DOCSLIB.ORG

Report of the Workshop on Eel and Salmon DCF Data (WKESDCF)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report of the Workshop on Eel and Salmon DCF Data (WKESDCF) ICES WKESDCF REPORT 2012 ICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ICES CM / ACOM:62 REF. PGCCDBS, WGEEL, WGNAS, WGRECORDS Report of the Workshop on Eel and Salmon DCF Data (WKESDCF) 3 – 6 July 2012 ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer H. C. Andersens Boulevard 44–46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected] Recommended format for purposes of citation: ICES. 2012. Report of the Workshop on Eel and Salmon DCF Data (WKESDCF), 3 – 6 July 2012, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM / ACOM:62. 67 pp. For permission to reproduce material from this publication, please apply to the Gen- eral Secretary. The document is a report of an Expert Group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council. © 2012 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICES WKESDCF REPORT 2012 | i Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Purpose of the Workshop .................................................................................... 3 1.2 Organization of the meeting ............................................................................... 3 1.3 Structure of the report .......................................................................................... 4 2 Current DCF requirements relating to eel and salmon as diadromous species .............................................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Current Regulation and Decision ....................................................................... 5 2.2 DCF requirements relating to diadromous species.......................................... 6 2.2.1 Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 ................................................... 6 2.2.2 Commission Decision 2010/93/EU ......................................................... 6 2.3 Concerns with the current DCF requirements for diadromous species .................................................................................................................. 12 2.4 DCF and CFP reform .......................................................................................... 14 2.5 Links with other EU Directives and Regulations ........................................... 14 3 Data collection requirements for eel assessment ................................................... 16 3.1 Background information on eel life history and production ........................ 16 3.2 Anthropogenic impacts on the stock ............................................................... 16 3.3 Management objectives for European eel ....................................................... 17 3.4 Assessments to meet management needs for European eel ......................... 17 3.4.1 International assessment ....................................................................... 17 3.4.2 National assessments ............................................................................ 20 3.5 Data requirements for management of European eel .................................... 21 3.6 Workshop proposed data collection under the DC-MAP for European eel ........................................................................................................ 26 4 Data collection requirements for salmon assessment ........................................... 30 4.1 Baltic and Atlantic salmon stocks and fisheries ............................................. 30 4.1.1 Stock structure ........................................................................................ 30 4.1.2 Wild and reared salmon ........................................................................ 30 4.1.3 Salmon fisheries ..................................................................................... 31 4.2 Baltic Salmon ....................................................................................................... 31 4.2.1 National and international management objectives for Baltic salmon........................................................................................... 31 4.2.2 Assessments to meet management needs for Baltic salmon ............ 32 4.2.3 Data requirements for Baltic salmon ................................................... 33 4.2.4 Proposed data collection for Baltic salmon under the DCF ............. 35 4.3 North Atlantic Salmon ....................................................................................... 36 ii | ICES WKESDCF REPORT 2012 4.3.1 National and international management objectives for North Atlantic salmon ........................................................................... 36 4.3.2 Assessment to meet management needs for North Atlantic salmon ..................................................................................................... 37 4.3.3 Data requirements for assessments of North Atlantic salmon ..................................................................................................... 39 4.3.4 Proposed data collection under the DCF for North Atlantic salmon ..................................................................................................... 40 5 Standards for data collection (precision, accuracy and quality control) ............ 44 6 Harmonization of collection methods for eel and salmon ................................... 46 7 Summary of recommendations ................................................................................. 47 7.1 General recommendations: ............................................................................... 47 7.2 Recommendations concerning data collection for eel: .................................. 