Clarke et al. 2014). Bycatch migaon methods are mandated by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, but their effecveness is unknown and there are issues with compliance with these measures (Clarke et al. 2014). We have therefore awarded a “high” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 43 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

44 Criterion 3: Management Effecveness Management is separated into management of retained species (harvest strategy) and management of non- retained species (bycatch strategy). The final score for this criterion is the geometric mean of the two scores. The Criterion 3 rang is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and ≤3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score ≤2.2 or either the Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern = Red or High Concern

Rang is Crical if either or both of Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) and Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) rangs are Crical.

Criterion 3 Summary

Region / Method Harvest Strategy Bycatch Strategy Score North Pacific / Pelagic longline 1.000 1.000 Red (1.000) South Pacific / Pelagic longline 1.000 1.000 Red (1.000) Western Central Pacific / Pelagic longline 1.000 1.000 Red (1.000)

The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission and Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission have been moderately effecve in implemenng and enforcing management measures for swordfish, albacore, bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin tuna in the Pacific Ocean.

Criterion 3 Assessment SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 3.1: Harvest Strategy Seven subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy, Recovery of Species of Concern, Scienfic Research/Monitoring, Following of Scienfic Advice, Enforcement of Regulaons, Management Track Record, and Inclusion of Stakeholders. Each is rated as ‘ineffecve,’ ‘moderately effecve,’ or ‘highly effecve.’ 5 (Very Low Concern)—Rated as ‘highly effecve’ for all seven subfactors considered 4 (Low Concern)—Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern rated ‘highly effecve’ and all other subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effecve.’ 3 (Moderate Concern)—All subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effecve.’ 2 (High Concern)—At minimum, meets standards for ‘moderately effecve’ for Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern, but at least one other subfactor rated ‘ineffecve.’ 1 (Very High Concern)—Management exists, but Management Strategy and/or Recovery of Species of Concern rated ‘ineffecve.’ 0 (Crical)—No management exists when there is a clear need for management (i.e., fishery catches threatened, endangered, or high concern species), OR there is a high level of Illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing occurring.

Factor 3.1: Harvest Strategy

Factor 3.1 Summary

FACTOR 3.1: MANAGEMENT OF FISHING IMPACTS ON RETAINED SPECIES Region / Method Strategy Recovery Research Advice Enforce Track Inclusion 45 North Pacific / Ineffecve Ineffecve Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Pelagic longline Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve South Pacific / Ineffecve N/A Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Pelagic longline Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve Western Central Ineffecve Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Moderately Pacific / Pelagic Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve Effecve longline

The United Naons Straddling and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks Agreement (1995) indicated that the management of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks should be carried out through Regional Fisheries Management Organizaons (RFMOs). RFMOs are the only legally mandated fishery management body on the high seas and within EEZ waters. There are currently 18 RFMOs (www.fao.org) that cover nearly all of the world’s waters. Member countries must abide by the management measures set forth by individual RFMOs in order to fish in their waters {Cullis-Suzuki and Pauly 2010}. Some RFMOs manage all marine living resources within their authority (e.g., General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM)), while others manage a group of species such as tunas (e.g., Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC)). This reports focuses on billfish, shark, and fish species caught in pelagic longline fisheries managed under the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), which manages tuna and tuna-like species in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO). WCPFC members include the following countries: Australia, China, Canada, Cook Islands, European Union, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, Indonesia, Japan, Kiriba, Republic of Korea, Republic of Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Chinese Taipei, Tonga, Tuvalu, United States, and Vanuatu. IATTC members: Belize, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, European Union, France, Guatemala, Japan, Kiriba, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Chinese Taipei, United States, Vanuatu, and Venezuela.

Subfactor 3.1.1 – Management Strategy and Implementaon Consideraons: What type of management measures are in place? Are there appropriate management goals, and is there evidence that management goals are being met? To achieve a highly effecve rang, there must be appropriate management goals, and evidence that the measures in place have been successful at maintaining/rebuilding species.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Ineffecve There are no management measures in place for opah, shorin mako shark, blue shark, and blue and black in the North Pacific. A phased-in reducon of catches of North Pacific striped marlin was iniated in 2011. Countries were to reduce their catches by 10%, 15%, and 20% in 2011, 2012, and 2013 respecvely from the highest catches recorded between 2000 and 2003 (WCPFC 2010d). There are no reference points in place for any of these species and no harvest control rule.

In terms of other retained species, there are few management measures in place for albacore tuna in the North Pacific Ocean. Measures were adopted in 2005 and have not been updated. Those management measures included maintaining current catch levels (average effort between 2002 and 2004) in order to maintain the long-term sustainability of the stock, and the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) was to work with members of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) to agree on consistent management measures for the North Pacific populaon (IATTC 2005c) (WCPFC 2005). The IATTC implemented a catch limit of 10,000 t between 2012 and 2013 (5,600 in 2012 and 4,400 in 2013) and 5,000 t for 2014 for Pacific bluefin tuna caught in the Convenon Area (IATTC 2012). In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission has limited fishing effort for Pacific bluefin tuna. Vessels fishing north of 20° N must stay below 2002–2004 fishing effort levels during 2013 (WCPFC 2012a). In addion, countries are to develop a Catch Documentaon Scheme to monitor Pacific bluefin tuna (WCPFC 2013a). There is an interim reference point (fishing mortality) for North Pacific albacore but no reference points for Pacific bluefin. Biomass-based limit reference points are used to determine the 46 status of other tuna populaons (bigeye and yellowfin). Target reference points are not yet in place for any of these species, and there are no harvest control rules (ISSF 2013). But the WCPFC has a working group that is currently working on idenfying potenal target reference points, and it last met in 2013 (WCPFC 2013c). In contrast to the IATTC, which has been much more proacve in using interim target and limit reference points and currently has an interim harvest control rule in place for tropical tunas and albacore, the WCPFC has no type of harvest control rule in place and does not have interim target reference points for all species. There are some management measures in place for tropical tuna species in the North Pacific region of Western and Central Pacific Ocean longline fisheries. The measures that are in place include catch limits for bigeye tuna; catches of yellowfin tuna are not to be increased; and longline fishing effort cannot be increased (except for small island naons and Indonesia) (WCPFC 2013b) (WCPFC 2012a) (WCPFC 2005).

We have scored management of this fishery as “ineffecve” because there are no management measures in place for most of the retained species covered in this report.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Ineffecve There are no management measures in place for blue or black marlins, blue or shorin mako sharks, or opah in the South Pacific. Striped marlin is managed through effort restricons (WCPFC 2006b). There are no biomass-based reference points for these species and no harvest control rules in place.

Few management measures have been enacted for other retained species. In terms of albacore tuna in the South Pacific region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) has limited the number of fishing vessels acvely fishing for albacore to not exceed 2005 levels or historical levels (2000–2004). In addion, member countries shall work to ensure the long- term sustainability of albacore tuna in this region, which includes collaborave research (WCPFC 2010c). In 2009, the WCPFC limited the number of vessels targeng swordfish and catches to levels from any year between 2000 and 2005, and required this informaon to be reported to the Commission (WCPFC 2009).

Management measures adopted by the Commission for the Conservaon of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), which is responsible for the management of southern bluefin tuna throughout its range, include a total allowable catch (TAC) set on a 3-year cycle divided between eight countries and the European Community, and a Management Procedure (MP) that the CCSBT uses to aid in the seng of the TAC. The MP has been in place since 2012. In addion, there is a meta-rule process that the CCSBT can use to deal with certain situaons, such as untested recruitment, abundance esmates, or “substanal” improvements with regard to unknown or missing data (CCSBT 2010) (CCSBT 2014).

Biomass-based limit reference points have been adopted by the WCPFC for albacore and tropical tunas and are used to determine the status of tuna populaons. Target reference points are not yet in place for any of these species. In addion, there are no harvest control rules (ISSF 2013). But the WCPFC has a working group that is currently working on idenfying potenal target reference points, and it last met in 2013 (WCPFC 2013c). In contrast to the IATTC, which has been much more proacve in using interim target and limit reference points and currently has an interim harvest control rule in place for tropical tunas and albacore, the WCPFC has no type of harvest control rule in place and does not have interim target reference points for all species.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Ineffecve There are no management measures in place for blue or shorin mako sharks, black or blue marlins, or opah. There are effort restricons for striped marlin in the South Pacific region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean and catch restricons (phased in over me) for striped marlin in the North Pacific region (WCPFC 2006b) (WCPFC 2010d). There are no reference points or harvest control rules for any of these species.

47 There are few management measures in place for retained tuna species in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) longline fisheries. The measures that are in place include catch limits for bigeye tuna; catches of yellowfin tuna are not to be increased; and longline fishing effort cannot be increased (except for small island naons and Indonesia) (WCPFC 2013b) (WCPFC 2012a) (WCPFC 2005).

Biomass-based limit reference points have been adopted by the WCPFC for bigeye and yellowfin tuna and are used to determine the status of tuna populaons. Target reference points are not yet in place for any of these species, except in the short term for bigeye tuna, and there are no harvest control rules (ISSF 2013). But the WCPFC has a working group that is currently working on idenfying potenal target reference points, and it last met in 2013 (WCPFC 2013c). In contrast to the IATTC, which has been much more proacve in using interim target and limit reference points and currently has an interim harvest control rule in place for tropical tunas and albacore, the WCPFC has no type of harvest control rule in place and does not have interim target reference points for all species.

We have scored management of this fishery as “ineffecve” because there are no management measures in place for most of the retained species covered in this report.

Subfactor 3.1.2 – Recovery of Species of Concern Consideraons: When needed, are recovery strategies/management measures in place to rebuild overfished/threatened/ endangered species or to limit fishery’s impact on these species and what is their likelihood of success? To achieve a rang of Highly Effecve, rebuilding strategies that have a high likelihood of success in an appropriate meframe must be in place when needed, as well as measures to minimize mortality for any overfished/threatened/endangered species.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Ineffecve Striped marlin is overfished and undergoing overfishing in the North Pacific. There are management measures in place but no recovery plan, and there are no target or limit reference points. In addion, there is concern over the status of shorin mako shark. Pacific bluefin tuna is overfished. Fishing effort and catch limits were adopted aer the 2012 assessment by the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) and the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) (IATTC 2012) (ISCPBWG 2014) (WCPFC 2012a). According to the 2014 updated assessment, these management measures were not sufficient to allow the populaon to recover. Measures recently agreed to by the WCPFC Northern Commiee to reduce catches by 50% of 2002–2004 levels of Pacific bluefin tuna 35 kg in weight and under are not projected to be sufficient to allow the populaon to recover (ISCPBWG 2014) (WCPFC 2014). We have awarded an “ineffecve” score due to the lack of proper recovery plans for these species in the North Pacific.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE N/A Although no stock assessment has been conducted on shorin mako or blue sharks in the South Pacific, there is concern over their status. Albacore and swordfish populaons are healthy in the South Pacific region (Hoyle et al. 2012) (Davies et al. 2013). We have awarded an N/A score because the statuses of sharks are unknown and other species are healthy.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve Striped marlin in the North Pacific is overfished and undergoing overfishing, and there is no recovery plan in place (Davies et al. 2012). There are concerns with the status of shorin mako shark throughout the Pacific and for blue shark in the South Pacific, but there are no recovery plans in place. Bigeye tuna is considered overfished and undergoing overfishing. There is a recovery plan in place, but so far it has not proved successful (WCPFC 2014). But bigeye tuna has only recently been classified as overfished and it is too early to 48 determine if the fishery will be able to recover the populaon in a mely manner. This results in a “moderately effecve” score.

