sign in sign up
<<
Home , Blue shark

THE TAGGER 1995 SUMMARY

Newsletter of the Coop~rative Shark Tagging Program

In this issue:

• 7,613 Tagged and 534 Recaptured • Long Distance Returns • Record Number of Makos Recaptured • 8 Tagged Juvenile Sandba.r Sha.rks Recaptured on Nursery Grounds • Management Plan Update • Survey Cruise Results • .Shark Genetic Studies • Updates on Nursery Ground Research and Shark Survivorship Studies

1995 Overview leosts (Table 1). The principal shark tagged were blue (66%), sandbar (8%), tiger (6%), and shortfin mako (3%). Anglers accounted for 74% of the tagging effort, followed by fisheries ob­ -1995 b8s been an exciting year:for the Apex Predator Investi­ servers aboard commerc;ial vessels (12%), NMFS and other coop­ gation (API) in terms of biological studies and in unique and valu­ erating biologists (9%), and commercial fisherman (5%). Fish were able information on shark distributions and migrations. Both our released by taggers representing seven countries: United States, ongoing research and the APl's Cooperative Shark Tagging Pro­ Canada, Portugal, Great Britain, Italy, France, and Spain. These gram (CSTP) have benefited immensely by collaboration and joint tags bring the total for the CSTP to overJ28,000. · res~arch with fisher'rnen and colleagues as individuals and from countl.ess groups and organizations: Without our many friends &nd associates, a program of this scope would not be possible. We Recaptures greatly appreciate all of your help with our research efforts and look forward to continued association in the future. In 1995, cooperators returned information on 534 tagged fish representing 14 species of and 3 species of teleosts (Table Tags 2, Page 5). This brings the Program totalfo over 6,000 fish recap­ tured. The inaj0rity were blue sharks (304), shortfin makos (53), In 1995, meinbers·of. the CSTP tagged and released 7,613 sandbar sharks (51 ), and tiger sharks (38). The data were return~d fish including 33 species of sharks and rays and 1o species of te- primarily from commercial (49%) and sport (45%) fishermen fol- • Continued on Page 2

Printed compliments of barl Daren.. berg, Jr., Montauk Marine Basin, Montauk, NY · U.S. Department of Commerce Dllil~lbutlon of this newsletter Is limited to active National Oceanic an'a Atmospheric Administration participants In the NMFS Cooperative Shark National Marine Fisheries Service Tagging Program. Ttiis Information Is preliminary, Northeast Fishe.rles Science. Center and subject to revision. Narragansett, RI 02882 Page2

Table 1. Summary of sharks and teleosts tagged, January to lowed by fisheries observers (5%) and biologists (1%). These per­ December, 1995 centages are similar to the overall percentages of recapture occu­ pations for the CSTP ( 1962-1993) except for the biologist ca!egory (Table 3). Spanish fishermen, through a cooperating biologist, re­ Species Number Tagged by turned 60 tags or 23% of the commerciaLreturns. In the observer Cooperative Taggers category, 21 were from U.S. fishing vessels !ind 6 were returned from Canadian observers on Canadian and Japanese vessels. Rod and reel, longline, and nets (gill and trawl) were the primary recap­ Sharks ture gear along with handline, harpoon, and free swimming. Over­ all, fishermen representing 17 countries returned information on Blue shark 5,018 tagged fish (Table 4). 596 In contrast. sport fishermen using rod and reel gear and tag­ Tiger shark 482 ging sharks free swimming did the majority (71%) of the original Shortfin mako 235 tagging of the recaptured fish, followed by commerqial fishermen 172 (13%) using longlines, U.S. and Canadian fisheries observers (10%) Atl~ntic sharpnose shark 145 on U.S., Canadian, and Japanese longline. and gill net vessels, and 130 biologists (6%) using longlines, gill nets, hand lines, and tagging 123 free swimming. Sport fishermen from 6 nations, and commercial 114 fishermen from 3 nations originally tagged these reqaptured fish. 56 52 Sand tiger 48 Blue Sharks (304 returns) 35 34 Blue sharks traveled distance~ from 1 to 2,704nautical miles. Scalloped hammerhead 27 Ten blue sharks traveled more than 2,1:>0,0 miles to their recapture . 19 location. The 2,704.mile blue shark was tagged free swimming off Reef shark 16 Martha'~.V~neyard, MA by a commercial fisherman and recaptured 13 off the Canaryi·lslandsafter 2.7 years at liberty. Nine of these ten ~o long distance returns were tagged off the Northeast coast.of tne Great hammerhead 8 U.S. and recaptured near the Azores, M.adeira Island, Canary Is­ 8 lands, Surinam, Western Sahara, andVenezuela (both in the At­ 7 lantic Ocean and Caribbean Sea); the otl:ler was tagged off Guyana Longtin mako 5 and recaptured off the Azores. Other,;long distance recovery loca­ Smooth hammerhead. 4 .tions (> 1,000 miles) werei off the Flemish Cap, Puerto Rico, Cuba, 2 Martinique, St. Croix,. and the West Indies. Six of these sharks Atlantic angel shark 1 were originally tagged in the Gulf of Maine. Caribbean sharpnose shark 1 Tagging off the Iberian Peninsula by Portuguese and EnQlish 1 sport fishermen produced Interesting results. Of the seven recap­ White shark 1 tured blue sharks tagged off southern Portugal, four traveled Sfue Hammerhead, unspecified 17 ' west and were recaptured within 360 miles of tlleir tagging site and Brown/Dusky, unspecified 6 within 8 months of the original tagging dates; one traveled 218 mil~s , unspecified 4 northwest to northern Portugal; one traveled 935 miles southwest Miscellaneous sharks 25 to an area 335 miles south of the Azores; and the other traveled 27 Miscellaneous rays 12 miles to the. east. The two smallest fish (approximately 2 ft total length (TL))traveled the shortest (27 mi.) and t!)eJlongest distances Total sharks 7,427 (935 mi.). Other interesting eastern Atlantic tags include: a 41 in. fork length (FL) blue, shark tagged off Rimini, Italy in the Adriatic Teleosts Sea and recaptured bff Croatia after 10.6 months at liberty; another small female (40 in. FL) tagged off England that traveled 934 miles .Swordfish 104 southwest to the Azores in 5. 7 months; and a large male tagged off Bluefin 22 Madeira Island that was recaptured 2.2 years later off Cape Verde White marlin 17 Island (768 mi. south). Sailfish 14 Ten blue sharks were both tagged·and recaptured in ar\ area Blue marlin 10 around the Flemish Cap. All were at liberty forless than 11 months; Yellowfin tuna 8 all except two were small blues (< 5 ft TL)Jhat traveled.in a south­ Bigeye tuna 6 easterly direction after 'tagging for a maxim.um of 409 miles.. The Skipjack tuna 1 two exceptions were .larger fish; one went 130 miles due .north and Miscellaneous teleosts 4 one traveled 1, 148 miles west to New York where it was re-tagged and re-releas9d ..Seven of the eight smalrblue sharks were tagged Total teleosts 186 in the same area within two weeks of each other in' September·of 1994 by acommercial longline fisherman and were recaptured by Grand Total 7,613 Spanish longliners after traveling distances of 1131 to 409 miles. One of these fish was originally'tagged southeast of Nantucket, MA ' On the cover: Tagging and injecting a juvenile tiger shark with and traveled 1, 148 miles to the Flemish Cap after approximately 1 tetracycline, a vertebral marker for age work, aboard'the NOAA month at liberty. · It was subsequently released.again to be recap­ RN Relentless. Please measure all recaptured sharks and send tured 131 miles southeast after another} 0 months at liberty. Three us the backbones. Photo by Mark Ablondi other long distance returns were recaptured ir\ this, area: with or)gi- / Page3