47 7.3 Recommendations concerning data collection for Baltic salmon: ................ 48 7.4 Recommendations concerning data collection for North Atlantic salmon: ................................................................................................................. 49 Annex 1: Terms of Reference for WKESDCF ................................................................. 51 Annex 2: Agenda .................................................................................................................. 52 Annex 3. Participants .......................................................................................................... 53 Annex 4. References ............................................................................................................ 56 Annex 5. Glossary of terms and acronyms ..................................................................... 58 Annex 6. Guidance for reporting progress with Eel Management Plans .................. 61 Annex 7. Map of ICES Fishing Areas .............................................................................. 63 ICES WKESDCF REPORT 2012 | 1 Executive summary The Workshop on Eel and Salmon DCF Data met at the IDA Centre, Copenhagen from 3 to 6 July 2012, under the co-chairmanship of Ted Potter (UK) and Alan Walker (UK). The Workshop was attended by 23 experts in eel and salmon assessment and management, representing nine EU Member States (Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden and UK). Changes to the EU Data Collection Framework (DCF) in 2007 introduced require- ments to collect data on eel and salmon, but the specific data requested for these spe- cies did not meet the needs of national and international assessments. The proposed development of the new Data Collection - Multi-Annual Programme (DC-MAP) in 2013 provides the opportunity to coordinate and improve the collection of data used in assessments for these species. The key tasks of the Workshop were therefore to: Determine the data required to support international obligations for the assessment of eel and salmon; Describe the national monitoring and survey programmes required to meet these data requirements; and Consider options for integrating salmon and eel surveys and monitoring. The Workshop met in plenary to discuss the current data collection requirements for these two diadromous species and the various ways that these had been addressed by different countries. The Workshop then split into two subgroups to address the future data collection requirements for eel and salmon, with the latter subgroup con- sidering the different requirements for Baltic and North Atlantic salmon. For each species/area, the subgroups structured their discussions by considering: the national/international management objectives; the assessments undertaken to sup- port these objectives; the data required to undertake the assessments; and the pro- posed changes to the DC-MAP to provide these data. The existing DCF also requires the collection of data on economics and aquaculture. These data are important in the management of diadromous species, but the Workshop did not contain the expertise necessary to consider these elements in detail. Eel and salmon differ markedly from marine species in their biology, the nature and distribution of their fisheries, and the methods used to assess stock status and provide management advice. As a result, the data collection requirements do not fit well into the ‘standard’ approaches used for marine species. In particular, much of the assessment of both species is conducted at a local and national level even when the results contribute to international assess-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RECOVERY POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT of AMERICAN EEL (Anguilla Rostrata) in EASTERN CANADA
    Gulf, Central & Arctic, Maritimes, Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec Science Advisory Report 2013/078 RECOVERY POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT OF AMERICAN EEL (Anguilla rostrata) IN EASTERN CANADA Illustration credit: US Fish and Wildlife Service Figure 1. American Eel Recovery Potential Assessment zones in eastern Canada. Interior zones boundaries follow watershed limits and exterior boundaries follow the 500 m bathymetric contour. Context: The American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) is widely distributed in freshwater, estuarine and protected coastal areas of eastern Canada (including Lake Ontario and the upper St. Lawrence River). It is a facultatively catadromous fish, spawning in the Sargasso Sea and the recruiting stages return to continental waters along the western North Atlantic Ocean to grow and mature. In April 2012, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) concluded that American Eel from eastern Canada belonged to one Designatable Unit, and assessed its status as Threatened because of declines in abundance indices over the last two or more generations. American Eel is being considered for legal listing under the Species at Risk Act (SARA; the Act). In advance of making a listing decision, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has been asked to undertake a Recovery Potential Assessment (RPA). This RPA summarizes the current understanding of the distribution, abundance and population trends of American Eel, along with recovery targets and timeframes. The current state of knowledge about habitat requirements, threats to both habitat and American Eel, and measures to mitigate these impacts are also included. This information may be used to inform both scientific and socio-economic elements of the listing decision, development of a recovery strategy and action plan, and to support decision-making with regards to the issuance of permits, agreements and related conditions of the Act.