Subfactor 3.1.3 – Scienfic Research and Monitoring Consideraons: How much and what types of data are collected to evaluate the health of the populaon and the fishery’s impact on the species? To achieve a Highly Effecve rang, populaon assessments must be conducted regularly and they must be robust enough to reliably determine the populaon status.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve Striped and blue marlin populaons have been assessed (BWG 2013) (Davies et al. 2012) (ISCBWG 2015). Albacore, swordfish, and Pacific bluefin tuna stocks are monitored and assessed on a regular basis (ISCAWG 2014) (Davies et al. 2013) (ISCPBWG 2014), and assessments include informaon on catches, catch per unit effort, length frequency, and tagging data. Assessments have not been conducted for species such as shorin mako shark or opah, and tuna/billfish assessments have a great deal of uncertainty associated with them. This results in a “moderately effecve” score.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve No stock assessment has been conducted for black marlin, opah, shorin mako shark, and blue shark in the South Pacific. Striped and blue marlin populaons have been assessed. These assessments contained informaon on catch and effort for a number of species in the South Pacific Ocean (BWG 2013) (Davies et al. 2012) (ISCBWG 2015). Albacore, swordfish, and southern bluefin tuna populaons are monitored and assessed on a regular basis (ISCAWG 2014) (Davies et al. 2013) (IOTC 2013), and assessments include informaon on catches, catch per unit effort, length frequency, and tagging data. Tuna/billfish assessments have a large amount of uncertainty surrounding them. This results in a “moderately effecve” score.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve Blue and striped marlin have been assessed in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, and blue shark has been assessed in the North Pacific region (BWG 2013) (Davies et al. 2012) (ISCBWG 2015) (Rice et al. 2013). These assessments contain catch and effort informaon from a variety of fisheries that capture these species. Bigeye, yellowfin, and skipjack tuna stocks are regularly monitored and assessed (Davies et al. 2011) (Hoyle et al. 2011) (Langley et al. 2011). A variety of informaon, including catch and effort data, size (for some species), and biological informaon is included in these assessments. Several other main species have been assessed including swordfish. There are issues with data reporng for the tuna assessments, so this results in a “moderately effecve” score.

Subfactor 3.1.4 – Management Record of Following Scienfic Advice Consideraons: How oen (always, somemes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scienfic recommendaons/advice (e.g. do they set catch limits at recommended levels)? A Highly Effecve rang is given if managers nearly always follow scienfic advice.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve No management advice was provided for shorin mako shark, black marlin, or opah because no assessments have been conducted. Management advice for blue shark in the North Pacific included developing reference points, the development of management plans for all target shark fisheries that include catch limits (by the 2016 meeng), and connued observer coverage is warranted (WCPFC 2014). To date, no reference points have been adopted. The Scienfic Commiee advised that blue marlin catches should not be increased from 2009–2011 levels in the North Pacific, but no management measures have 49 been adopted for this (WCPFC 2013e).

The SC advised that fishing mortality for striped marlin in the North Pacific needs to be reduced but no addional effort cuts have been made since 2010 (WCPFC 2011). Members of the albacore working group suggested aer the last assessment that the current management measures should be maintained (ISCAWG 2011). The latest Pacific bluefin stock assessment acknowledged that the recently implemented catch-and- effort controls put into place by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission and the Inter- American Tropical Tuna Commission, if properly implemented and enforced, could lead to an improved stock status. But keeping fishing levels at the status quo (2007–2009) is unlikely to improve the status of Pacific bluefin tuna (ISCPBWG 2012). The Scienfic Commiee suggested that fishing mortality of Pacific bluefin tuna should be immediately reduced and that candidate limit and target reference points should be adopted (WCPFC 2013e). In 2013, a new resoluon, which took into account scienfic recommendaons for the conservaon of Pacific bluefin tuna, was adopted by the IATTC (IATTC 2013). Included in this resoluon is the requirement that future assessments include analysis to determine what the status of Pacific bluefin tuna would be with and without these measures in place. The WCPFC also adopted an interim measure in 2013 that aimed to reduce fishing mortality rates, and the Northern Commiee has recently agreed upon addional management measures to reduce fishing mortality on juvenile fish (WCPFC 2013a) (WCPFC 2014). No new advice was provided by the Scienfic Commiee in 2014 for swordfish in the North Pacific Ocean (ISCBWG 2014). We have awarded a “moderately effecve” score because some but not all advice has been addressed.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve No management advice has been provided for shorin mako and blue sharks, opah, and black marlin because no assessments have been conducted. No new advice was provided for striped marlin in the South Pacific and the advice for blue marlin is to maintain catches at the 2009–2011 levels (WCPFC 2011). No new management measures to curb fishing pressure for blue marlin have been enacted. The most recent assessment for albacore tuna in the South Pacific did not provide any suggesons on the need for any specific management measures. The Scienfic Commiee did suggest that longline fishing mortality needs to be reduced to maintain the economic viability of the fishery, and this has not been adopted by the Commission (WCPFC 2013e). The last assessment did not suggest any specific management measures for swordfish in the Southwest Pacific region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Davies et al. 2013). No measures aimed at reducing longline fishing mortality rates have been adopted. The Commission for the Conservaon of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT) has adhered to scienfic advice and ulizes a Management Procedure in seng a total allowable catch level that will ensure that the biomass reaches the current interim rebuilding target for southern bluefin tuna (CCSBT 2011). This results in a “moderately effecve” score because advice has been followed for some but not all species.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve No management advice was provided for shorin mako shark or opah because no assessments have been conducted. Management advice for blue sharks in the North Pacific included developing reference points, the development of management plans for all target shark fisheries that include catch limits (by the 2016 meeng), and connued observer coverage is warranted (WCPFC 2014), but there is no advice for the South Pacific populaon. To date, no reference points have been adopted. The Scienfic Commiee advised that blue marlin catches should not be increased from 2009–2011 levels but no management measures have been adopted for this (WCPFC 2013e). The Scienfic Commiee advised that fishing mortality for striped marlin in the North Pacific needs to be reduced but no addional effort cuts have been made since 2010, and no new advice for the South Pacific populaon has been given (WCPFC 2011). The last bigeye, skipjack, and yellowfin tuna assessments made recommendaons to improve the current stascal model used and idenfied needs for data improvement, but did not idenfy specific management measures (Davies et al. 2014) (Davis et al. 2011) (Rice et al. 2014) (Davies et al. 2014). Based on the assessment results, bigeye tuna fishing mortality levels need to be 36% less than the 2008–2011 level in order to be sustainable. The Scienfic Commiee noted that spaal management could be ulized for yellowfin tuna and that catches should not be increased from 2012 levels (WCPFC 2014b). In addion, reducing the fishing mortality on juveniles would increase the overall yield (Harley et al. 2014). The Scienfic Commiee did recommend in 2009 that the Commission consider fishing limits for skipjack (Rice et al. 2014). The Commission does recognize that fishing mortality 50 needs to be reduced to improve the status of bigeye and yellowfin tuna in this region (WCPFC 2012). The Commission has recently prohibited discarding of these species but there are not catch limits for either species in this fishery. The 2014 Commission meeng had not occurred at the me of this report, so it is unknown if addional management measures are to be adopted based on the updated 2014 stock assessments. We have awarded a “moderately effecve” score because management advice has been followed for some but not all species.

Subfactor 3.1.5 – Enforcement of Management Regulaons Consideraons: Do fishermen comply with regulaons, and how is this monitored? To achieve a Highly Effecve rang, there must be regular enforcement of regulaons and verificaon of compliance. NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) has a compliance monitoring scheme in place that assesses members’ compliance with obligaons, idenfies areas of conservaon and management that may need refinement, responds to non-compliance, and monitors and resolves non-compliance issues. The Commission evaluates compliance by members annually with respect to catch and effort limits and reporng for target species, spaal and temporal closures, observer and Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) coverage, and provision of scienfic data (WCPFC 2012c).

Vessel Monitoring Systems are required on all vessels fishing for highly migratory species in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean south of 20° N and east of 175° E. The area north of 20° N and west of 175° W had an acvaon date for VMS of December 31, 2013 (WCPFC 2012d). There are measures in place allowing for the boarding and inspecon of vessels in the Convenon Area (WCPFC 2006b) and the WCPFC maintains a list of illegal, unreported, and unregulated vessels (WCPFC 2010b).

A recent study, which developed a standard way of assessing transparency in RFMOs, found that the WCPFC had a lack of transparency with regard to the availability of compliance-related data, a lack of incenve for countries to comply with management measures, and lacked the processes needed to respond to non- compliance (Gilman and Kingma 2013). Koehler (2013) also found the WCPFC to be ineffecve with regard to compliance transparency, specifically because the WCPFC's compliance assessment process (there is a compliance monitoring scheme in place) (WCPFC 2013d) is closed to the public and the WCPFC does not have ways of dealing with non-compliance. In 2013, the Commission finally started releasing some informaon on the compliance of individual naons (WCPFC 2013g).

Assessing the effecveness of these enforcement measures is difficult because there is a general lack in the transparency of informaon with regard to surveillance acvies, infracons, and enforcement acons and outcomes {Gilman et al. 2013). We have therefore awarded a “moderately effecve” score.

Subfactor 3.1.6 – Management Track Record Consideraons: Does management have a history of successfully maintaining populaons at sustainable levels or a history of failing to maintain populaons at sustainable levels? A Highly Effecve rang is given if measures enacted by management have been shown to result in the long-term maintenance of species overme.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve Management measures enacted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission have shown mixed results in their ability to meet stock management objecves of principal market species (Gilman et al. 2013). For example, in terms of striped marlin in the North Pacific, management has been unable to maintain healthy populaons (ISCBWG 2015). In terms of Pacific bluefin tuna, the WCPFC and IATTC have been unable 51 to maintain a healthy populaon (ISCPBWG 2014). But albacore and swordfish populaons have remained healthy (ISCAWG 2011) (ISCBWG 2014). We have therefore awarded a “moderately effecve” score.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve Management measures enacted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) have shown mixed results in their ability to meet stock management objecves of principal market species (Gilman et al. 2013). For example, the Commission for the Conservaon of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT) has been unable to maintain healthy populaons of southern bluefin tuna (IOTC 2013), while yellowfin tuna and striped marlin populaons have remained healthy (Hoyle et al. 2012) (Davies et al. 2013). The statuses of many species, including sharks and billfish, are unknown in this region. We have therefore awarded only a “moderately effecve” score.

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve Management measures enacted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Management Commission (WCPFC) have shown mixed results in their ability to meet stock management objecves of principal market species (Gilman et al. 2013). For example, species such as striped marlin in the North Pacific are not healthy but blue marlin populaons are. The statuses of many species, including sharks, billfish, and opah, are unknown, so we have awarded a “moderately effecve” score.

Subfactor 3.1.7 – Stakeholder Inclusion Consideraons: Are stakeholders involved/included in the decision-making process? Stakeholders are individuals/groups/organizaons that have an interest in the fishery or that may be affected by the management of the fishery (e.g., fishermen, conservaon groups, etc.). A Highly Effecve rang is given if the management process is transparent and includes stakeholder input.

NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission allows for accredited observers to parcipate in most meengs. Historically, the WCPFC has lacked transparency (Gilman et. al. 2013) in some factors but this has been improved in recent years. The Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission also allows for outside accredited observers, which can be made up of sciensts, NGOs, or other interested pares, to aend meengs. We have therefore awarded a “moderately effecve” score.

SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission allows for accredited observers to parcipate in most meengs. Historically, the WCPFC has lacked transparency (Gilman et. al. 2013) in some factors but this has been improved in recent years. We have therefore awarded a “moderately effecve” score.

Factor 3.2: Bycatch Strategy

FACTOR 3.2: BYCATCH STRATEGY All Region / Method Kept Crical Strategy Research Advice Enforce North Pacific / Pelagic longline No No Ineffecve Ineffecve Moderately Moderately Effecve Effecve South Pacific / Pelagic longline No No Ineffecve Ineffecve Moderately Moderately 52 Effecve Effecve Western Central Pacific / Pelagic No No Ineffecve Ineffecve Moderately Moderately longline Effecve Effecve

The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) has instuted management measures for seabirds and sea turtles in longline fisheries operang in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. The success of these measures is not yet known. Observer programs do exist, but they observe only a fracon of the enre fishery.

Subfactor 3.2.2 – Management Strategy and Implementaon Consideraons: What type of management strategy/measures are in place to reduce the impacts of the fishery on bycatch species and how successful are these management measures? To achieve a Highly Effecve rang, the primary bycatch species must be known and there must be clear goals and measures in place to minimize the impacts on bycatch species (e.g., catch limits, use of proven migaon measures, etc.). NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Ineffecve The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) has adopted several management measures to protect vulnerable bycatch species. For example, WCPFC members are asked to implement the Internaonal Plan of Acon for Reducing Incidental Catches of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries. Vessels fishing north of 23° N in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) are required to use at least two migaon measures including at least one of the following: side seng, night seng, tori line, or weighted branch line. Members must submit annual reports detailing the migaon measures used and are encouraged to undertake addional migaon research (WCPFC 2012e). Members of the WCPFC are also to implement the FAO Guidelines to Reduce Sea Turtle Mortality in Fishing Operaons. Proper handling and release guidelines should be used when hard-shell turtles are incidentally captured, and longline vessels must carry line cuers and de-hookers to allow for the safe handling and release of turtles. Longline fisheries are also urged to research migaon techniques such as the use of circle hooks. Vessels conducng shallow-set fishing targeng swordfish must also comply with migaon measures (e.g., circle hooks, whole bait, or other reviewed techniques) (WCPFC 2008b). In addion, fisheries observers record and report interacons with seabirds and turtles (WCPFC 2012e) (WCPFC 2008b).