nal tagging locations off Rho~e Island, the Tail-Of the Grand Banks and east of Barba­ dos. . In recent years, increased tagging ef~ fort has come from fishermen in the Gulf of Maine, Madeira and Canary Islands, Jtaly, Spain, Portugal and . Infor­ mation on returns .from foreign scientists in Mexico, Spain, the Azores, and Venezuela has also been intensified. Tags and recap­ tures such as these, outside our typical tag­ ging and fishing ateas, are proving critical to further delineate the blue sharks' wide ranging migratory patterns. · 1995 Shortfin Mako Recaptures Short distance recoveries are also in- N = 53 . teresting and informative. There are nu­ merous examples of blue sharks returning to within 25 miles of their original tagging location after up to 3.g years at liberty. In one instance, a blue shark was tagged and . released, then recaptured for the first time 19 days later and 19 miles to the north. This 5 ft TL male was re-released and re­ Table 3. Comparison of 1995 tag and recapture data to that of previous years captured again after 10.4 months only 5 miles northwest of the second release lo- . cation and 18 miles west of the original tag 1995 1962-1993 location. Another multiple recapture shows a similar tendency to return to the same area Tag Recapture Tag Recapture after an eXtended period of time. The first (%) (%) 1%) (%) recapture occurred after the blue shark was at liberty for 29 days and had traveled 20 miles east. It was then recaptured 2.9 years Occupation: later within 19 miles of its second release Angler 74 45 .55 40 site and 2 miles of the first. Commercial 5 49 8 50 In summary, blu.e sharks were at lib­ Observer 12 5 12 4 erty for <1 day to 5.4 years. Thirty percent Biologist 9 1 25 6 were at liberty for <1 month, .and 81 % were at liberty for <1 year. .The 5.4 year recap­ Method: ture is under the 8.5 year record time at lib­ Rod & Reel 71 44 53 43 erty for blae sharks in the CSTP (Table 5). Lbngline 23 48 35 44 Overall, 38% Of the blue shark recaptures Free Swimming 3 <1 4 <1 were re-Jagged, released with the same tag, Net 3 5 4 8 or released without a tag. Hand Line <1 2 4 3 Misc. <:1 <1 <1 1 Shortfin Makos (53.Returns)

tion of this kind in the remarks column of. • Ma~o sharkswere at liberty for <1 day off.Newfo_undland, Canada(< 5 previously· to 3.6 years. Many (25) were at liberty for< recaptured in this arel'!); makos tagged off . your tag cards. Additional interesting re- . turns include: a 2 ft FL mako shark recov­ 1 year and rnost (41) for < 2 years. Dis­ the Flemish Cap that traveled west to Rhode ered in a gill net off Sakonnet Point, RI and tances traveled ranged from 34 to 1,589 Island and New Jersey waters after 1.0 and re-released without its tag and small nautical mile§ (see map). The 1,589..mile 3.6 years at liberty; and a fish tagged off two females tagged consecutive days south­ return is ninth i.n terms of maximum distance Ocean City, MD and recaptured off C,uba on (1,028 mi.; 234 days). There are less than west of the Tail of the Grand Banks that were }ravele~ for a mako shark (Table 5) <;l.nd was both recaptured approximately one. year originally tagged east of the Flemish Cap 10 makos recaptured in that area to date .. later, 500 miles to the northeast (within 37 and recaptured .off Oregon Inlet, NC after A mako shark was reported as gut 1.2 years at liberty. A first for the CSTP is a hooked at capture and then released with a miles of .each other). · Notable this year is the large number . tagged off Madeira is­ tag. It was. subsequently recaptured 1.2 of recaptured (53) makos. This is the high­ land and recaptured southwest of the years later after traveling an overall distance est for any )'ear in the CSTP. In recent Azores. A limited number of previous re_. 88 miles. This is not the. first repor:tedly gut years, many sport and commercial fisher­ captures have shown transatlantic move­ hooked fish that has been recaptured after. men have been more willing to tag and re­ ments from west to east; this is the first evi­ various times at liberty; The survival rate of lease makos of any size. In ac:ldition, fish­ dence from the CSTP data to show move­ sharks after different capture times and con­ .ermen are increasingly cooperative in re­ ment of makos from east to west. Other. long ditions is still under Investigation (see ar­ turning tags a.nd information on recaptured distance recoveries include: a mako shark ticle in this and previous newsletters). To­ wards this end, ·please note any informa- fish. - tagged off Cape May, NJ and recaptured Continued .on Page 4 Page4