    [Show full text]
  • American Eel Anguilla Rostrata
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the American Eel Anguilla rostrata in Canada SPECIAL CONCERN 2006 COSEWIC COSEPAC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION ENDANGERED WILDLIFE DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL IN CANADA AU CANADA COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC 2006. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the American eel Anguilla rostrata in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 71 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge V. Tremblay, D.K. Cairns, F. Caron, J.M. Casselman, and N.E. Mandrak for writing the status report on the American eel Anguilla rostrata in Canada, overseen and edited by Robert Campbell, Co-chair (Freshwater Fishes) COSEWIC Freshwater Fishes Species Specialist Subcommittee. Funding for this report was provided by Environment Canada. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: (819) 997-4991 / (819) 953-3215 Fax: (819) 994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Évaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur l’anguille d'Amérique (Anguilla rostrata) au Canada. Cover illustration: American eel — (Lesueur 1817). From Scott and Crossman (1973) by permission. ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2004 Catalogue No. CW69-14/458-2006E-PDF ISBN 0-662-43225-8 Recycled paper COSEWIC Assessment Summary Assessment Summary – April 2006 Common name American eel Scientific name Anguilla rostrata Status Special Concern Reason for designation Indicators of the status of the total Canadian component of this species are not available.
    [Show full text]
  • Justification For, and Status Of, American Eel Elver Fisheries in Scotia-Fundy Region
    Not to be cited without Ne pas citer sans permission of the authors' autorisation des auteurs ' DFO Atlantic Fisheries MPO Pêches de l'Atlantique Research Document 95/2 Document de recherche 95/2 Justification for, and status of, American eel elver fisheries in Scotia-Fundy Region by B.M. Jessop Biological Sciences Branc h Department of Fisheries and Oceans P.O. Box 550 Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2S7 'This series documents the scientific basis for the 'La présente série documente les bases scientifiques evaluation of fisheries resources in Atlantic Canada. des évaluations des ressources halieutiques sur la côte As such, it addresses the issues of the day in the time atlantique du Canada. Elle traite des problèmes frames required and the documents it contains are not courants selon les échéanciers dictés . Les documents intended as definitive statements on the subjects qu'elle contient ne doivent pas être considérés comme addressed but rather as progress reports on ongoing des énoncés définitifs sur les sujets traités, mais plutôt investigations . comme des rapports d'étape sur les études en cours . Research documents are produced in the official Les Documents de recherche sont publiés dans la language in which they are provided to the secretariat . langue officielle utilisée dans le manuscrit envoyé au secrétariat . 2 Abstract North Ame rica contributes less th an 1% to the total world production of eels (AnQuillidae) for human consumption . Elvers of the native species have been fished by m any coastal nations of Europe An illa anguilla) since the e arly 1900s, by Japan L . 'a nica since the 1920s, and in various U .S.
    [Show full text]
  • Compiled Eel Abstracts: American Fisheries Society 2014 Annual Meeting August 18-21, 2014 Quebec City, Quebec, Canada [Compiled/Organized by R
    Compiled Eel Abstracts: American Fisheries Society 2014 Annual Meeting August 18-21, 2014 Quebec City, Quebec, Canada [Compiled/organized by R. Wilson Laney, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh, NC, USA] International Eel Symposium 2014: Are Eels Climbing Back up the Slippery Slope? Monday, August 18, 2014: 1:30 PM 206B (Centre des congrès de Québec // Québec City Convention Centre) Martin Castonguay, Institut Maurice-Lamontagne, Pêches et Océans Canada, Mont-Joli, QC, Canada David Cairns, Science Branch, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Charlottetown, PE, Canada Guy Verreault, Ministere du Développement durable, de l'Environnement, de la Faune et des Parcs, Riviere-du-Loup, QC, Canada John Casselman, Dept. of Biology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada This talk will introduce the symposium. The first part will outline how the Symposium is structured, where to see Symposium posters, the panel, publication plans, etc. This would be followed by a brief outline of eel science and conservation issues, and how the Symposium will address these. I will then present with some level of detail the themes that the symposium will cover. The Introduction would also state the question that will be addressed by the panel discussion, and ask participants to keep this question in mind as they listen to the various talks. In closing, the introductory talk will outline the purpose of the Canada/USA Eel governance session that will be held at the very end of the meeting, after the Symposium panel. Publishing in the eel symposium proceedings - An orientation from the Editor-in- Chief of the ICES Journal of Marine Science Monday, August 18, 2014: 5:00 PM 206B (Centre des congrès de Québec // Québec City Convention Centre) Howard Browman, Marine Ecosystem Acoustics, Institute of Marine Research, Storebø, Norway I will provide symposium participants with a status report on the ICES Journal of Marine science.