Members of the WCPFC are prohibited from retaining, transshipping, storing, or landing oceanic whitep and silky sharks, and any incidentally caught sharks should be released and the incident recorded and reported (WCPFC 2012f) (WCPFC 2013f). Members are also to implement the FAO Internaonal Plan of Acon for the Conservaon and Management of Sharks, and Naonal Plans of Acon should have policies in place to reduce waste and discarding of sharks. Informaon on catch and effort for key species is to be reported, and shark finning is banned (5% rao) (WCPFC 2010a).

The WCPFC scored an average of 42% across five broad bycatch governance categories in a recent study conducted by Gilman et al. (2013). We have awarded an “ineffecve” score because there are no bycatch limits for non-target species, and it is unclear if these management measures are effecve at maintaining populaon levels of bycatch species or are being put in place. For example, Clarke (2013) idenfied that compliance with implemenng WCPFC adopted management measures specific to sharks is at best 60%, and lower for some measures. In addion, the low level of observer coverage in the WCPO has hampered the ability of assessing whether adopted management measures have been effecve (Gilman 2011).

Subfactor 3.2.3 – Scienfic Research and Monitoring Consideraons: Is bycatch in the fishery recorded/documented and is there adequate monitoring of bycatch to measure fishery’s impact on bycatch species? To achieve a Highly Effecve rang, assessments must be conducted to determine the impact of the fishery on species of concern, and an adequate bycatch data collecon program must be in place to ensure bycatch management goals are being met

53 NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Ineffecve Vessels fishing for “fresh fish” north of 20° N in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean must implement an observer program and achieve 5% coverage by the end of 2014 (WCPFC 2012g). This monitoring level is very low considering the number of potenal bycatch species, it is oen not aained by all naons, and the low observer coverage hinders the ability to accurately determine the effecveness of management measures (Gilman 2011) (Clarke 2013). In addion, data collecon protocols within the observer programs are considered deficient (Gilman et al. 2013). We have awarded an “ineffecve” score.

Subfactor 3.2.4 – Management Record of Following Scienfic Advice Consideraons: How oen (always, somemes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scienfic recommendaons/advice (e.g., do they set catch limits at recommended levels)? A Highly Effecve rang is given if managers nearly always follow scienfic advice. NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve The Scienfic Commiee has recently (2014) recommended that several measures related to bycatch be adopted by the Commission. These include analyzing bycatch migaon methods for sharks and evaluang the fin-to-carcass rao currently in effect, implemenng e-monitoring trials for seabirds, and addional collecon of seabird bycatch data. No addional scienfic advice was provided in 2014 for sea turtles (WCPFC 2014). Historically, all scienfic advice related to bycatch has not been adopted (WCPFC 2013e), so we have awarded a “moderately effecve” score.

Subfactor 3.2.5 – Enforcement of Management Regulaons Consideraons: Is there a monitoring/enforcement system in place to ensure fishermen follow management regulaons and what is the level of fishermen’s compliance with regulaons? To achieve a Highly Effecve rang, there must be consistent enforcement of regulaons and verificaon of compliance. NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Moderately Effecve See the Harvest Strategy secon 3.1.5 for determinaon.

54 Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem This Criterion assesses the impact of the fishery on seafloor habitats, and increases that base score if there are measures in place to migate any impacts. The fishery’s overall impact on the ecosystem and food web and the use of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) principles is also evaluated. Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management aims to consider the interconnecons among species and all natural and human stressors on the environment. The final score is the geometric mean of the impact of fishing gear on habitat score (plus the migaon of gear impacts score) and the Ecosystem Based Fishery Management score. The Criterion 2 rang is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and ≤3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score ≤2.2=Red or High Concern

Rang cannot be Crical for Criterion 4.

Criterion 4 Summary Gear Type and Migaon of Gear Region / Method Substrate Impacts EBFM Score North Pacific / Pelagic longline 5.00: None 0.00: Not Applicable 3.00: Moderate Green Concern (3.873) South Pacific / Pelagic longline 5.00: None 0.00: Not Applicable 3.00: Moderate Green Concern (3.873) Western Central Pacific / Pelagic 5.00: None 0.00: Not Applicable 3.00: Moderate Green longline Concern (3.873)

Although pelagic longline gears do not typically come in contact with boom habitats, they do affect a number of ecologically important species and the consequence of this varies by region. Migaon measures to reduce the impact of pelagic longlines on boom habitats are not generally needed and there is no indicaon of a need in these three fisheries.

Criterion 4 Assessment SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 4.1 - Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate 5 (None) - Fishing gear does not contact the boom 4 (Very Low) - Vercal line gear 3 (Low)—Gears that contacts the boom, but is not dragged along the boom (e.g. gillnet, boom longline, trap) and is not fished on sensive habitats. Boom seine on resilient mud/sand habitats. Midwater trawl that is known to contact boom occasionally 2 (Moderate)—Boom dragging gears (dredge, trawl) fished on resilient mud/sand habitats. Gillnet, trap, or boom longline fished on sensive boulder or coral reef habitat. Boom seine except on mud/sand 1 (High)—Hydraulic clam dredge. Dredge or trawl gear fished on moderately sensive habitats (e.g., cobble or boulder) 0 (Very High)—Dredge or trawl fished on biogenic habitat, (e.g., deep-sea corals, eelgrass and maerl) Note: When mulple habitat types are commonly encountered, and/or the habitat classificaon is uncertain, the score will be based on the most sensive, plausible habitat type.

Factor 4.2 - Migaon of Gear Impacts

+1 (Strong Migaon)—Examples include large proporon55 of habitat protected from fishing (>50%) with gear, fishing intensity low/limited, gear specifically modified to reduce damage to seafloor and modificaons shown to be effecve at reducing damage, or an effecve combinaon of ‘moderate’ migaon measures. +0.5 (Moderate Migaon)—20% of habitat protected from fishing with gear or other measures in place to limit fishing effort, fishing intensity, and spaal footprint of damage caused from fishing. +0.25 (Low Migaon)—A few measures are in place (e.g., vulnerable habitats protected but other habitats not protected); there are some limits on fishing effort/intensity, but not acvely being reduced 0 (No Migaon)—No effecve measures are in place to limit gear impacts on habitats

Factor 4.3 - Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management 5 (Very Low Concern)—Substanal efforts have been made to protect species’ ecological roles and ensure fishing pracces do not have negave ecological effects (e.g., large proporon of fishery area is protected with marine reserves, and abundance is maintained at sufficient levels to provide food to predators) 4 (Low Concern)—Studies are underway to assess the ecological role of species and measures are in place to protect the ecological role of any species that plays an exceponally large role in the ecosystem. Measures are in place to minimize potenally negave ecological effect if hatchery supplementaon or fish aggregang devices (FADs) are used. 3 (Moderate Concern)—Fishery does not catch species that play an exceponally large role in the ecosystem, or if it does, studies are underway to determine how to protect the ecological role of these species, OR negave ecological effects from hatchery supplementaon or FADs are possible and management is not place to migate these impacts 2 (High Concern)—Fishery catches species that play an exceponally large role in the ecosystem and no efforts are being made to incorporate their ecological role into management. 1 (Very High Concern)—Use of hatchery supplementaon or fish aggregang devices (FADs) in the fishery is having serious negave ecological or genec consequences, OR fishery has resulted in trophic cascades or other detrimental impacts to the food web.

Factor 4.1 - Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE None Although pelagic longlines are surface fisheries, contact with the seabed can occur in shallow-set fisheries, such as the Hawaiian shallow-set fishery (Passfield and Gilman 2010) (Gilman et al. 2012). These effects are sll considered to be a low risk to boom habitats (Gilman et al. 2013) (Seafood Watch 2013), so we have awarded a no impact score.

Factor 4.2 - Migaon of Gear Impacts NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE Not Applicable

Factor 4.3 - Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management NORTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE SOUTH PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC, PELAGIC LONGLINE 56 Moderate Concern The pelagic longline fishery in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean catches a number of ecologically important species including other tunas, billfish, and sharks. In parcular, sharks are considered top predators in many ecosystems and play a crical role in how these ecosystems are structured and funcon (Piraino et al. 2002) (Stevens et al. 2000). The loss of these predators can cause many changes, such as to prey abundances, that can lead to a cascade of other effects (Myers et al. 2007) (Duffy 2003) (Ferre et al. 2010) (Schindler et al. 2002) and behavioral changes (Heithaus et al. 2007). In the North Pacific Ocean, the removal of blue shark and tunas by the longline fishery has been shown to lead to an increase in the number of short-lived, fast growing species such as mahi mahi (Polovina et al. 2009).

The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission has begun idenfying key shark species affected by fisheries in the Convenon Area and has to date completed stock assessments on two species (oceanic white p and silky sharks), and it has adopted several management measures to protect bycatch species (Rice and Harley 2013) (Rice and Harley 2012b). In addion, the WCPFC has iniated studies to monitor changes to the food web and to examine predator-prey relaonships (Allain 2010) (Allain et al. 2012).

We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because this fishery catches exceponal species but there are some efforts to incorporate their ecological roles into management.

57 Acknowledgements Scienfic review does not constute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch® program, or its seafood recommendaons, on the part of the reviewing sciensts. Seafood Watch® is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. Seafood Watch would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for graciously reviewing this report for scienfic accuracy.