Table 4. 1995 recaptures by country of recapture

Country Number

us~ 367 Spain 68 Canada 55 \ Venezuela 10 Mexico 8 1995 Tiger Shark Rec,ptures Portugal 6 N=38 . Cuba 6 Japan 3 Croatia 2 Bahamas 2 Italy 1 Dominican Republic 1 Puerto Rico 1 England 1 Honduras 1 Sri Lanka r· Dominica, W.I. 1 Table 5 .. Summary of time atliberty, distance traveled, and speed for five species of shark '

Sandbar Sharks (51 Returns) Species Time at Liberty Distance Traveled Speed {years) {nmi) {nmifctay) Sandbar sharks were at liberty from 5 days to 10.6 years and traveled distances 1995 All Years 1995 All Years 1995 AH Years from< 1 to 1,966 nautical miles. The long­ est. distance return was tagged off Shinnecock Inlet, NY .and recaptured off Blue Shark 5.4 8.5 2,?04 3,740 39 50 Port Aransas, TX, 5.4 years later.There are Shbrtfin Mako 3.6 9.s· 1,589 2,453 10 36 less than 12 sandbar sharks recaptured pre­ San.dbar Shark 10.6 27.8 1,966 2,039 6 12 viously in this area.. A tota1 of eight fish were returned after traveling more than 1,000 Tiger Shark· 3.6 10.9 1,763 1,871 12 33 miles. AU were tagged north of Cape Porbeagle Shark 8.0 8;6 .530 1,005 2 22 Hatteras, NC and recovered in the Gulf of Mexico (seven off the west coast of Florida). coast of the U.S. have been recapturedoff 3 ft FL female wa;tagged by a commercial As in other years, long distance recaptures Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Dominican Repub­ fisherman and.recaptured by a Spanish (> 300 mi:) primarily exhibited a southwest lic, Puerto Rico,.Venezuela, and Central longline fisherman after 2.5 years atHberty. pattern of .movement. The ·one ex~ption America and show movements into and out · · The species identification was confirmed at this year was from an interesting multiple of the Gulf of Mexico and into ttie Carib­ both tag and recapture. We are in the pro­ recapture. This 7 ft TL female sandbar bean Sea. In many cases, on(y one brtwo cess of verifying the recapture Jocation arid . shark was originally tagged off Long Island, _fish have been recovered in these areas in if validated, it would be the longest distance NY in September of 1986 and moved 788 the 30 years of our program. _Recaptures traveled by any tagged !iger shark in the miles in a southwesterly direction to be re- in 1995 have strengthened the validity of CSTP and the first evidence of transatlan- • tagged and re-released off northern Florida: these recovery sites with rerurns off Canada / tic movement forJhis species. In summary, 5 years later. Tne·fish was again recap­ (second tiger to be recaptured there), tiger sharks traveled confirmed distances tured 3.5 years later, in May .of 1995 off Vir­ Mexico (fifth), Cuba (ninth), Dominican Re­ from 6 to 1 ,763 nautical miles with 11 trav­ ginia, after traveling 535 miles to the north­ public (fifth and sixth), Bahamas (first)cyen­ eling more than 500 miles and three > 1,poo east. At that point, the shark was 254 miles ezuela (fifth), and .Honduras (second). · miles from. their original tagging location. from its original tagging location. Overall, In all, three fish traveling distances Other interesting1'eturns include sev" ten of the 42 recaptures (with distance in­ over .300 miles moved in a northerly or eral pairs of tiger sh.arks tagged in the same formation) were recovered in the Gulf of northeasterly direction: two were tagged off location on the same day that were subse­ Mexico; nine off the west coast of Florida northern Florida and recaptured off quently recaptured. lnsome cases, the and one off -Texas .. Montauk, NY (743 mi.; 2.3 yr.) and Nova sharks traveled to diverse locations ai;id in Scotia, Canada (992 mi.; 1.4yr.); and the others, the tiger sharks seemed tp remain third traveled from North Carolina to th.e together for.yarious perigds of time. ···For Tiger Sharks (38 returns)/ Flemish Cap (1,763 mi.; 1.6 yr.); This re­ example, two 3 ft FL males were released capture location is one of the farthest east with tags in September of 1994 off northern This has. been an impressive year for for any tagged tiger shark in thEf CSTP. F'lorida by a commercial fisherman. One tiger shark recaptures in terms of recovery Another spectacular tiger shark long dis~!.. was recaptured southwest of Cuba after 1.3 locations (see map), Previous returns have tance return was a fish tagged off Jackson­ years at 'liberty. and the other was caught shown that tigers tagged off the Atlantic ville, Florida and recaptured off Africa. This off North Carolina after 0.5years. Two other