    [Show full text]
  • February 22, 2006 Doubletree Hotel Crystal City Arlington, Virginia
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE ATLANTIC STATES MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION AMERICAN EEL MANAGEMENT BOARD February 22, 2006 Doubletree Hotel Crystal City Arlington, Virginia ATTENDANCE Board Members George Lapointe, Maine DMR Bernard Pankowski, proxy for Sen. Venables (DE) Dennis Damon, Maine Leg. Apptee. Russell Dize, proxy for Sen. Colburn (MD) John Nelson, New Hampshire F&G Bruno Vasta, Maryland Peter Whelan, proxy for Dennis Abbott (NH) Howard King, MD DNR G. Ritchie White, New Hampshire A.C. Carpenter, PRFC Paul Diodati, Massachusetts DMF Jack Travelstead, Virginia MRC William Adler, Massachusetts Kelly Place, proxy for Sen. Chichester (VA) Vito Calomo, Massachusetts Cathy Davenport, Virginia Jerry Carvahlo, Rhode Island Preston Pate, North Carolina DMF Eric Smith, Connecticut DEP Mel Bell, South Carolina DNR Lance Stewart, Connecticut Robert Boyles, proxy Gordon Colvin, Chair, New York DEC Malcolm Rhodes, South Carolina Pat Augustine, New York John Duren, Georgia Tom McCloy, New Jersey DFG&W April Price, Florida Erling Berg, New Jersey Gil McRae, Florida FWC Leroy Young, Pennsylvania FBC Tom Meyer, NMFS Frank Cozzo, proxy for Rep. Schroeder (PA) Wilson Laney, USFWS Roy Miller, Delaware DFW Ex-Officio Members Steve Gephard, Technical Committee Chair Matt Cieri, Stock Assessment Subcommittee Chair Dave Secor, Peer Review Panel Chair ASMFC Staff Lydia Munger Carmela Cuomo Bob Beal Julie Nygard Vince O’Shea Guests Steve Doctor Bennie Williams James Trossback Eric Robillara Maddy Silgrist Charles Sensiba Mari-Beth DeLucia Barry Kratchman Mike Hendricks
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of New England Salt Marsh Support of the American Eel, Anguilla Rostrata, and the Impacts of Hydrologic Restriction
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Doctoral Dissertations Student Scholarship Winter 2019 EVALUATION OF NEW ENGLAND SALT MARSH SUPPORT OF THE AMERICAN EEL, ANGUILLA ROSTRATA, AND THE IMPACTS OF HYDROLOGIC RESTRICTION Alyson L. Eberhardt University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation Recommended Citation Eberhardt, Alyson L., "EVALUATION OF NEW ENGLAND SALT MARSH SUPPORT OF THE AMERICAN EEL, ANGUILLA ROSTRATA, AND THE IMPACTS OF HYDROLOGIC RESTRICTION" (2019). Doctoral Dissertations. 2486. https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation/2486 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EVALUATION OF NEW ENGLAND SALT MARSH SUPPORT OF THE AMERICAN EEL, ANGUILLA ROSTRATA, AND THE IMPACTS OF HYDROLOGIC RESTRICTION BY ALYSON L. EBERHARDT BA, Drew University, 1997 MS, University of New Hampshire, 2004 DISSERTATION Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Earth and Environmental Sciences December, 2019 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Ó 2019 Alyson L. Eberhardt ii This dissertation was examined and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor
    [Show full text]
  • American Eel Biological Species Report
    AMERICAN EEL BIOLOGICAL SPECIES REPORT Supplement to: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Petition Finding for the American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) Docket Number FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0143 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5 June 2015 This page blank for two-sided printing ii U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region AMERICAN EEL BIOLOGICAL SPECIES REPORT Steven L. Shepard U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Maine Field Office 17 Godfrey Drive, Suite 2 Orono, Maine 04473-3702 [email protected] For copies of this report, contact: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, MA 01035 http://www.fws.gov/northeast/newsroom/eels.html http://www.regulations.gov This American Eel Biological Species Report has been prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) in support of a Status Review pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531, et seq. This report reviews the best available information, including published literature, reports, unpublished data, and expert opinions. The report addresses current American eel issues in contemporary time frames. The report is not intended to provide definitive statements on the subjects addressed, but rather as a review of the best available information and ongoing investigations. The report includes updates to, and relevant material from, the Service’s 2007 American Eel Status Review. The report was published in January 2015 following peer review. The report was revised to correct typographical and minor factual errors and reissued in June 2015. With thanks to Krishna Gifford, Martin Miller, James McCleave, Alex Haro, Tom Kwak, David Richardson, Andy Dolloff, Kate Taylor, Wilson Laney, Sheila Eyler, Mark Cantrell, Rosemarie Gnam, Caitlin Snyder, AJ Vale, Steve Minkkinen, Matt Schwarz, Sarah LaPorte, Angela Erves, Heather Bell, the ASMFC American Eel Technical Committee, and the USFWS American Eel Working Group.