58 References Abreu-Grobois, A & Plotkin, P. (IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group) 2008. Lepidochelys olivacea. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. ACAP. 2008. Albatross and petrel distribuon within the WCPFC area. The Fourth meeng of the WCPFC Ecosystem and Bycatch Specialist Working Group, Port Moresby, August 14, 2008. ACAP. 2014a. Light-mantled albatross Phoebetria palpebrata. Agreement on the Conservaon of albatross and petrels. ACAP. 2014b. Wandering albatross Diomedea exulans. Agreement on the Conservaon of albatross and petrels. ACAP. 2014d. White-chinned petrel Procellaria aequinocalis. Agreement on the Conservaon of albatross and petrels. ACAP. 2014c. Salvin's albatross Thalassarche salvini. Agreement on the Conservaon of albatross and petrels. Agreement on the Conservaon of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACP). 2010. Species assessments: Laysan albatross (Phoebastria immutabilis). Downloaded from hp://www.acap.aq on April 29, 2013. Akroyd, J., Hunngton, T. and McLoughlin, K. 2012. MSC report for Fiji albacore tuna longline fishery version 4 final report. Intertek Moody Marine. Allain, V. 2010. Trophic structure of the pelagic ecosystems of the western and central pacific ocean. WCPFC- SC6-2010/EB- IP 10. Allain, V., S.P. Griffiths, J. Polovina, and S. Nicol1. 2012. WCPO ecosystem indicator trends and results from ECOPATH simulaons. WCPFC-SC8-2012/EB-IP-11. Amorim, A., Baum, J., Cailliet, G.M., Clò, S., Clarke, S.C., Fergusson, I., Gonzalez, M., Macias, D., Mancini, P., Mancusi, C., Myers, R., Reardon, M., Trejo, T., Vacchi, M. & Valen, S.V. 2009. Alopias superciliosus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 Anderson, O.R.J., Small, C.J., Croxall, J.P., Dunn, E.K., Sullivan, B.J., Yates, O. & Black, A. 2011. Global seabird bycatch in longline fisheries. Endangered Species Research 14: 91–106. Baird, K., Dias, M., Small, C., Shaffer, S., Suryan, R., Anderson, D., Kappes, M. and Balgh, G.R. 2013. Overlap between WCPFC longline fishing effort and albatross distribuon in the North Pacific. WCPFC-SC9-2013/EB- WP-14. Baker, G.B. and Finley, L.A. 2008. Naonal Assessment Report for Reducing the Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries - 2008 Assessment Report. Report to Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra. Baker, G.B. and Wise, B.S. 2005. The impact of pelagic longline fishing on the flesh-footed shearwater Puffinus carneipes in Eastern Australia. Biological Conservaon 126: 306–316. Barlow, J. 2006. Cetacean abundance in Hawaiian waters esmated from a summer/fall survey in 2002. Marine Mammal Science 22:446-464. Baum, J., Medina, E., Musick, J.A. & Smale, M. 2006. Carcharhinus longimanus. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. Bell, E.A., Sim, J.L. and Scofield, P. 2009. Populaon parameters and distribuon of the black petrel (Procellaria parkinsoni), 2005/2006. Department of Conservaon, Wellington, New Zealand. BirdLife Internaonal. 2012. Thalassarche melanophyrs. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 BirdLife Internaonal. 2012d. Procellaria cinerea. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 BirdLife Internaonal. 2012f. Phoebetria palpebrata. In: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 BirdLife Internaonal. 2012h. Thalassarche salvini. In: IUCN 2012 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 BirdLife Internaonal. 2012i. Puffinus griseus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. BirdLife Internaonal. 2012l. Diomedea exulans. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. 59 BirdLife Internaonal. 2012o. Procellaria aequinocalis. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 BirdLife Internaonal 2012s. Phoebastria immutabilis. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.1. BirdLife Internaonal 2012e. Diomedea exulans. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.1. BirdLife Internaonal 2012c. Thalassarche chrysostoma. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.1. BirdLife Internaonal 2014. Phoebastria nigripes. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2. BirdLife Internaonal 2014. Thalassarche melanophris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2. Bonfil, R., Amorim, A., Anderson, C., Arauz, R., Baum, J., Clarke, S.C., Graham, R.T., Gonzalez, M., Jolón, M., Kyne, P.M., Mancini, P., Márquez, F., Ruíz, C. & Smith, W. 2009. Carcharhinus falciformis. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. Brodziak, J. and Ishimura, G. 2010. Stock assessment of North Pacific swordfish (Xiphias gladius) in 2009. Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center Administrave Report H-10-01. 43 p. Brooke, M. 2004. Albatrosses and petrels across the world. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 499 p. Brouwer, S. and I. Bertram. 2009. Seng bycatch limits for sea turtles in the Western and Central Pacific oceans shallow-set longline fisheries. WCPFC-SC5-2009/EB-WP-04. BWG. 2013. Stock assessment of blue marlin in the Pacific Ocean in 2013. WCPFC-SC9-2013/SA-WP-09. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session, 6-14 August 2013, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. Cailliet, G.M., Cavanagh, R.D., Kulka, D.W., Stevens, J.D., Soldo, A., Clo, S., Macias, D., Baum, J., Kohin, S., Duarte, A., Holtzhausen, J.A., Acuña, E., Amorim, A. & Domingo, A. 2009. Isurus oxyrinchus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 CCSBT. 2011. Report of the eighth meeng of the Commission. Commission for the Conservaon of the Southern Bluefin Tuna. 10-13 October 2011, Bali, Indonesia. Chang J.H. and Liu, K.M. 2009. Stock assessment of the shorin mako (Isurus oxyrinchus) in the Northwest Pacific Ocean using per recruit and virtual populaon analyses. Fisheries Research 98:92-101. Clarke, S. 2009. An alternave esmate of catches of five species of sharks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean based on shark fin trade data. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Scienfic Commiee Paper SC5/WB-WP-02. Clarke, S. 2011. A status snapshot of key shark species in the Western and Central Pacific and potenal management opons. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session, 9-17 August 2011, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC-SC7-EB-WP-04. 37 p. Clarke, S. 2013. Towards and integrated shark conservaon and management measure for the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Pacific Islands Regional Office and Naonal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administraon. WCPFC-SC9-2013/EB-WP-08. Clarke, S., Yokawa, K., Matsunaga, H., and Nakano, H. 2011. Analysis of North Pacific shark data from Japanese commercial longline and research/training vessel records. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session, 9-17 August, 2011, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC-SC7-2011/EB-WP-02. 89 p. Clarke, S., Yokawa, K., Matsunaga, H. and Nakano, H. 2011c. Analysis of North Pacific Shark Data from Japanese Commercial Longline and Research/Training Vessel Records. WCPFC-SC7-2011/EB-WP-02. Clarke, S., Sato, M., Small, C., Sullivan, B., Inoue, Y. and Ochi, D. 2014. Bycatch in longline fisheries for tuna and tuna-like species: a global review of status and migaon measures. WCPFC-SC10-2014/EB-IP-04. Clarke, S., Harley, S., Hoyle, S. and Rice, J. 2011b. An Indicator-based Analysis of Key Shark Species based on Data Held by SPC-OFP. WCPFC-SC7-2011/EB-WP-01. Collee, B., Acero, A., Canales Ramirez, C., Carpenter, K.E., Di Natale, A., Fox, W., Miyabe, N., Montano Cruz, R., Nelson, R., Schaefer, K., Serra, R., Sun, C., Uozumi, Y. & Yanez, E. 2011a. Isompax indica. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Collee, B., Acero, A., Amorim, A.F., Boustany, A., Canales Ramirez, C.,et al. 2011b. Makaira nigricans. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. 60 Collee, B., Acero, A., Amorim, A.F., Boustany, A., Canales Ramirez, C., et al. 2011c. Coryphaena hippurus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Collee, B., Chang, S.-K., Di Natale, A., Fox, W., Juan Jorda, M., Miyabe, N., Nelson, R., Uozumi, Y. & Wang, S. 2011e. Thunnus maccoyii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2. Collee, B., Acero, A., Amorim, A.F., Boustany, A., Canales Ramirez, C., Cardenas, G., et al. 2011d. Acanthocybium solandri. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 Cousins, K. and Cooper, J. 2000. The populaon of the black-footed albatross in relaon to mortality caused by longline fishing. Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. Crowder, L. and R. Myers. 2001. A Comprehensive Study of the Ecological Impacts of the Worldwide Pelagic Longline Industry. 2001 First Annual Report to the Pew Charitable Trusts. Pew Charitable Trusts: Philadelphia, PA, USA. Cullis-Suzuki, S. and Pauly, D. 2010. Failing the high seas: a global evaluaon of regional fisheries management organizaons. Marine Policy 34:1036-1042 Davies, N., Hoyle, S., Harley, S., Langley, A., Kleiber, P., and Hampton, J. 2011. Stock assessment of bigeye tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session, 9-17 August, 2011, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC-SC7-2011/SA-WP-02. 133 p. Davies, N., Hoyle, S. and Hampton, J. 2012. Stock assessment of striped marlin ( audax) in the southwest Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Eighth Regular Session, Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, 7-15 August 2012, Busan, Republic of Korea. WCPFC-SC8-2012/SA-WP-05. 84 p. Davies, N., Pilling, G., Harley, S. and Hampton, J. 2013. Stock assessment of swordfish (Xiphias gladius) in the southwest Pacific Ocean. WCPFC-SC9-2013/SA-WP-05. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session, 6-14 August 2013, Federated States of Micronesia. Duffy, J.E. 2003. Biodiversity loss, trophic skew and ecosystem funconing. Ecology Leers 6:680-687. Duon, P.H., Hipeuw, C., Zein, M., Benson, S.R., Petro, G., Pita, J. et al. 2007. Status and genec structure of nesng populaons of leatherback turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) in the western Pacific. Chelonian Conservaon and Bioloyg 6:47-53. Food and Agriculture Organisaon (FAO). 2012. Fishstat J database. Food and Agriculture Organisaon, Rome, Itsly. Accessed April, 2013. FAO. 2015. Fishery and Aquaculture Stascs. Global capture producon 1950-2013. FishStatJ. In: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Rome. Ferre, F., B. Worm, G.L. Brien, M.R. Heithaus, H.K. and Lotze. 2010. Paerns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean. Ecology Leers, 13: 1055– 1071. Fonteneau, A. 1991. Seamounts and tuna in the tropical eastern Atlanc. Aquac and Living Resources 4:13- 25. Fonteneau, A., Ariz, J., Gaertner, D., Nordstrom, V. and Pallares, P. 2000a. Observed changes in the species composion of tuna schools in the Gulf of Guinea between 1981 to 1999, in relaon with the fish aggregang device fishery. Aquac and Living Resources 13:253-257. Forney, K.A. 2009. Serious injury determinaons for cetaceans caught in Hawaii longline fisheries during 1994- 2008. Dra document PSRG-2009-09 presented to the Pacific Scienfic Review Group, November 3-5, 2009, Del Mar, Ca. French, R.P., Lyle, J., Tracey, S., Currie, S. and Semmens, J.M. 2015. High survivorship aer catch-release fishing suggests physiological resilience in the endothermic shorin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus). Conservaon Physiology 3. Fréon, P. and Dagorn, L. 2000. Review of fish associave behavior: Toward a generalizaon of the meeng point hypothesis. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 10:183-207. Froese, R. and Kesner-Reyes, K. 2002. Impact of fishing on the abundance of marine species. ICES CM 2002/L:12. Available at: hp://info.ices.dk/products/CMdocs/2002/L/L1202.pdf Froese, R. and D. Pauly. Editors. 2015. FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publicaon. www.fishbase.org, version Gascoigne, J., Kolody, D., Sieben, C., and Cartwright, I. 2014. The SZLC, HNSFC & Cook Islands EEZ south Pacific albacore longline fishery. MSC Public Comment Dra report.