SeeOVERVIEW, Page 16 n Pages l Table 2. Tag recoveries: January-December 1995. f - GENERALLOCATIONS MONTAS OIST. (Mi.) CAPTURE TAGGED BY AT MIDDIR. METHOD TAGGED RECAPTURED LIBERTY TAG. REC. TAGGER RESIDENCE I Blue. sharlr. . I Page6

Table 2. Tag recoveries: January..oeCember 1995. GENERAL LOCATIONS MONrHS OIST.(Mi.) CAPTURE TAGGEOSY AT ANDDIR. METHOD TAGGED RECAPTURED LIBERTY TAG. REC. TAGGER RESIDENCE Blue. shark . Page7

MONTAS DIST. (Ml.) CAPTURE TAGQEOBV AT AND DIR. METHOD TAOOEQ LIBERTY TAG. REC. TAGGER RESIDENCE ..aha SE Pl .kK9h, RI 24 20 SE RR RR James Walsh . . 13 221 SW RR RR Jim Hinkley, Jr. 1 83 NE

•

• • • Pages

Table 2. Tag recoveries: January-Oec:ernber 1996. CENERAL LOCATIONS MONTHS CllST.(MI.) CN'IURE TWEOBY ~T ~~DIR. METHOD TAGGED RECAPTURED LIBERTY TAG. REC. TAGGER RESIDENCE Bluesherlc E Lltlle Egg lnl., NJ NY . . SW Shinnecock lnl., NY NY SE PL JUdllh, RI NY E Cape May, NJ NY

•

_/. Page9

NERAL LOCATIONS MONTHS OIST. (Mi.) CAPTURE TAGGEOBY AT ANODIR. METHOD TAGGED RECAPTURED LIBERTY TAG. REC. TAGGER RESIDENCE NE Fl Pierce lnl., FL 3 580 SW LL MA SE Cape Fear, NC 34 73 SW RR NC NW Sarasota, FL 49 n3W LL fl Broadkift Bch, DE 1 1 N GN RI

• . Page 10

Table 2. T!ll -ies: January-Decembar 1885. WWWLOCAllONS llONtAs ... , . (faJ tAPICN! ,?C TWIT AT ~DIR. ME'JHOD TAGGED RECAPTURED LIBERTY . TAG. REC.

NOTE: FS-Free Swimming; GN-GlllMI; HL•HanclHne; LL-Longllne; RR-Rod&Real; TN-Trawl Net; BGl-Blg Gama Italia; FD-Found Dead; HP-Harpoon; TO-Tag Only Found;ObPFC!nllgn Fisheries ObMrver; NR•Not Reportld . • .r- ,\ . . . ~ / \

Atlantic Shark Management Plan Update

On March 12, 1996, the ljighly Migrat9ry Species Management Division (HMS) announced that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has decid~d to maintain the commercial quota and recreational bag limits for Atlantic sharks· at 1995 levels pending further scientific review: · · - . . Commercial quotas: 2,570 mt for large coastal sharks and 580·mt for pelagic shaf-ks • and no commercial quota for.small coastal shar.k species.

Recreational: Bag limit.is 4 sharks per. vessel per trip for large coastal and pelagic sharks combined and 5 sharks per person per day for small coastal sharks • -

Despite considerable pressure for commercial quota reductions,.especially for large coastal sharks; and for reductions in the recreational bag limits~ NMFS has maintained these harvest levels because no new stock as~ssments have been conductest yet to support reductions. Reducing harvest lev~ls at this time, without new.data, contradicts the NMFS mandate to manage·re- sources based on the best available scientific information. ' _ , • .. ' Anew stock assessment is scheduled to be conducted in early June, 1996 at the NMFS .Southeast Fish.arias Scienee Center in Miami, Florida. At that time, the current stock status of large coastal sharks will be evaluated and consequences of commercial and recreational harvest reductions will be examined. Comments are welcomed concerning any management issues. Please contact C. Michael Balley, NMFS - SSMC3 - F/CM4, 1315 Eaat West Highway, Sliver Spring, MD 20910. Telephone (301) 713- 2347, FAX (301) 713-0596: Page 11 F.ield Studies