    [Show full text]
  • 5-Review-Fish-Habita
    United Nations UNEP/GEF South China Sea Global Environment Environment Programme Project Facility UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.8/5 Date: 12th October 2006 Original: English Eighth Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the Fisheries Component of the UNEP/GEF Project: “Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand” Bangka Belitung Province, Indonesia 1st - 4th November 2006 INFORMATION COLLATED BY THE FISHERIES AND HABITAT COMPONENTS OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA PROJECT ON SITES IMPORTANT TO THE LIFE- CYCLES OF SIGNIFICANT FISH SPECIES UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-F.8/5 Page 1 IDENTIFICATION OF FISHERIES REFUGIA IN THE GULF OF THAILAND It was discussed at the Sixth Meeting of the Regional Scientific and Technical Committee (RSTC) in December 2006 that the Regional Working Group on Fisheries should take the following two-track approach to the identification of fisheries refugia: 1. Review known spawning areas for pelagic and invertebrate species, with the aim of evaluating these sites as candidate spawning refugia. 2. Evaluate each of the project’s habitat demonstration sites as potential juvenile/pre-recruit refugia for significant demersal species. Rationale for the Two-Track Approach to the Identification of Fisheries Refugia The two main life history events for fished species are reproduction and recruitment. It was noted by the RSTC that both of these events involve movement between areas, and some species, often pelagic fishes, migrate to particular spawning areas. It was also noted that many species also utilise specific coastal habitats such as coral reefs, seagrass, and mangroves as nursery areas. In terms of the effects of fishing, most populations of fished species are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of high levels of fishing effort in areas and at times where there are high abundances of (a) stock in spawning condition, (b) juveniles and pre-recruits, or (c) pre-recruits migrating to fishing grounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology, Stock Status and Management Summaries for Selected Fish Species in South-Western Australia
    Fisheries Research Report No. 242, 2013 Biology, stock status and management summaries for selected fish species in south-western Australia Claire B. Smallwood, S. Alex Hesp and Lynnath E. Beckley Fisheries Research Division Western Australian Fisheries and Marine Research Laboratories PO Box 20 NORTH BEACH, Western Australia 6920 Correct citation: Smallwood, C. B.; Hesp, S. A.; and Beckley, L. E. 2013. Biology, stock status and management summaries for selected fish species in south-western Australia. Fisheries Research Report No. 242. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia. 180pp. Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Fisheries Western Australia. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Department of Fisheries Western Australia does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication. Fish illustrations Illustrations © R. Swainston / www.anima.net.au We dedicate this guide to the memory of our friend and colleague, Ben Chuwen Department of Fisheries 3rd floor SGIO Atrium 168 – 170 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000 Telephone: (08) 9482 7333 Facsimile: (08) 9482 7389 Website: www.fish.wa.gov.au ABN: 55 689 794 771 Published by Department of Fisheries, Perth, Western Australia. Fisheries Research Report No. 242, March 2013. ISSN: 1035 - 4549 ISBN: 978-1-921845-56-7 ii Fisheries Research Report No.242, 2013 Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EIFAC/ICES Working Group on Eels (WGEEL) CM2001/ACFM:03
    Advisory Committee on Fisheries Management ICES CM 2001/ACFM:03 REPORT OF THE EIFAC/ICES WORKING GROUP ON EELS St. Andrews, N.B., Canada 28 August - 1 September 2000 This report is not to be quoted without prior consultation with the General Secretary. The document is a report of an expert group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer Palægade 2–4 DK–1261 Copenhagen K Denmark TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Main Tasks ......................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Participants......................................................................................................................................................1 2 TRENDS IN RECRUITMENT AND FISHERIES, CAUSES AND EFFECTS ON STOCK AND YIELD ............2 2.1 Trends in Commercial Landings of American Eels.........................................................................................2 2.1.1 Reported elver catches.......................................................................................................................2 2.1.2 Reported yellow and silver eel catches..............................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • The Living Planet Index (Lpi) for Migratory Freshwater Fish Technical Report