61 Gilman, E.L. 2001. Keeping Albatross off the Hook in the North Pacific Ocean. World Bird Watch. 23(2): 14-16. Gilman, E. 2011. Bycatch governance and best pracce migaon technology in global tuna fisheries. Marine Policy 35:590-609. Gilman, E. and Kingma, E. 2013. Standard for assessing transparency in informaon on compliance with obligaons of regional fisheries management organizaons: validaon through assessment of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission. Ocean & Coastal Management 84:31-39. Gilman, E., Pasfield, K. and Nakamura, K. 2013. Performance of regional fisheries management organizaons: ecosystem-based governance of bycatch and discards. Fish and Fisheries DOI:10.1111/faf.12021 Gilman, E., Suuronen, P., Hall, M., Kennelly, S. In Press (2013). Causes and methods to esmate crypc sources of fishing mortality. Journal of Fish Biology. Harley, S.J., Davies, N., Tremblay-Boyer, L., Hampton, J. and McKechniw, S. 2015. Stock assessment for south Pacific albacore tuna. WCPFC-SC11-2015/SA-WP-06 Heithaus, M.R., Frid, A., Wirsing, A.J., Dill, L.M., Fourqurean, J.W., Burkholder, D., Thomson, J. and Bejder, L 2007. State-dependent risk taking by green sea turtles mediates top-down effects of ger shark inmidaon in a marine ecosystem. Journal of Ecology 76:837-844. Hoyle, S., Kleiber, P., Davies, N., Langley, A. and Hampton, J. 2011. Stock assessment of skipjack tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session, 9-17 August, 2011, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC-SC7-2011/SA-WP-04. 134 p. Hoyle, S., Hampton, J. and Davies, N. 2012. Stock assessment of albacore tuna in the South Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Eighth Regular Session, 7-15 August 2012, Busan, Republic of Korea. WCPFC-SC8- 2012/SA-WP-04-REV1. 123 p. Huan, H. 2014. Seabirds and sea turtles bycatch of Taiwanese tuna longline fleets in the Pacific Ocean. WCPFC- SC10-2014/EB-SP-06 Rev 1. Ianelli, J., M. Maunder, and A. E. Punt. 2012. Independent peer review of 2011 WCPFC bigeye tuna stock assessment. WCPFC-SC8-2012/SA-WP-01. Available online hp://www.wcpfc.int/node/4587. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2004. Resoluon on the establishment of a vessel monitoring system (VMS). Resoluon c-04-06, 72nd Reunion, Lima Peru. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2005b. Resoluon on the conservaon of sharks caught in associaon with fisheries in the eastern Pacific Ocean. Resoluon C-05-03. 73rd Meeng, Lanzarote, Spain, 20- 24 June 2005. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2005c. Resoluon on northern albacore tuna; C-02-02. 73rd Meeng, Lanzarote, Spain, 20-24 June 2005. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2005a. Resoluon to establish a list of vessels presumed to have carried out illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing acvies in the eastern Pacific Ocean. Resoluon C- 05-07. 73rd Meeng, Lanzarote, Spain, 20-24 June 2005. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2006. Consolidated resoluon on bycatch. Resoluon C-04- 05 (Rev 2). 74th Meeng, Pusan, Korea. 26-30 June 2006. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2011a. Resoluon on the process for improved compliance of resoluons adopted by the Commission. Resoluon C-11-07. 82nd Meeng, La Jolla, CA, 4-8 July 2011. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2011b. Resoluon to migate the impact on seabirds of fishing for species covered by the IATTC. Resoluon C-11-02. 82nd Meeng, La Jolla, CA, 4-8 2011. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2011c. Resoluon on scienfic observers for longline vessels. Resoluon C-11-08. 82nd Meeng, La Jolla, CA, 4-8 2011. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2011d. Resoluon on the conservaon of oceanic whitep sharks caught in associaon with fisheries in the Angua Convenon Area. Resoluon C-11-10. 82nd Meeng, La Jolla, Ca, 4-8 June 2011. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2012. Conservaon and Management Measures for bluefin tuna in the eastern Pacific Ocean. Resoluon C-12-09, 83rd Meeng, La Jolla, CA, 25-29 June 2012. IATTC. 2014. Tunas and billfishes in the eastern Pacific Ocean in 2013. Fishery status report No. 12. Inter- American Tropical Tuna Commission. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC). 2007. Resoluon to migate the impacts of tuna fishing 62 vessels on sea turtles. Resoluon C-07-03. 75th Meeng, Cancun, Mexico, 25-29 June 2007. IOTC. 2013e. Report on biology, stock status and management of southern bluefin tuna: 2013. IOTC-2013- SC16-ES05[E]. Available at:hp://www.iotc.org/files/proceedings/2013/sc/IOTC-2013-SC16-ES05[E].pdf ISC. 2015. Indicator-based analysis of the status of shorin mako sharks in the north Pacific Ocean WCPFC- SC11-2015/SA-WP-08. ISC Albacore Working Group. 2011. Stock assessment of albacore tuna in the North Pacific Ocean in 2011. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, 9-17, August 2011. WCPFC-SC7-2011/SA-WP-10 ISCBWG. 2014. North Pacific swordfish (Xiphias gladius) stock assessment in 2014. Report of the billfish working group. Internaonal Scienfic Commiee for tuna and tuna-like species in the North Pacific Ocean. ISCBWG 2015. Stock assessment of striped marlin in the western and central North Pacific Ocean through 2013. WCPFC-SC-2015/SA-WP-10 Internaonal Scienfic Commiee for Tuna and Tuna-like Species in the North Pacific Ocean Pacific Bluefin Working Group. 2012. Pacific bluefin tuna stock assessment summary. Webinar, 19-21 December, 2012. 13 p. ISCSWG. 2013. Report of the shark working group workshops May 2012, January and April 2013. SCPFC-SC9- 2013/SA-WP-11a. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session 6-14 August 2013, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. ISCSWG. 2014. Stock assessment and future projecons of blue shark in the North Pacific Ocean. Report of the Shark Working Group, ISC. Internaonal Seafood Sustainability Foundaon (ISSF). 2013a. ISSF stock assessment workshop: control rules and reference points for tuna RFMOs. ISSF Technical Report 2013-03. Internaonal Seafood Sustainability Foundaon, Washington, DC. 34 p. ISSF. 2014. ISSF Tuna Stock Status Update, 2014: Status of the world fisheries for tuna. ISSF Technical Report 2014-09. Internaonal Seafood Sustainability Foundaon, Washington, D.C., USA. Internaonal Seafood Sustainability Foundaon (ISSF). 2013b. ISSF stock status rangs 2013 status of the world fisheries for tuna. ISSF Technical Report 2013-4, April 2013 Jones, T.T., Bostrom, B.L., Hasngs, M.D., Van Houtan, K.S., Pauly, D. and Jones, D.R. 2012. Resource requirements of the Pacific leatherback turtle populaon. PLoS ONE 7:e45447/dpi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045447. Josse, E., Bertrand, A. and Dagorn, L. 1999. An acousc approach to study tuna aggregated around fish aggregang devices in French Polynesia: methods and validaon. Aquac and Living Resources 12:303-313. Josse, E., Dagorn, L. and Bertrand, A. 2000. Typology and behavior of tuna aggregaons around fish aggregang devices from acousc surveys in French Polynesia. Aquac and Living Resources 13:183-192. Kaplan, I.C. 2005. A risk assessment for Pacific leatherback turtles (Dermochelys coriacea). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquac Sciences 62:1710-1719. Kelleher, K. 2005. Discards in the world's marine fisheries. An update. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 470. Rome, FAO. 131 p. Kirby, D.S. 2006. Ecological risk assessment for species caught in WCPO tuna fisheries: inherent risk as determined by producvity-suscepbility analysis. Scienfic Commiee Second Regular Session, 7-18 August 2006, Manila, Philippines. WCPFC-SC2-2006/EB WP-1. 25 p. Kirby, D.S. and Hobday, A. 2007. Ecological risk assessment for the effects of fishing in the western and central Pacific Ocean: producvity and suscepbility analysis. Scienfic Commiee Third Regular Session, 13-24 2007, Honolulu, HI. WCPFC-SC3-SWG/WP-1. 20 p. Kleiber, P., Hampton, J., Hinton, M.G and Uozumi, Y. 2003. Update on blue marlin stock assessment. 15th Meeng of the Standing Commiee on Tuna and Billfish BBRG-10. SCTB15 Working Paper. Kleiber, P., Clarke, S., Bigelow, K., Nakano, H., McAllister, M. and Takeuichi, Y. 2009. North Pacific blue shark stock assessment. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-PIFSC-17. 83 p. Koehler, H.R., 2013. Promong compliance in tuna RFMO's: a comprehensive baseline survey of the current mechanics of reviewing, assessing and addressing compliance with RFMO obligaons and measures. ISSF Technical Report 2013-02. Kolody, D., Campbell, R. and Davies, N. 2008. A Mulfan-CL stock assessment of south-west Pacific swordfish 63 1952-2007. Scienfic Commiee Fourth Regular Session, 11-22 August 2008, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea. WCPFC-SC4-2008-SA-WP-6 (REVISION 1*). 90PG. Langley, A., Hoyle, S. and Hampton, J. 2011. Stock assessment of yellowfin tuna in the Western and Central pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session, 9-17 August 2011, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC-SC7-2011/SA-WP-03. 135p. Lawson, T. 2001. Observer data held by the Oceanic Fisheries Programme covering tuna fishery bycatches in the western and central Pacific Ocean. 14th Meeng of the the Standing Commiee on Tuna and Billfish, 9-16 August 2001, Numea, New Caledonia. SWG-9. 42 p. Lehodey, P., Bergnac, M., Hampton, J., Lewis, A. and Picault, J. El Nino Southern Oscillaon and tuna in the western Pacific. Nature 389:715-718 Lewison, R.L. and Crowder, L.B. 2003. Esmang fishery bycatch and effects on a vulnerable seabird populaon. Ecological Applicaons 13:743-753. Lewison, R.L. and Crowder, L.B. 2007. Pung longline bycatch of sea turtles into perspecve. Conservaon Biology 21:79-86 Lewison, R., Freeman, S.A. and Crowder, L.B. 2004. Quanfying the effects of fisheries on threatened species: the impact of pelagic longlines on loggerheard and leatherback sea turtles. Ecology Leers 7:221-231/ Maison, K.A., Kinan Kelly, I. and K.P. Frutchey. 2010. Green Turtle Nesng Sites and Sea Turtle Legislaon throughout Oceania. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFS-F/SPO-110, 52 pp. Marine Turtle Specialist Group 1996. Carea carea. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Marnez, A.L. 2000. Dermochelys coriacea. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Menard, F., Stequert, B., Rubin, A., Herrera, M. and Marchal, E. 2000. Food consumpon of tuna in the equatorial Atlanc Ocean: FAD associated versus unassociated schools. Aquac and Living Resources 13:233- 240. Miyashita, T. 1993. Abundance of dolphin stocks in the western North Pacific taken by the Japanese drive fishery. Reports of the Internaonal Whaling Commission 43: 417-437. Molony, B. 2005. Esmates of the mortality of non-target species with an inial focus on seabirds, turtles and sharks. First meeng of the Scienfic Commiee of the western and central Pacific Fisheries Commission, 9-19 August 2005. WCPFC-SC1. 84 p. Molony, B. 2006. Summary of the biology, ecology and stock status of billfishes in the WCPFC, with a review of major variables influencing longline fishery performance. 1st Meeng of the Scienfic Commiee of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Noumea, New Caledonia, 18-19, August 2006. WCPFC-EB- 2. Molony, B. 2007. Overview of purse-seine and longline bycatch issues in the western and central Pacific Ocean. Inaugural Meeng of the Asia and Pacific Islands Bycatch Consorum, 15-16 February 2007, Honolulu, HI. 42 p. Mormer, J.A & Donnelly, M. (IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group). 2008. Eretmochelys imbricata. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Myers, R.A., Baum, J.K., Shepherd, T.D., Powers, S.P. and Peterson, C.H. 2007. Cascading effects of the loss of apex predatory sharks from a coastal. Science 315:1846-1850. Naughton, M. B, M. D. Romano, T. S. Zimmerman. 2007. A Conservaon Acon Plan for Black-footed Albatross (Phoebastria nigripes) and Laysan Albatross (P. immutabilis), Ver. 1.0. Naonal Marine Fisheries Service. 2011. U.S. Naonal Bycatch Report. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-117E, 508 p. Naonal Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2012. Endangered Species Act - Secon 7 Consultaon Biological Opinion. Naonal Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Islands Region, Protected Resources Division. 162 pg. Naonal Marine Fisheries Service. 2013. U.S. Naonal Bycatch Report first edion update 1. (Eds. L.R. Benaka, C. Rilling, E.E. Seney, and H. Winarsoo). US Department of Commercie, 57 p. Naonal Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2014. Us Foreign trade. NOAA Office of Science and Technology. NZG. 2008. Fisheries (seabird sustainability measures-surface longlines) noce 2008 (No. F429). New Zealand 64 Gazee 21 February 2008, No. 31. New Zealand Government, Wellington. Oceanic Fisheries Programme. 2010. Non-target species interacons with the tuna fisheries of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Sixth Regular Session, 10-19 August, 2010, Nuku'alofa, Tonga. 59 p. Oceanic Fisheries Programme (OFP). 2012a. Esmates of annual catches in the WCPFC stascal area. Scienfic Commiee Eighth Regular Session, 7-15 August 2012, Busan, Republic of Korea. WCPFC-SC8- 2012/ST IP-1. Oro, D. and A. Marnez-Abrain. 2000. Ecology and behavior of seabirds. Marine Ecology - Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. Available at: hp://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c09/E2-27-05-00.pdf Passfield, K., Gilman, E. (2010) Effects of Pelagic Longline Fishing on Seamount Ecosystems based on Interviews with Pacific Island Fishers. Technical Report produced under the Global Environment Facility Oceanic Fisheries Management Project. Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature, Gland, Switzerland. Paxton, J.R. 2010. . In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. PIFSC. 2014. Internaonal team launches research on pelagic sharks in the North Pacific Ocean. NOAA Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center Quarterly Research Bullen, June 2011. Piraino, S., Fanelli, G., Boero, F. 2002. Variability of species roles in marine communies: change of paradigms for conservaon priories. Marine Biology 140:1067-1074. Polovina, J.J., Abecassis, M., Howell, E.A. and Woodworth, P. 2009. Increases in the relave abundance of mid- trophic level fishes concurrent with declines in apex predators in the subtropical North Pacific 1996-2006. Fisheries Bullen 107:523-531. Reilly, S.B., Bannister, J.L., Best, P.B., Brown, M., Brownell Jr., R.L., Buerworth, D.S., Clapham, P.J., Cooke, J., Donovan, G.P., Urbán, J. & Zerbini, A.N. 2008. Megaptera novaeangliae. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Rice, J. 2012. Alternate catch esmates for silky and oceanic whitep sharks in Western and Central Pacific Ocean. WCPFC-SC28-2012/SA-IP-12. Rice, J. and Harley, S. 2012b. Stock assessment of oceanic whitetop sharks in the western and central Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Eighth Regular Session, 7-15 August 2012. WCPFC-SC8-2012/SA-WP-06 Rev 1. 53 pg. Rice, J. and Harley, S. 2013. Updates stock assessment of silky sharks in the western and central Pacific Ocean. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session, 6-14 August 2013, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC-SC9-2013/SA-WP-03. Rice, J., Harley, S., Maunder, M. and Aires Da-Silva, A. 213. Stock assessment of blue sharks in the north Pacific Ocean using stock synthesis. WCPFC-SC9-2013/SA-WP-02. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, 6-14 August 2013. Roe, J.H., Morreale, S.J., Paladino, F.V., Shillinger, G.L. and Benson, S.R. et al. 2014. Predicng bycatch hotspots for endangered leatherback turtles on longlines in the Pacific Ocean. Proceedings of the Royal Society 281:20132559 Schindler, D.E., Essington, T.E., Kitchell, J.F., Boggs, C. and Hilborn, R. 2002. Sharks and tunas: fisheries impacts on predators with contrasng life histories. Ecological Applicaons 12:735-748. Seafood Watch. 2013. Seafood Watch criteria for fisheries. Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch Version January 18, 2013. 82 p. Seminoff, J.A. (Southwest Fisheries Science Center, U.S.) 2004. Chelonia mydas. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. SPC. 2014. Tuna fisheries longline. Secretariat for the Pacific Community, Oceanic Fisheries Programme. Available at: hp://www.spc.int/oceanfish/en/tuna-fisheries/174-longline Spola, J.R., Dunham, A.E., Leslie, A.J., Steyermark, A.C., Plotkin, P.T. and Paladino, F.V. 1996. Worldwide populaon decline of Dermochelys coriacea: are leatherback turtles going exnct? Chelonian Conservaon and Biology 2:209-222 Stevens, J. 2009. Prionace glauca. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. Available at: hp://www.iucnredlist.org/details/39381/0 Stevens, J.D., Bonfil, R., Dulvy, N.K. and Walker, P.A. 2000. The effects of fishing on sharks, rays, and chimaeras (chondrichthuyans), and the implicaons for marine ecosystems. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57:476-494. 65 Tapilatu, R.F., Duon, P.H., Tiwari, M., Wibbels, T., Ferdinandus, H.V., Iwanggin, W.G. and Nugroho, B.H. 2013. Long-term decline of the western Pacific leatherback, Dermochelys coriacea: a globally important sea turtle populaon. Ecosphere 4:25.hp://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES12-00348.1 Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. 2008a. Pseudorca crassidens. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. 2008b. Peponocephala electra. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. 2008. Feresa aenuata. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. 2008. Physeter macrocephalus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. 2011. Globicephala macrorhynchus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2 Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J.K.B., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. 2012. Grampus griseus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Tuck, G.N., Phillips, R.A., Small, C., Thomson, R.B., Klaer, N.L., Taylor, F., Wanless, R.M. and Arrizabalaga, H. 2011. An assessment of seabird–fishery interacons in the Atlanc Ocean. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: 1628–1637 Van Houtan, K.S. 2011. Assessing the impact of fishery acons to marine turtle populaons in the North Pacific using classical and climate-based models, Internal Report IR-II-024. NOAA Fisheries, Pacific Islands Science Center. 25 p. Wallace, B.P., Kot, C.Y., MiMaeo, A.D., Lee, T., Crowder, L.B. and Lewison, R.L. 2013. Impacts of fisheries bycatch on marine turtle populaons worldwide: toward conservaon and research priories. Ecosphere 4:40.hp://dx.doi.org/10.1980/ES12-00388.1 Walsh, W.A., Bigelow, K.A. and Sender, K.L. 2009. Decreases in shark catches and mortality in the Hawaii-based longline fishery as documented by fishery observers. Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management and Ecosystem Science 1:270-282. Waugh, S.M., Filippi, D.P., Kirby, D.S., Abraham E. & Walker N. 2012. Ecological Risk Assessment for seabird interacons in Western and Central Pacific longline fisheries. Marine Policy 36: 933–946. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2005. Conservaon and management measure for North Pacific albacore. Conservaon and Management Measure-2005-03. Second Session 12-16 December 2005. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2006. Western and central Pacific fisheries commission boarding and inspecon procedures. Conservaon and Management Measure 2006-08. Third Regular Session, Apia, Samoa, 11-15 December 2006. WCPFC, 2006b. Conservaon and management measure for striped marlin in the southwest Pacific. Conservaon and Management Measure 2006-04. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 200. Conservaon and management measure for the -regional observer programme. Conservaon and Management Measure 200. Fourth Regular Session, Tumon, Guam, USA, 2-7 December 20007. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission. 2008a. Conservaon and management measure for bigeye and yellowfin tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Conservaon Management Measure 2008-01. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2008b. Conservaon and management of sea turtles. Conservaon and Management Measure 2008-03. Fih Regular Session, 8-12 December 2008, Busan, Korea. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2009. Conservaon and management for swordfish. Conservaon and Management Measure 2009-03, Sixth Regular Session, Papeete, Tahi, French Polynesia, 7-11 December 2009. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2010c. Conservaon and management measure 66 for South Pacific albacore. Conservaon and Management Measure-2010-051. Seventh Regular Session, Honolulu, HI, December 6-10, 2010. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2010a. Conservaon and management measure for sharks. Conservaon and Management Measure 2010-07. Seventh Regular Session, Honolulu, HI, 6-12 December 2010. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2010b. Conservaon and management measure to establish a list of vessels presumed to have carried out illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing acvies in the WCPO. Conservaon and Management Measure 2010-06. Seventh Regular Session, Honolulu, HI, 6-10 December 2010. WCPFC. 2010d. Conservaon and management measure for north Pacific striped marlin. Conservaon and Management Measure 2010-01. WCPFC. 2011. Commission for the Conservaon and management of highly migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific ocean summary report. Scienfic Commiee Seventh Regular Session. Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012A. Conservaon and management measure for bigeye, yellowfin and skipjack tuna in the western and central Pacific Ocean. Conservaon and Management Measure 2012-01. Commission Ninth Regular Session, Manila, Philippines, 2-6 December 2012. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012b. Conservaon and management measure for Pacific bluefin tuna. Conservaon and Management Measure 2012-06. Commission Ninth Regular Session, Manila, Philippines 2-6 December 2012. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012e. Conservaon and management measure to migate the impact of fishing for highly migratory fish stocks on seabirds. Conservaon and Management Measure 2012-07. Commission Ninth Regular Session, Manila, Philippines, 2-6 December 2012. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012f. Conservaon and management measure for oceanic whitep shark. Conservaon and Management Measure 2011-04. Eighth Regular Session, Tumon, Guam, 26-30 March 2011. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012g. Conservaon and management measure for implemenng the regional observer programme by vessels fishing for fresh fish north of 20N. Conservaon and Management Measure 2012-03. Commission Ninth Regular Session, Manila, Philippines, 2-6 December 2012. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012c. Conservaon and management measure for compliance monitoring scheme. Conservaon and Management Measure 2012-02. Commission Ninth Regular Session, Manila, Philippines, 2-6 December 2012. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). 2012d. Commission vessel monitoring system. Conservaon and Management Measure 2011-02. Commission Eighth Regular Session, Tumon, Guam, 26-30 March 2012. WCPFC. 2013a. Conservaon and management measure for Pacific bluefin tuna. Conservaon and Management Measure 2013-09. Tenth Regular Session, 2-6 December 2013, Cairns, Australia. WCPFC. 2013d. Conservaon and management measure for compliance monitoring scheme. Conservaon and Management Measure 2013-02. Tenth Regular Session, 2-6 December 2013, Cairns, Australia. WCPFC. 2013c. WCPFC management objecves workshop 2. 28-29 November, 2013, Cairns, Australia. WCPFC. 2013b. Conservaon and management measure for bigeye, yellowfin and skipjack tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Conservaon and Management Measure 2013-01. Tenth regular session, December 2-6, 2013, Cairns Australia. WCPFC. 2013e. Commission for the Conservaon and Management of highly migratory fish stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean Summary Report. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session, 6-14 August, 2013, Federated States of Micronesia. WCPFC. 2013f. Conservaon and management measure for silky sharks. Conservaon and Management Measure 2013-08. Commission Tenth Regular Session, 2-6 December, 2013, Cairns, Australia. WCPFC. 2013g. Commission for the Conservaon and Management of highly migratory fish stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Tenth Regular Session, Cairns, Australia, 2-6 December 2013. WCPFC. 2013h. Scienfic Commiee Ninth Regular Session summary report. Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, 6-14 August 2013. 67 WCPFC. 2014. Scienfic Commiee Tenth Regular Session. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands, 6-14 August 2014. WCPFC. 2014b. Esmates of annual catches in the WCPFC stascal area. WCPFC-S10-2014/ST IP. WCPFC. 2014c. Tuna fishery yearbook 2013. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission. WCPFC. 2015. Esmates of annual catches in the WCPFC stascal area. WCPFC-SC11-2015/ST IP-1 Whitehead, H. 2002. Esmates of the current global populaon size and historical trajectory for sperm whales. Marine Ecology Progress Series 242: 295-304. Williams, P. and Terewasi, P. 2014. Overview of tuna fisheries in the western and central Pacific Ocean, including economic consideraons 2013. WCPFC-SC10-2014/GN WP-1 Williams, P, S.S. Kirby and S. Beverly. 2009. Encounter rates and life status for marine turtles in the WCPO longline and purse seine fisheries. WCPFC-SC5-2009/EB-WP-07. Work, T.M. and Balazs, G.H. 2002. Necropsy findings in sea turtles taken as bycatch in the North Pacific longline fishery. Fishery Bullen 100:876-880. Work, T.M. and Balazs, G.H. 2002. Necropsy findings in sea turtles taken as bycatch in the North Pacific longline fishery. Fisheries Bullen 100:876-880 Zug, G.R. and Parham, J.F. 1996. Age and growth in leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea (Testudines: Dermochelyidae): A skeletochronological analysis. Chelonian Conservaon and Biology 2(2): 244-249.