Research C!ruises

/ . In the summer of 1995;·project staff participated In two longline shark survey cruises. These surveys, one in th.e Gulf of Mexico and· one along the Atlantic c9ast, were spearheaded by personnel from the NMFS Pascagoula, MS Laboratory in co­ operation with the NMFS Laboratories in Miami, FL; Woods Hole, MA; Narrag(:lnsett, RI; and the Highly Migratory Species Man­ agement Division in Washington, DC. The primary objectives of the cruises were to 1) conduct pilot studies on the feasibility of using commercial rnonofilament bottom longline gear to assess the distribution and abundance of large coastal sharks, 2) tag and release live sharks for ongoing migra­ tion studies, 3) obtain biologiqal data for ongoing age and growth, reproduction and food habits studies, a,nd 4) .collect environ­ mental data at each station. It is hoped that Setting bottom longline from the NOAA RN Rel~ntless. · Photo by Lisa J. Natanson these surveys will provide the basis for con­ ducting comprehensive longline surveys to the age and growth, reproduction and food , Mote Marine Laboratory, Louisiana obtain fishery indepen.dent data. These habits data that were collected for our on­ Wilelife and Fisheries, and an observer from data can then be used in conjunction with going research, visiting .scientists from sev­ . the Gulf a~d Atlantic Fisheries Development fishery dependent catch data to assess the eral universities were on board to ..sample Foundation, Inc. also participated. Com­ populations of coastal sharks in the Gulf o.f . for their research. These included~person­ mercial fisherman Basil Arend, representa­ Mexiccr.and western North Atlantic. nel from: University of Connecticut - inter­ tive of the Southern Offshore Fishing Asso­ The. Atlantic and. Gulf surveys were in­ nal parasites; Tennessee Aquarium - exter­ ciation, Inc., was a welcome addition to the. tended to be conducted with identical bot­ nal parasites; University of Rhode Island - Gulf cruise where he was integral in assist­ tom longline fishing gear and methods. This sandbar shark.reproductive condition; and ing the fishing operation. Additionally, sev­ gear was designed to mimic that currently University of Alabama, Mississippi Valley eral researchers who could not participaJe use.d by commerc;ial fishermen targeting College, Texas A & M, and Unhtersity of in the survey sent protocols for the collec- large coastal sharks. As fished, each stan­ Massachusetts - samples for various degree tion of their samples; e:g. tissue samples dard longline consisted of a 940 lb related topics. Personnel from !:)ERO, St. for DNA aniilysis for population genetics monofilarrient mainline, or:ie hundred 12 ft Petersburg, FL, Florida Department of En" studies. (See artiCle, Page 15.) gangions made of730 lb moriofjlament line, vironmental. Protection, the Texas Parks and and bullet floats attached at 33 hook iAter­ Continued on Page 12 vals (Atlantic) or one float at midset (Gulf). Each bullet float was directly' followed by weights and a staff buoy was attached to each end of the mainline. Hooks were baited with mackereL(1/3 to 1/2 of a whole fish). This "standard gear" was fished for 1 . hour at each station. On both surveys, the mean length of the mainline was 1.4 nauti­ 34•N cal.miles (nm). In the Gulf, the survey plan was de­ signed to include three stations.per 60 min­ utes latitude or longitude based on SEAMAP statistical zones (22 zones) and one randomJy selected station for each depth strata(10-19, w:.29, and 30-39 tath­ oms). In the Atlantic, an attempt was made 30-N to repeat stations conducted during previ­ ous NMFS N_arragansett Atlantic shark sur­ veys, while incorporating the depth strata 2a•N and includillg three stations per 60 minutes latitude. .. c On both surveys, biological samples were taken from landed sharks. Aside from I i Page 12

October to assist with tagging and identifi" b Locations of Longline Stations cation techniques. To date, 38 reef and . from the 1995 RN Oregon II blacktip sharks have been tagged with M­ Golf Shark Surve tag capsules modified to be_ easily identi- · F~----- fied by divers at a distance. ·All of the tagged sharks have remained in the area and are usually seen several times each week by staff and visiting diver~. Tagging provide~ accurate identification of th~se individuals through vJsualrecaptures and photogreiphic ~­ records: Some sharks have been observed. in courtship activities and much can be learned. abo_ut their reproductive behavior ·~ .J usingtflis time series of observations ... ..· ~

Ongoing-Research

T/].ese articles update studies that we have. reported in previous Shark Tagger newslet­ The following is a brief summary of the cant difference was.found between day (44 ters. results of the two surveys. sets) and night(38 sets) catches. A total of 271 sharks were caught; of these, 133 were tagged and released, 111 Sandbar Shark. Atlantic Survey were brought on deck and 27 were lost The Nursery Study ~ majority. of sharks caught were Atlantic sharpnose sharks (55%), followed by The Atlantic survey was conducted blacktip sharks (10%), blacknose shar~s The sandbarshark utilizes coastal bays from 10 - 24 August 1995 on the NOAA (7°/c,J and tiger and sandbar sharks (6% and estuaries along the western North At- Research Vessel Relentless. Forty-five sta­ each). All other species represented less lantic for'nursery grounds. Little. is known tions were completed between Cape. than 3% of the shark catch. Catch per 100 aboutthe current extent andecology of the Canaveral, FL ar;id Oregon Inlet, NC (see hooks for all species was 4.1 and 3.3 for coastal nursery habitats of the sandbar and map). Of the total stations, the majority were sharks. other. sharks north of ChesapeaJ