    THE LIVING PLANET INDEX (LPI) FOR MIGRATORY FRESHWATER FISH LIVING PLANET INDEX TECHNICAL1 REPORT LIVING PLANET INDEXTECHNICAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are very grateful to a number of individuals and organisations who have worked with the LPD and/or shared their data. A full list of all partners and collaborators can be found on the LPI website. 2 INDEX TABLE OF CONTENTS Stefanie Deinet1, Kate Scott-Gatty1, Hannah Rotton1, PREFERRED CITATION 2 1 1 Deinet, S., Scott-Gatty, K., Rotton, H., Twardek, W. M., William M. Twardek , Valentina Marconi , Louise McRae , 5 GLOSSARY Lee J. Baumgartner3, Kerry Brink4, Julie E. Claussen5, Marconi, V., McRae, L., Baumgartner, L. J., Brink, K., Steven J. Cooke2, William Darwall6, Britas Klemens Claussen, J. E., Cooke, S. J., Darwall, W., Eriksson, B. K., Garcia Eriksson7, Carlos Garcia de Leaniz8, Zeb Hogan9, Joshua de Leaniz, C., Hogan, Z., Royte, J., Silva, L. G. M., Thieme, 6 SUMMARY 10 11, 12 13 M. L., Tickner, D., Waldman, J., Wanningen, H., Weyl, O. L. Royte , Luiz G. M. Silva , Michele L. Thieme , David Tickner14, John Waldman15, 16, Herman Wanningen4, Olaf F., Berkhuysen, A. (2020) The Living Planet Index (LPI) for 8 INTRODUCTION L. F. Weyl17, 18 , and Arjan Berkhuysen4 migratory freshwater fish - Technical Report. World Fish Migration Foundation, The Netherlands. 1 Indicators & Assessments Unit, Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society 11 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION of London, United Kingdom Edited by Mark van Heukelum 11 Data set 2 Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Design Shapeshifter.nl Biology and Institute of Environmental Science, Carleton University, Drawings Jeroen Helmer 12 Global trend Ottawa, ON, Canada 15 Tropical and temperate zones 3 Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury, Photography We gratefully acknowledge all of the 17 Regions New South Wales, Australia photographers who gave us permission 20 Migration categories 4 World Fish Migration Foundation, The Netherlands to use their photographic material.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel. the Plan Development Team (Team), Chaired by Heather M
    Fishery Management Report No. 36 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel April 2000 Fishery Management Report No. 36 of the Atlantic State Marine Fisheries Commission Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) April 2000 Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) Prepared by the American Eel Plan Development Team And Approved by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission November 1999 This document was prepared in cooperation with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s American Eel Management Board, American Eel Technical Committee, American Eel Plan Development Team, and the American Eel Advisory Panel. A report of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission pursuant to U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award Nos. NA97 FGO 0034 and NA07 FGO 024 . ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission developed this Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Eel. The Plan Development Team (Team), chaired by Heather M. Stirratt, Fishery Management Plan Coordinator, ASMFC, and previously John Field, consisted of (in alphabetical order): Mr. W.-Dieter N. Busch, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Mr. Lewis Flagg, Maine Department of Marine Resources; Mr. Daniel M. Kuzmeskus, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Mr. John McClain, New Jersey Division of Fish, Game & Wildlife; Mr. Stewart Michels, Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife; Mr. Charles Moore, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources; Ms. Julie Weeder, Maryland Department of Natural Resources; and Mr. John Whitehead, East Carolina University. The Team worked under the guidance of the American Eel Management Board Chaired by Dr.
    [Show full text]