68 Appendix A: Extra By Catch Species

Yellowfin tuna

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Medium FishBase assigned a moderate to high vulnerability of 46 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). Yellowfin’s life history characteriscs support a moderate vulnerability score. Yellowfin tuna reaches sexual maturity by 100 cm in length, although growth rates vary by locaon, and 2–3 years of age. It can aain a maximum size of 180 cm and live to at least 4 years of age and perhaps as much as 9 years. It is a broadcast spawner and an important predator in the ecosystem (Langley et al. 2011) (Froese and Pauly 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Very Low Concern The biomass-based reference point was 1.37 for the reference model used in the 2014 assessment (SBcurrent /SB MSY , the rao of the current [2008–2011] spawning [mature fish] biomass to that needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield). The rao of the latest (2012) spawning biomass to the level needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (SBcurrent /SB MSY ) was 1.24. Therefore yellowfin tuna is not in an overfished state (Davies et al. 2014b). We have awarded a “very low” concern score.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Very Low Concern The current fishing mortality rate is below levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (Fcurrent /F MSY = 0.72) for the most realisc models. Therefore overfishing is not occurring (Davies et al. 2014). We have awarded a “very low” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

69 NORTH PACIFIC

20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Silky shark

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Fishbase assigned a high score of 79 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) considers silky shark to be Near Threatened globally (Bonfil et al. 2009). The first assessment of silky shark in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) was conducted in 2012 and updated during 2013 (Rice and Harley 2013). According to this model, the spawning biomass (abundance of mature fish) levels consistently declined over the modeled period (1995–2009). The spawning biomass has declined by 67% since 1995. The spawning biomass in 2009 was far below target levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (SBcurrent /SB MSY = 0.70 (95% C.I. 0.51– 1.23) and therefore the stock is overfished. We have awarded a “high” concern score because the SSB is below MSY.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

70 WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Concern According to the 2013 updated silky shark assessment in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), fishing mortality rates in 2009 (the last year of the modeled period) exceeded levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (Fcurrent/FMSY = 4.48 (1.41–7.96)). This indicates that overfishing is occurring (Rice and Harley 2013). The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission has recently banned the catch, landing, and sale of silky shark (WCPFC 2013f). The success of this measure is highly dependent on post- release survival of silky shark. We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the high fishing mortality rates.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

71 Albacore tuna

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Medium FishBase assigned a high vulnerability score of 58 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). But the life history characteriscs of albacore suggest only a medium vulnerability to fishing. For example, albacore reaches sexual maturity between 5 and 6 years of age and reaches a maximum age of 15 years (ISCAWG 2011). It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2013). Based on these life history characteriscs, which score a 2 on the Seafood Watch producvity and suscepbility table, we have awarded a medium score. Raonale: Life history characterisc Paramater Score Age at maturity <5 years 3 Average maximum age 10-25 years 2 Reproducve strategy Broadcast spawner 3 Trophic level >3.25 1

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

NORTH PACIFIC Low Concern The most recent stock assessment for albacore tuna in the North Pacific Ocean was conducted in 2014. According to this assessment, the spawning stock biomass (SSB) in 2012 (last year of data included in the model) was 110,101 t, with stock depleon esmated to be 35.8% of the unfished SSB. No biomass-based reference points are in place, but the assessment concluded that there was lile indicaon that the SSB was below any candidate biomass-based reference points. We have therefore awarded a “low” concern score because it is likely that albacore tuna in the North Pacific is not overfished, but not a very low concern score because no reference points are currently accepted (ISCAWG 2014).