Fipn I. 1995 Delawan :&;.y Gill Net Statiou and Sandbar Shark Recaptures

A tagged newborn sandbar shark is Brandyw,ine 39N released.in Delaware Bay. ·· Photo by H. Wes Pratt venile sandbar sharks in the Bay. Four of the twelve stations were in New Jersey state waters, seven were in Delaware, and.one * Station Location station Vl!aS at mid-Bay (see map). - Live • Recapture sharks were taggQd with a small plastic dart­ tipped NMFS Narragansett tag. Umbilical &km scar condition and presence and location .of external parasites were recorded. Dead sharks were sampled for stomach contents and vertebrae were removed. Our studies of .sandbar nurseries in mating and puppingof free living sharks, The net was sef 15 times over a period Delaware Bay and between Virginia and were published in the journal Copeia. (1994, of 11 days. A total of 199 sandbar sharks MassachusettS will continue in 1996. API No: 3) and in National. Geographic Maga­ w~re caught; 154 were tagged, one of which staff, working with University of Rhode Is­ zine (Vol. 187, No. 5, May1'995). was later recaptured and re-released .. Over­ land students, R~ka Merson'andAllisbn In 1995, emphcisis was placed on tag­ all mort~lity was 17%. The ~verage catch Ferreira and staff from the NMFS. Highly Mi­ ging adult males to study their joteraction per unit eff~rt (CPUE) of all sets was 0.4, gratory Species Management Divis.ion will with other males wtiile mating. Our prelimi­ and 0.7 sharks per 100 m2/hour at stations expang gill net surveys along the Atlantic nary work on nurse sharksat Tortugas sug­ with st1ark~. Very small (8-1 o in. TL) young coast to delineate the 1range, scope, and ·gests th.at multiple males may sometimes of the yec:u smooth .dogfish were caught extent of the sandbar nursery areas. be necessary for one successfu.1 copulation. .readily in the mesh indicatiog that even the We also tagged and injected juveniles with smallest sandbar sharks were susceptible tetraqyCline for long term. ·age studies. In Jo this' gear. .Sandbars approximately 16- I Mating Sharks this unique project using free diving, we 24 in. fl were gilled inJhe net and animals have observed the same free-liviflg individu­ over 24.in. FL were captured byiantangle- als, day after day, and year. after year. De­ ment of the snout and fins: · · Our cooperative Wrork in the .Dry · tails .of ~eproductive behavior and interac­ Sandbar shark distribution in Delaware Tortugas continued with Dr. deft Carrier of-­ tions among.sexu.ally active males and fe­ Bay may be related to salinity and to distri­ Albion College to study the reproductive males provide new insights into the repro­ bution of forage species. Surface tempera­ dynamics of a population of -:Seasonally ductive biology, including a tim~-series tures varied more with weather and cloud mating nurse sharks. Past results, the first record of courtship; mating and pupping cover than with location and did not seem comprehensive investigation of courtship, behavior. to be a factor inour summer sample~; Large sharlc catches jn some areas show that su..Vivorship Studies: An Update Sandbar sharks ~re primarily distributed in I . . ' shallow (9-12 ff) near shore waters over sand/mud bottom. Anecdotal evidence from Gregory B. Skomal and Bradford C. Ch~$e, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries local. fishermen suggests that juvenile sand­ bars move about in groups with the tide. In the 1994 Shark Tagger.we r~ported may beseyere enough t() alter normal physi­ ology andbehavior, and ultimately compro­ Salinity:Preferences would help>explain thei~ on oar studies in Massachusetts to assess patchy distribution. post-release survivorship of sharks, , miSe survivq_rship. In some cases, fish may die, E!ither on the line or more likely after . Eight of the 154 tagged sandbar sharks and marlin. These efforts to charaCterize release. The chemical constituents of the (5.1 %) have been recaptured to d~te, four the physiological effectS .of. ~hgling stress of them in July. Sharks were at liberty be­ and to determine whether or not large pe­ blood can be u_sed to profile the cond.ition tween 5 and 40 days and were all recap­ lagic species survive the rigorous fight as­ of the fish before it is released. , tllred within 7 miles of the original tagging sociated with angling continued in 1995. In 1995, 76 fish representing 6 ~pecies This article is an update Qf these efforts. of tunas and sharks were exposed to vary­ sites (see map). ~ost show movement to the southeast; one traveled to the center of High muscular activity and stress in­ ing levels of angling stress; blood was the Bay where previously caugl'\t and duced by angling causes changes and sampled, anC:l the fish were tagged and re­ we leased. 1\,fost of these fish wer€ bluefin tagged one sandbar shark. These data disturbances in fish tissues a,rid organs. tuna(56), although albacore, yellowtin, skip- suggest a very localized. nursery ground These changes, manifested in the blooa, population. · Continued on Page 14 Page 14 jack, Atlantic bonito, and blue sharks also WHITE MARL1N1'jiiiiiiiiiil--.....,,..------1 comprised the catch. Blood samples from these fish bring the number sampled to 279. MAKOSHARK······ MEAN BLOOD In 1995, we not only sampled bluefin off the BLUESHARK:_..... LACTATE LEVELS coast of Massachusetts but also during the FALSE ALBACORE •••••••••••••• winter fishery off Hatteras, NC. ATLANTIC BONITO' ••••••••••••••• Preliminary findings sh.ow that large gamefish exhibit fluctuations in blood pH Sl(IPJACKJl••·········- and levels of hormones, electrolytes, and metabolites due to the fight associated with ALBACORE_.BIGEYEd·•··········· •••••••••••••••• rod and reel angling. The magnitude and YELLOWFiN •••••••••••••• nature of these disturbances were found to r differ by species. Therefore, eachspecies BLUEFIN has a different physiological response to an­ .0 20 40 • 60 ' 80 100 120 gling. For example, .a common metabolite LACTATE (mg/dl) normally associated with fatigue is· lactate (lactic acid). Blood lactate levels in angling­ stressed tunas were significantly higher than / those in sharks and marlin (see Figure.) Moreover, bluefin tuna possessed extremely high levels of blood lactate relative to other species sampled. The amount of lactate in the blood contributes to the acidity of the . BLUEFIN TUNA TRACK blood. By measuring the pH of the blood, we can determine the extent of the "acido­ sis." Extreme acidosis can severely impede normal behavior and may compromise survivorship. BOTIOM For each species, changes in .blood chemistry can be compared to several vari­ A =SCHOOL AT SURFACE ables which are associated with the fight -Soo-t---..----.---.----.---..,....---..,.....---.---..----.--~ oo:oo 02:00 04:00 6a:oo oe:oo lo:oo such as tackle type, fight time, water tem­ POST:RELEASE TIME (hrs) perature, 9nd fish size: Most of the corre­ lations calculated to date are associated Blood pH does decrease slowly to a low at fight. After about two hours of deep pro­ with fight time. The following gives a brief a fight time of about 40 minutes. This can longed diving excursions(reeoveryperiod), preliminary synopsis of what happens physi­ probably be attributed to the slow increase this fish resumed noJmal behavior. ologically to bluefin tuna, yellowfin tuna, and in metabolic end-products like lactate. -The vertical behavior of a bluefin tuna blue sharks during the fight. Nonetheless, pH levels remained apprecia­ traclns) located neXt to the ribosomal RNA species are morphologically similar: and difficult Laura_F_ [email protected] if genes. Surprisingly, the shark introns have to identify accurately to species level for catch statistics and enforcement purposes. This prob­ interested. ~ . all the characteristics of a specific class of lem is compounded by the dressing of sharks introns (known as Group I introns) that have before landing, which removes most morphologi­ so far been reported only from some vi­ cal identifying characteristics. For the past sev­ . I DNA Studies on Sharks I ruses, protozoans,. fungi and algae. This eral years we. have cooperated with various re­ class of introns has riot previously been searchers concerned with identifying species and found in the nuclear DNA of animals. 2 stock differences using cellular level genetic Mahmood Shivji1, Scott Rogers and lri addition to being the first Group I in­ markers. 3 Michael Stanhope tron reported for any , the shark in­ 1 Oceanographic· Center, Nova Southeastern trons are also unusual in their chromosomal · University, Dania, FL; 2 College of Environmen­ location. In sharks, the introns do not oc­ Identification of Shark tal Scienc~ and Forestry, State University of New York, Syracuse, NY; 3 School of Biology and Bio­ cur inside the rib'lsomal RNA genes as they Carcasses chemistry, The Queen's University, Belfast, N. do in other organisms, but instead are found Ireland, UK. in tbe DNA spacer regions that separate the ribosomal RNA genes. To reflect the un­ Laura F. Webster, Jon Ahlquist, R. Martin For tne past year and a half, we have usual chromosomal location of the shark . Ball, and Cheryl M. Woodley combined our interests and expertise in dif­ intrans, we have named them "spintrons", National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Charleston Laboratory, ferent areas of molecular, evolutionary, and for spacer introns. The discovery of these Charleston, SC · population genetics to address issues in the shark spintrons prompts many questions biology, conservation, and management of regarding their acquisition, function, and The NMFS Charleston Laboratory has sharks. With the assistance of the NMFS evolution. We are conducfi~g biochemical been developing a DNA-based method for Narragansett Apex Predator Investigation studie.S to determine the function of these stiark species identification. A standard (API) and Charleston Laboratory, we have spintrons, and exploring the evolutionary method extsts for identifying sharks from initiated several. projects, some of which are basis for the acquisition .and distribution of proteins extracted from their muscle, but a briefly described here. these structures in divergent elasmo­ method of identifying othe~ parts of the shark To enable accurate, species-level iden­ branchs. We are also el.ecies identification(see above). blood or muscle, but it is also well suited to DNA-based approaches for identifying A recently initiated study in our labora- analysis of other tissue types. A particular pathogenic and disease vector organisms . tories involves examining' global genetic portion of the shark DNA is duplicated about are widely used in 111.edicine and agriculture, structu.re inthe blue shark. Blue sharks are a million times (amplified) by a biochemical and are directly applicable to solving fish­ a highly migratory species with a process known as polymerase chain reac­ eries identification problems. We are inves­ circumglobal temperate and tropical distri­ tion (PCR). The amplified PNA is then cut tigating markers derived from a region of .bution. In the North Atlantic, tagging stud­ into smaller pieces by particular restriction the shark.chromqsome containing DNA se­ ies conducted by the API indicate that blue enzymes that recognize a specific DNA.se­ quences known as ribosomal RNA genes. shark migratio11s are extensive and seem quence. The fragments are separated in a Preliminary analysili' of our DNA.se­ to follow current patterns in ttieAtlantic.ba­ polyacrylamide gel, which is exposed to. an quence data from several carcharhinid sin. The full extent of blue shark global electrical current, and visualized with a DNA sharks shows clear, species-specific differ­ •.. migrations, however, is unknown. We are ~tai~. The fragments can vary in length ences. These sequences will provide robust using mitochondrial apd nuclear DNA se­ according to size or in the numbefof pieces markers for accurate and rapid identifica­ :quences to assess global genetic popula­ for diffe~ent shark species producing dis­ tiol'I of Janded shark carcasses to species­ tion structure in blue sharks, and thec·de­ tinct patterns known as restriction fragment level. 'Additionally, a m~jor advantage of gree of gene flow within and between oce­ ~ength polymorphisms (RFLPs). Combina­ DNA markers is that they .:tan be used to anic basins. Such studies will, we antici­ tions of these DNA banding patterns result­ identify even pieces of tissue (e~g.; from fins, pate, improve our understanding of migra­ ing from different enzymatic digestions can skin,· fillets) that may be too small or de­ tor:y patternS" and reproductive behavior in produce diagnostic patterns for each shark graded for morphological; and protein­ this species. based, biochemical diagnostic approaches. species. To date, we have identified 21 Special Request: For the blue shark study, we such, the availability of speqies-diagnos­ species of shark from DNA isolated from As need to collect small amounts of tissue (muscle muscle and blood (unpublished data). This tic DNA .markers for sharks will be of con­ and/or liver) for DNA analysis from blue shark assay development is intended to expand sider.~ble use in forensic and legal applica­ specimens· caught from around ttie world. We the Charleston Laboratory's current techni­ tions. would greatly appreciate any help frompartici­ cal support capabilities for law enforcement As representatives of one of the oldest pants in the shark tagging pr.ograJiTI. fo assist; in identifing seized propeey as well as ai.d groups, sharks are of interest contact Dr. Lisa Natanson at (401)782-3320; or in identification requested by management from the perspective of the function of their e-maii [email protected] or Dr. Mahm9od Shivji at (954) 920-1909; or e-mail or industry. · biochemical systems. We.are also study­ [email protected]. We will send1you ing the function and evolution of 'some We are conti11.uing to add more shark tubes. containing a nonhazardous .air-transport­ nuclear genes in sharks, inctuding the species to our database and to test pro- able preservation solution. ~"<~~ Page 16