SOUTH PACIFIC Low Concern Albacore tuna in the South Pacific was last assessed in 2015. According to the assessment, the spawning stock biomass of albacore tuna has been reduced to around 41% (33%–55%) of unfished levels. The current spawning stock biomass is esmated to likely be above the levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield. The limit reference point for albacore is 20% of the spawning biomass with no fishing (20% SBF = 0) and the current spawning biomass is esmated to be 40% of values with no fishing (SBF = 0) (Harley et al. 2015). We have awarded a “low” concern score because the model suggests a healthy stock, but there is a large amount of uncertainty surrounding these results and the biomass has been declining over me.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

NORTH PACIFIC Low Concern

The current fishing mortality rate (F2010–2012 ) for albacore tuna in the North Pacific Ocean is around 72% of the interim reference point (FSSB–ATHL50% , the fishing mortality rate that would lead to future minimum SSB falling below the SSB-ATHL threshold level at least once during a 25-year projecon period). In addion, the current fishing mortality rate (F2010–2012 ) is below other F-based reference points (FMSY , F 0.1 , and F 10%– 40% (fishing mortality that gives 10%–40% reducon in the spawning potenal rao)) except FMED and F 50% . 72 Albacore tuna in the North Pacific Ocean are therefore not currently undergoing overfishing. But increases in fishing mortality rates will significantly reduce the spawning biomass (ISCAWG 2014). We have awarded a “low” concern and not very low concern score.

SOUTH PACIFIC Very Low Concern According to the most recent stock assessment (2015), the fishing mortality reference point for albacore tuna in the South Pacific, Fcurrent /F MSY , had a median esmate of 0.39 (0.2–0.59) and there is a low risk that overfishing is occurring (Harley et al. 2015). We have therefore awarded a “very low” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Bigeye tuna

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Medium FishBase assigned a high to very high vulnerability of 72 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). But bigeye tuna’s life history characteriscs suggest a medium vulnerability to fishing. For example, bigeye tuna reaches sexual maturity around 100–125 cm, reaches a maximum size of 200 cm, and lives around 11 years (Davies et al. 2014) (Froese et al. 2013). It is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2013). Based on the Seafood Watch producvity analysis table, these life history characteriscs suggest a medium level of vulnerability. We acknowledge that other methods may suggest a different vulnerability rang. But because the stock status of bigeye tuna is known, this inherent vulnerability score will not affect the 73 overall outcome. We have therefore awarded a medium vulnerability based on the producvity table analysis.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern Bigeye tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) was last assessed in 2014. According to the base case model, the rao of the current average (2008–2011) spawning biomass to that needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (SBcurrent/SBMSY) was 0.94, and the rao of the latest (2012) spawning biomass (mature fish) to that needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (SBlatest/SBMSY) was 0.77, indicang that the populaon is overfished (Harley et al. 2014). We have therefore awarded a “high” concern score.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The raos of current fishing mortality rates to those that produce the maximum sustainable yield (Fcurrent/FMSY) for all model runs were much higher than 1, with the rao from all runs esmated at 1.57, indicang that overfishing is occurring. Based on this esmate, fishing mortality needs to be reduced by more than 30% from 2008–2011 levels to become sustainable (Harley et al. 2014). We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the assessment results that overfishing is occurring and has been for some me.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

74 SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Black-footed albatross Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

NORTH PACIFIC High Concern According to the Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN), black-footed albatross is classified as Near Threatened with a stable to increasing populaon trend (BirdLife Internaonal 2014). Based on counts conducted during the 2006–2007 breeding season, 64,500 pairs were esmated in colonies that support 90% of the global breeding populaon. Other esmates from 2000 concluded there were 275,000 birds (Cousins and Cooper 2000). Its status in the North Pacific Ocean is unknown, so we have awarded a “high” concern score based on the IUCN status.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

NORTH PACIFIC High Concern Black-footed albatross is one of the more commonly observed bird species in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), with interacons primarily occurring in the North Pacific longline fisheries (Baird et al. 2013). Some studies have suggested that the mortality associated with North Pacific tuna longline fisheries may threaten black-footed albatross. For example, research suggests that a mortality rate of 10,000–12,000 birds 75 per year is needed to sustain this populaon and that mortality from pelagic longline fisheries may exceed this (Lewison and Crowder 2003) (Crowder and Myers 2001) (Arata and Naughton 2009). From 1992 to 2009, 100% of black-footed albatross caught in longline fisheries north of 10° N were discarded dead (OFP 2010). The total esmated mortality of this species in the Central North Pacific between 1994 and 2000 ranged from 5,200 to 13,800 birds (Gilman 2001). Other research has esmated mortality rates as high as 6,000 black-footed albatross per year by the Japanese and Taiwanese fleets (BirdLife Internaonal 2014). Reducing seabird interacons in this region could improve their status. We have awarded a “high” concern score because seabirds are considered highly vulnerable and their stock statuses are of high concern; current mortality rates are unknown but could be high; and although management measures have been adopted by some fleets to migate incidental capture in longline fisheries operang in the North Pacific Ocean (Clarke et al. 2013), the best management pracces that minimize seabird mortality are not required or adopted by all fleets.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

Olive ridley turtle

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Sea turtles have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria, based on their life history characteriscs that include being long-lived, aaining sexual maturity at a later age, and having a low reproducve rate (Seafood Watch 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance SOUTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) considers olive ridley sea turtle to be Vulnerable with a decreasing populaon trend. Olive ridley turtle has been listed as Threatened on the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) since 1978 (NMFS 2012a). Along several beaches in Thailand, current esmates of the number of nests/km/day are around 20, while in Indonesia this number is 230. It is esmated that the annual nesng subpopulaon on these Thai beaches has decreased76 97%–98% over me, while in Indonesia they have increased substanally. Overall, in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, there has been a decrease in annual nesng females of 92%, from 1,412 to 108 (Abreu-Grobois and Plotkin 2008). We have awarded a “high” concern score because of the IUCN lisng.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality SOUTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC Moderate Concern The incidental capture of olive ridley turtle occurs worldwide, although other fisheries such as trawls and gillnets appear to have a larger negave impact compared to longlines (Wallace et al. 2013) (Abreu-Grobois and Plotkin 2008). Data related to incidental captures are scarce due to low reporng by some countries and low observer coverage rates (≈1%) (Brouwer and Bertram 2009) (Williams et al. 2009). Bycatch of olive ridley is reported to be especially high in some albacore fisheries operang in the South Pacific region (Huang 2014) but not others (Akroyd et al. 2012). Bycatch is thought to be a low threat to the populaon in the West Pacific region and the populaon is at low risk (Wallace et al. 2013). Bycatch migaon methods have been put into place by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, but there are issues with compliance and the effecveness of these measures is unknown (Clarke et al. 2014). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because the populaon is depleted, but this fishery is not a major contributor.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

Green sea turtle

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

77 WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Sea turtles have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria, based on their life history characteriscs that include being long-lived, aaining sexual maturity at a later age, and having a low reproducve rate (Seafood Watch 2013).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance SOUTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC Very High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) has classified green sea turtle as Endangered with a decreasing populaon trend. Wallace et al. (2013) idenfied populaons of green sea turtle in the North Central Pacific Ocean to be at high risk. Green sea turtle has been listed on the Convenon on Internaonal Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) since 1975 and is currently listed on CITES Appendix I, meaning that it is threatened with exncon and that internaonal trade is prohibited. The mean annual number of nesng turtles worldwide has decreased 48% to 67% over the past 100 to 150 years (Seminoff 2004). Out of 27 known nesng sites in Oceania, 3 had an increasing trend, 2 had decreasing trends, and 2 had stable trends, while trends at the remaining sites were unknown (Maison et al. 2010). We have awarded a “very high” concern score because of the IUCN classificaon.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality SOUTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC Moderate Concern The incidental capture of green sea turtle is considered a major threat to its populaons worldwide (Seminoff 2004). Though green sea turtle is one of the more commonly caught turtle species in the South Pacific region (NMFS 2013) (Williams et al. 2009), the impact from bycatch to the populaon is low in the South Central Pacific and the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, and those populaons are considered to be at low risk (Wallace et al. 2013). The American Samoa pelagic longline fishery reported the incidental capture of 42 green sea turtles during 2010, four mes higher than any other species (NMFS 2013). The Cook Island South Pacific albacore fishery also reports green sea turtle as one of the most commonly caught bycatch species (Gascoigne et al. 2014). Bycatch migaon methods have been adopted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, but their use and effecveness are unknown and there are issues with compliance (Clarke et al. 2014). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because bycatch in this fishery does not appear to be threatening the populaon, but impacts are not fully known.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20%

78 The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

Salvin's albatross

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern According to the Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN), Salvin’s albatross is considered Vulnerable and it is unknown whether its populaons are increasing or decreasing. In 1998, it was esmated that 30,750 breeding individuals were present on the Bounty Islands and that this represented 99% of the global populaon. Based on this esmate, there are roughly 61,500 mature birds and 90,000 individuals (BirdLife Internaonal 2012h). We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the IUCN lisng.

79 Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern Salvin’s albatross is more commonly reported as incidentally caught by New Zealand tuna longliners than in other areas of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO). For example, between 1996 and 2005, observers reported 150 interacons with this species aboard New Zealand longliners (BirdLife Internaonal 2012h). We have awarded a “moderate” concern and not high concern score because bycatch migaon measures have been adopted by the New Zealand fleet (NZG 2008) and almost all of the breeding and foraging areas for this species occur in New Zealand waters (ACAP 2014c).

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Swordfish

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC Medium FishBase assigned a high to very high vulnerability of 72 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). But the life history characteriscs of swordfish indicate a lower vulnerability to fishing. For example, swordfish reaches sexual maturity at around 180 cm in size and around 5 years of age, and it reaches a maximum length of 455 cm and lives more than 10 years. Swordfish is a broadcast spawner and top predator (Froese and Pauly 2013). This is more indicave of a moderate vulnerability to fishing. Raonale: Life history characterisc Paramater Score Age at maturity <5 years 3 Average size at maturity 100-300 cm 2 Average maximum size >300 cm 1 Average maximum age 10-25 years 2 Reproducve strategy Broadcast spawner 3 Trophic level >3.25 1

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

NORTH PACIFIC 80 Very Low Concern In 2014, an assessment for swordfish in the North Pacific was conducted. This assessment considered two populaons: one in the Western and Central Pacific (WCPO) and one in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. According to this model, the exploitable biomass for the populaon in the WCPO region fluctuated at or above the level needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (BMSY) for most of the me series (1951–2012), and there is a low probability (14%) of the biomass being below BMSY in 2012 (ISCBWG 2014). We have therefore awarded a “very low” concern score.

SOUTH PACIFIC Low Concern In 2013, an updated assessment of swordfish in the southern region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) was conducted. This updated stock assessment included both the South-West Pacific (SWP) as well as the South-Central Pacific (SCP). Compared to the 2008 assessment, this updated one was able to determine abundance esmates for both regions. Considerable uncertainty sll surrounded the assumpons made with regard to growth, maturity, and mortality (age-specific). Standardized catch rates for the main fleets declined drascally between 1997 and 2011, and the mean size also decreased in the main fisheries. The total and spawning biomass have declined since the late 1990s and the current levels are 44%–68% and 27%–55% of virgin levels, respecvely. The raos of biomass and spawning biomass (mature fish) levels to those needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) range from 1.15 to 1.85 and 1.15 to 3.53, respecvely, indicang that the populaon is not overfished (Davies et al. 2013). We have awarded a “low” concern and not very low concern score due to the high level of uncertainty.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

NORTH PACIFIC Very Low Concern In 2014, an assessment for swordfish in the North Pacific was conducted. Exploitaon rates in this region peaked in the 1960s and have declined since. The current fishing mortality rate (H2010–2012) is 15%, which is lower than the level necessary to produce the maximum sustainable yield (HMSY = 25%). It is very unlikely (<1%) that fishing mortality rates (H) are unsustainable; therefore overfishing is not occurring (ISCBWG 2014). We have therefore awarded a “very low” concern score.

SOUTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern According to the updated 2013 assessment of swordfish in the Southwest Pacific Ocean, catches are around the levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) (82%–102%). The fishing mortality rate for juvenile swordfish increased in the mid-1990s, and the raos of current fishing mortality rates to those needed to produce MSY range from 0.33 to 1.77. This indicates that the populaon, under some assumpons, may be undergoing overfishing (Davies et al. 2013). We have therefore awarded a “moderate” concern and not a low concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

81 SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Wandering albatross Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) considers the wandering albatross populaon to be Vulnerable with a decreasing populaon trend. The global populaon is around 20,100 mature individuals but the status of this species in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean is unknown (BirdLife Internaonal 2012l). We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the IUCN classificaon.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern Wandering albatross is threatened by longline fisheries, which have been idenfied as a leading cause of its global declines. This is primarily a factor of its large range, which makes it suscepble to capture by a variety of fleets (BirdLife Internaonal 2012l). Between 1980 and 2004, 107 interacons between wandering albatrosses and pelagic longline gear (primarily south of 31° S) were observed (Molony 2005), and from 1992 to 2009, 53% of incidentally captured seabirds died (OFP 2010). Wandering albatross is affected evenby low bycatch rates due to its small populaon size (ACAP 2014b). The majority of breeding area for this species 82 occurs in South African territories (ACAP 2014b). Management measures have been adopted by many fleets in the Southwestern Pacific Ocean to reduce the incidental capture of seabirds. These measures have not been adopted by all fleets operang in its breeding region (ACAP 2014b). Due to the impact from even low bycatch rates, combined with the fact that bycatch migaon measures have not been fully adopted by all fleets, we have awarded a “moderate” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Flesh-footed shearwater Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC Low Concern According to the Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN), flesh-footed shearwater is classified as Least Concern and the populaon is considered stable (BirdLife Internaonal 2012c). This classificaon was due to this species’ extremely large range, and the large populaon size. In 2004, the global populaon was esmated to be more than 650,000 individuals (Brooke 2004). We have therefore awarded a “low” concern score.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

83 SOUTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern Flesh-footed shearwater appears to be incidentally caught in pelagic longline fisheries operang in the South Pacific. For example, between 1980 and 2004, 124 flesh-footed shearwater interacons with pelagic longline gear were observed in waters south of 31° S (Molony 2005). From 1992 to 2009, 92% of flesh-footed shearwaters captured in the albacore South Pacific longline fishery were discarded, and of those, 85% were dead (OFP 2010). Flesh-footed shearwater has a large range and subsequently a large overlap with this fishery. Since this species has a high suscepbility to the fishery and fishing mortality rates are unknown, but migaon measures have been adopted by many fleets in the Southwest Pacific Ocean (Clarke et al. 2013), we have awarded a “moderate” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Black-browed albatross

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon for Nature (IUCN) has classified black-browed albatross as Near Threatened with a decreasing populaon trend (BirdLife Internaonal 2014b). The total populaon size 84 worldwide is esmated to be 700,000 breeding birds or 2.1 million individual birds (Birdlife Internaonal 2014b). The status in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean is unknown. We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the IUCN lisng.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Low Concern Interacons between black-browed albatross and the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, although low in number, have been reported. For example, from 1980 to 2004, 22 black-browed albatross interacons with pelagic longline gear were observed south of 31° S (Molony 2005), and between 1992 and 2009, 95% of black-browed albatross captured in the albacore South Pacific longline fishery were discarded, and of those, 71% were dead. Management measures have been adopted by most fleets to migate the incidental capture of seabirds in longline fisheries operang in the South Pacific region of the western and central Pacific Ocean (Clarke et al. 2013). We have awarded a “low” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Grey petrel Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

85 SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) classifies grey petrel as Near Threatened with a decreasing populaon trend (BirdLife Internaonal 2012d). The global populaon is esmated to be somewhat low, around 400,000, with a low esmate of 160,000 and a high of 1,200,000 (Brooke 2004). We have awarded a “high” concern score to account for the IUCN rang.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern Between 1980 and 2004, 126 grey petrel interacons with pelagic longline gear were observed, primarily south of 31° S (Molony 2005), and from 1992 to 2009, 100% of incidentally capture grey petrels in the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery were discarded and all of them were dead (OFP 2010). In New Zealand waters of the South Pacific, it has historically been one of the most commonly killed bird species in the tuna longline fishery, with esmates of 45,000 birds being caught during the 1980s and 1990s (BirdLIfe Internaonal 2014d). But New Zealand has implemented the use of several bycatch migaon measures in tuna fisheries (NZG 2008). Incidental mortality in fisheries off the coast of Australia has also been reported (BirdLife Internaonal 2012d). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because, although bycatch has been reduced in New Zealand waters, informaon gaps in other areas suggest that this species should remain as moderate concern.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

White-chinned petrel Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High 86 Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) has listed white-chinned petrel as Vulnerable and its populaons are decreasing. The global populaon is esmated to have declined from 1,430,000 pairs in the 1980s to 1,200,000 pairs currently. There are around 3 million mature birds (Brooke 2004) (BirdLife Internaonal 2012o). We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the IUCN lisng.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern White-chinned petrel is one of the most vulnerable bird species to bycatch in fisheries operang in the Southern Hemisphere (ACAP 2014d). Esmates from the 1990s in the Australian longline fishery suggest that over 800 white-chinned petrels were incidentally caught per year. In the New Zealand longline fishery, 14.5% of incidentally caught birds in longline (and trawl) fisheries between 2003 and 2005 were white- chinned petrels (BirdLife Internaonal 2012o). White-chinned petrel also has a very high mortality rate as a result of this incidental capture (OFP 2010). White-chinned petrel has a high aerial and vercal overlap with pelagic longline gear (BirdLife Internaonal 2012). It should be noted that many fisheries outside of this region may also be contribung to a cumulave effect on populaon size (ACAP 2014d). For example, this is one of the most commonly caught species in the South Atlanc (Tuck et al. 2011). But management measures to reduce the incidental capture of seabirds have been adopted by many fleets in the South Pacific (Clarke et al. 2013), so we have awarded a “moderate” concern and not high concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Light-mantled albatross Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

87 NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) classifies light-mantled albatross as Near Threatened with a decreasing populaon trend. The total breeding populaon is esmated to be 19,000– 24,000 pairs or about 58,000 individuals (BirdLife Internaonal 2012s). We have awarded a “high” concern score based on the IUCN lisng.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Low Concern Specific longline fleets in the South Pacific that have reported this species as incidentally caught (in small amounts) in tuna fisheries include New Zealand and Australia (BirdLife Internaonal 2012f) (ACAP 2014a). Between 1980 and 2004, 38 interacons between light-mantled albatross and pelagic longline gear (primarily south of 31° S) were observed (Molony 2005), and from 1992 to 2009, 100% of light-mantled albatross were discarded dead in the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery (OFP 2010). Interacons are low, breeding areas have all adopted bycatch avoidance methods since 2000, and the majority of its foraging range is within the Convenon for the Conservaon of Antarcc Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) region (ACAP 2014a), so we have awarded a “low” concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010). 88 Laysan albatross Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC

High Seabirds have a high level of vulnerability according to the Seafood Watch criteria (Seafood Watch 2013). Seabirds reach sexual maturity later in life, produce few young, and have a long lifespan (Oro and Marnez- Abrain 2000). These life history traits support a “high” vulnerability score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

NORTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) lists the Laysan albatross as Near Threatened but with a stable populaon trend (BirdLife Internaonal 2012f). Globally, there are an esmated 591,000 breeding pairs or 1.18 million mature birds (Naughton et al. 2007). We have awarded a “high” concern score due to the IUCN lisng.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

NORTH PACIFIC Moderate Concern Laysan albatross has a very high overlap within the northern region of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Baird et al. 2 013). It has been esmated that pelagic longline vessels fishing in the North Pacific Ocean may kill around 8,000 Laysan albatross a year, although in recent years these numbers have been much less due to the use of migaon measures (Birdlife Internaonal 2012c). Between 1992 and 2009, 100% of incidentally captured Laysan albatross from the North Pacific albacore tuna fishery were discarded, and of these, 67% were dead (OFP 2010). We have awarded a “moderate” concern score because fishing mortality rates are unknown but there are migaon measures in place (Clarke et al. 2013).

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

89 Oceanic whitep shark

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability NORTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High FishBase assigned a very high vulnerability score of 75 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). Oceanic whitep shark reaches sexual maturity between 180 and 200 cm in size. It can aain a maximum length of 400 cm and live up to 22 years. Oceanic whitep shark gives birth to live young and is a top predator (Froese and Pauly 2015). These life history characteriscs also suggest a “high” level of vulnerability to fishing.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance NORTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) considers oceanic whitep shark to be Vulnerable globally (Baum et al. 2006). The first stock assessment of oceanic whitep shark in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) was conducted in 2012. Although results are reported in relaon to maximum sustainable yield (MSY) reference points, reference points to manage this stock have not yet been idenfied by the scienfic commiee or Commission. According to the assessment, the spawning biomass (mature fish) is esmated to be far below the level needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (SBcurrent /SB MSY = 0.153), indicang that the stock is overfished (Rice and Harley 2012b). We have awarded a “high” concern score because of the stock status.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality NORTH PACIFIC WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC SOUTH PACIFIC High Concern According to the first and only assessment conducted in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), fishing mortality far exceeds levels needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (FMSY with Fcurrent /F MSY = 6.694) and therefore overfishing is occurring (Rice and Harley 2012b). It should be noted that the majority of oceanic whitep sharks are caught in longline fisheries, compared to purse seine (Rice 2012). Recently, the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission banned the capture and sale of oceanic whitep shark. We have therefore awarded a “high” concern and not crical concern score.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

NORTH PACIFIC 20-40% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%. In the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). Informaon from observer records collected in the North Pacific indicate that 36% of the total catch is discarded. Specifically, in the area north of 10° N, discard rates for tuna ranged from 0%–35%, for billfish from 3%–44%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, and for marine mammals, seabirds, and turtles 100% (OFP 2010).

90 WESTERN CENTRAL PACIFIC

< 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). In the WCPO pelagic longline fisheries, around 5% of targeted tuna (bigeye, yellowfin, and albacore) were esmated to have been discarded between 1994 and 2011 (OFP 2012a). Discard rates of skipjack tuna are higher (20%) (OFP 2010). Earlier esmates through 2009 indicated that the total discard rate of targeted tunas was around 5%. Discard rates for non-targeted species between 1994 and 2009 were 11% for billfish, 54% for other bony fish, 49% for elasmobranchs, 73% for seabirds, 94% for marine mammals, and 96% for turtles (OFP 2010). According to this second study, based on observer data, the overall discard rate for the WCPO longline fishery is 15% (OFP 2010).

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

Southern bluefin tuna

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

SOUTH PACIFIC High FishBase assigned a high to very high vulnerability score of 67 out of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2013). Southern bluefin tuna reaches sexual maturity aer at least 8 years of age and at a size of 155 cm in length, but perhaps not unl 15 years of age. It reaches a total length of 2 m and can live up to 42 years (IOTC 2013e). Southern bluefin tuna is a top predator and is considered a broadcast spawner (Froese and Pauly 2013). We have awarded a “high” vulnerability based on the FishBase score.

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

SOUTH PACIFIC Very High Concern The Internaonal Union for the Conservaon of Nature (IUCN) has classified southern bluefin tuna as Crically Endangered (Collee et al. 2011e). According to the latest stock assessment, the current spawning biomass of southern bluefin tuna is a small fracon of virgin levels and well below the level needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (SBcurrent /SB MSY = 0.229 (0.146–0.320)). But at current catch levels, the populaon is expected to increase. Catch rates from the Japanese longline fishery have been increasing since 2007 for some age classes, and aerial surveys have indicated a recent increase in abundance in 2013, the second-highest in history (IOTC 2013e). We have awarded a “very high” concern score based on the current low biomass levels and IUCN status.

91 Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

SOUTH PACIFIC Low Concern Fishing mortality rates have decreased for southern bluefin tuna and are now below those needed to produce the maximum sustainable yield (Fcurrent/FMSY = 0.76 (0.52–1.07)). In addion, reported catches are below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels, and current exploitaon rates are considered moderate (IOTC 2013e). We have awarded a “low” concern instead of very low concern score because fishing mortality rates have just decreased to sustainable levels and because current exploitaon rates are considered moderate.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

SOUTH PACIFIC < 20% The average overall discard rate in tuna longline fisheries worldwide is 22%, but in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), distant-water longline vessels may have a discard rate as high as 40% (Kelleher 2005). The three targeted tunas represented 74% of the South Pacific albacore tuna fishery, and in this fishery, mahi mahi, wahoo, and blue shark are the most commonly caught non-target species. According to observer data from the Fiji pelagic longline fishery in the South Pacific, discard rates vary by species but are around 6% of the total catch for all species combined. For example, tuna, mahi mahi, and opah have very low discard rates of <5%, but sharks have very high discard rates of >95% (Akroyd et al. 2012). It should be noted that Fiji bans the retenon of sharks and therefore discard rates may be skewed. Observer data from the South Pacific albacore fishery indicate that discard rates for tuna ranged from 3%–100%, for billfish from 4%–45%, for sharks and rays from 0%–100%, for other bony fish from 0%–100%, for marine mammals 100%, for seabirds from 0%–100%, and for turtles from 71%–100% (OFP 2010). The overall discard rate, according to observer records, is around 18% (OFP 2010).

92