OVERVIEW (Continued from Page 4) fisheries observer on a Japanese fongline small tigers were tagged two days. late,r fur­ vessel that was recaptured by a commer­ THE SHARK TAGGER ther north off Georgia; one was recaptured cial fisherman southwest.of Newfoundland, NEWSLETTER northeast of Cuba after 0.8 years .at liberty Canada (530 mi.; is yr.). There.are less and the otherwas reoovered off North Caro- than 10 recovered from this . lina after 0.5 years. Two 4 ft FL females area. ·Many of both the tagging and r~p­ Published a.11nually by were tagged off North Carolina in January ture locations are primarily along or just The Co.operative Shark of that same year: one traveled 675 miles . outside the 200 meter depth contour. Tagging Program to the Bahamas and the other621 miles to Data for nine of the original tags and the Dry Tortugas, FL. Alternatively, a 3.4 ft sixteen of the recoveries were collected by U.S, pept. of Commerce FL/male and a 3.7 ft female tiger' shark Canadian commercial fishermen and-ob­ NOAA/NMFS/NEFSC tagged off northern Florida on the same day servers on Canadian and Japanese vessels 28 Tarzwell Drive and in the same location were both recap­ outside our U.S. exclusive economic zone. tured within a mile of each other 5.8 months Consequently, one porbeagle that was origi- - Narragansett, RI 02882 later by a sport fisherman after traveling 30 nally tagged west of Cape Race, NF; 401 q52.3200 miles to the northeast. Canada and recaptured southeast of Nova Overall, tiger sharks were at liberty Scotia after O. 7 years at liberty, is one of Nancy E. Kohler, Acting Inv. Chief from 1 day to 3.6 years with 19 out fer < 1 the most easterly tagged fish to date. Also, Harold Wes Pratt, Jr. year, 33 for< 3 years, and/one fish at lib­ the recapture :of a. small female in the Bay Lisa J. Natanson ertyfor over 3 years. Alarge percentage of of Fundy is the first recovery in this area. Patricia Turner/ the tiger shar~s were measured attagging We are grateful to have this opportunity to Ruth (3riggs (84%) and at recapture (34%), providing collaborate with the Canadians on the mi­ ' \ valuable growth information. Nineteen per­ grations of this important northern shark south of Cape Hatteras, NC and into the cent of the tiger shark recaptures were re­ species. Gulf of Mexico .. Recapturesto date show tagged or released with the same tag. very local movement except for one fisn that moved from Texas to the Mexican border. Other Species (70 Returns). A dusky shark that was tagged off Oregon Porbeagles (18 Returns) Inlet, NC in 1988 was recaptured off Recaptures from other species in­ Veracruz, Mexico (1,099 mi. southwest) 6.6 Porbeagles were at liberty from 128 cluded some long distance and maximum years_ lafer. A backbone for aging studies days to 8.0 years. Tl) is is close to the maxi­ time at liberty records. An Atlantic was collected from a dusky that was at lib­ mum of 8.6 years previously recorded in the . sharpnose shark surpassed the .species erty f(;>r 2.5 years andwas measured at bpth CSTP for a porbeagle shark (Table 5). In maximum distance record.by traveling.560 release and recapture. Other int~resting tac~. six of the 18 porbeagle returns were at miles from, Padre Island, TX te Ta~sco, .recoveries include: a silky shatk that was liberty for over 6 years with five of the six Mexico a~er 5 months at liberty. This is the tagged southeast of Liberia, Africa that trav­ grouped in. the top ten for all years (third, second fastest movement to date and the eled 517 miles to the east after 2.1 years at fourth, fifth, seventh, and tenth longest times seventh sharpnose to travel from tile U.S. liberty (fourth in~ distance traveled and sixth at liberty). One of these fish at liberty to( to Mexican waters. A bonnethead shark in tirnl:! at liberty); two nurse sharks recap­ 7 .3 years was recaptured only 33 miles from was at liberty for 0.8 years-the maximum tured after 1.0 and 1.9 years at liberty that its original tagging location. Overall, dis­ for this·species in the CSTP. This.fish had traveled less than 4 miles from their ol'igi­ tances traveled rangedfrom 20 - 530 miles. traveled less than one mile from its original nal tagging location; aQd three blacktip This long "distance recovery was a 6 ft FL tagging location. The bonnethead isan in­ sharks tagged Off Texas and recapt!Jred off male tagged in Nygren Canyon by a foreign shore coastal species located primarjly Mexico. · /~-r""'4 Jack· Casey Retires

h1961, John G. Casey had a visionary shark conservation plan centered around tag and· release. For years, Jack worked against the tide of myths and misinformation hbout sharks. He was one of the first to clearly see the value of wild shark populations. After a lifetime of effort and 40 years of government service; Jack Casey retired in April of 1995. It.is the end of an era, and. we are glad to have been a part of it. Through Jack's inspiration and hard work, NOAA's Cooperative Shark Tagging Program was created in 1961, at Sandy Hook, NJ,and moved in 1966 to the Narragansett Laboratory. Under his direction, more than 6,500 volunteer fishermen and cooperating scientists have tagged more.than 120,000 sharks for research in the past 35 years. The scope of this work is a tribute notonly to Jack, but to the thousands of fishermen of all kinds, ages, and nationalities whom he inspired. Jack assembled a team of scien­ tists and support staff to study the confounding and little known lives of sharks. Age, growth, reproduction, and food habits are among the topics of research that he il!,te­ grated into the Apex Predator Investigation. Jack Casey has touched the lives of thou­ sands of students from school kids on the docks to candidates for advanced degrees. Jack leaves behind not just research papers, but decades of public interface; count­ less newspaper, magazine, book, radio and television reports that have subtly sl')aped public opinion about sharks. Jack's legacy is also a .Strong research program with a huge database promising many fruitful years of re~earch on large Atlantic sharks. .