DOCSLIB.ORG

Wasted Resources: Bycatch and Discards in U. S. Fisheries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wasted Resources: Bycatch and Discards in U. S. Fisheries Wasted Resources: Bycatch and discards in U. S. Fisheries by J. M. Harrington, MRAG Americas, Inc. R. A. Myers, Dalhousie University A. A. Rosenberg, University of New Hampshire Prepared by MRAG Americas, Inc. For Oceana July 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 7 NATIONAL OVERVIEW 9 Introduction 9 Methodology 11 Discarded Bycatch Estimates for the 27 Major Fisheries in the U.S. 12 Recommendations 17 Definitions of Key Terms Used in the Report 19 Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in the Report 20 NORTHEAST 25 Northeast Groundfish Fishery 27 Target landings 28 Regulations 30 Discards 32 Squid, Mackerel and Butterfish Fishery 41 Target landings 42 Regulations 44 Discards 44 Monkfish Fishery 53 Target landings 53 Regulations 54 Discards 55 Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery 59 Target landings 59 Regulations 60 Discards 61 Spiny Dogfish Fishery 69 Target landings 69 Regulations 70 Discards 70 Atlantic Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog Fishery 75 Target landings 75 Regulations 76 Discards 76 Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery 79 Target landings 79 Regulations 80 Discards 81 Atlantic Sea Herring Fishery 85 Target landings 85 Regulations 86 Discards 87 Northern Golden Tilefish Fishery 93 Target landings 93 Regulations 94 Discards 94 Atlantic Bluefish Fishery 97 Target landings 97 Regulations 98 Discards 98 Deep Sea Red Crab Fishery 101 Target landings 101 Regulations 101 Discards 102 SOUTHEAST 103 Shrimp Fishery of the South Atlantic 105 Target landings 105 Regulations 106 Discards 107 Snapper and Grouper of the South Atlantic 111 Target landings 112 Regulations 114 Discards 115 Dolphinfish and Wahoo Fishery of the South Atlantic 121 Target landings 121 Regulations 122 Discards 123 Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 127 Target landings 127 Regulations 128 Discards 128 Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico 133 Target landings 133 Regulations 136 Discards 137 Coastal Migratory Pelagics of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic 145 Target landings 145 Regulations 148 Discards 149 Red Drum Fishery of the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico 155 Target catch data 155 Regulations 156 Discards 156 Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Menhaden Fisheries 159 Target landings 159 Regulations 160 Discards 160 WEST COAST 165 Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 167 Target landings 168 Regulations 173 Discards 174 Pacific Halibut Fishery 181 Target landings 181 Regulations 182 July 2005 U.S. Fisheries Atlas of Bycatch Page 4 Discards 184 West Coast Salmon Fishery 189 Target landings 190 Regulations 192 Discards 193 Coastal Pelagic Species of the Pacific 197 Target landings 197 Regulations 199 Discards 199 ALASKA 207 Alaskan Salmon Fishery 209 Target landings 209 Regulations 211 Discards 212 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crab Fishery 217 Target landings 217 Regulations 220 Discards 221 Alaskan Weathervane Scallop Fishery 227 Target landings 227 Regulations 228 Discards 229 Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Fishery 233 Target landings 233 Regulations 234 Discards 235 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Groundfish Fishery 243 Target landings 243 Regulations 244 Discards 245 WESTERN PACIFIC 253 Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish of the Western Pacific 255 Target landings 256 Regulations 257 Discards 258 Western Pacific Pelagics Fishery 263 Target landings 263 Regulations 266 Discards 267 HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES FISHERIES 273 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fisheries: Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish and Sharks 275 Target landings 276 Regulations 279 Discards 280 July 2005 U.S. Fisheries Atlas of Bycatch Page 5 Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the following people for their contributions to this project: Erin Collings, Eric Blankfield, John Hoenig, Felicia Coleman, Mike Hirshfield, Ingrid Nugent, Maggie Mooney- Seus, Scott Sherrill-Mix, Beth Weiland and Joseph Beland. Without their efforts, the completion of this report would not have been possible. In addition, the following people supplied us with invaluable advice and expertise in their fields of study: Dvora Hart, Frank Steimle, Anne Richards, Stu Kennedy, Richard Leard, Gregg Williams, Kelly van Wormer, Aaron Ranta, Paul Nitschke, James Nance, Kim Iverson, Gina Shield, Matthew Cieri, David Gloeckner, Steve Correia, Doug Harper, Elizabeth Scott-Denton, Kevin McCarthy, Gregor Cailliet, Heather Gillroy, Martin Loefflad, Samuel Pooley, Leanne Laughlin, Valerie Taylor, Dale Sweetnam, Tom Kohler, Diana Stram, Bill Clark, Mary Yoklavich, Ryan Burt, and Vanessa Tuttle. July 2005 U.S. Fisheries Atlas of Bycatch Page 7 National Overview An Overview of Fishery Discards in the United States Introduction The unintentional capture of non-target species of fish, mammals, turtles and birds, and invertebrates is a well-recognized feature of fisheries around the world. Usually termed bycatch, some of the captured organisms may be retained for sale or use, while others are discarded back into the sea due to either low value or regulatory requirements. Survival rates for discarded bycatch is highly variable (Chopin and Arimoto, 1995; reviewed in Alverson et al. 1994; Davis, 2002), as are the impacts of bycatch on marine ecosystems (Hall et al. 2000) but it is widely accepted that the ecological impacts of bycatch are substantial (FAO, 2004a). Bycatch, and particularly discarded bycatch, is a serious conservation problem because valuable living resources are wasted, populations of endangered and rare species are threatened, stocks that are already heavily exploited are further impacted, and important changes at an ecosystem level such as the overall structure of trophic webs and habitats may result (Morgan and Chuenpagdee, 2003; Alverson and Hughs, 1996; Crowder and Murawski, 1998). Reviewing the status of the stocks included in this report reveals that 25% of stocks are overfished, meaning that their biomass is below a threshold level to maintain a stable population, and 15% of stocks are being fished at a rate above a threshold level, defining overfishing (Figure 1) (NMFS, 2004d). The threshold levels are set individually for each stock by the National Marine Fisheries Service and regional fishery management councils. U.S. Fisheries Stock Status 150 128 131 100 72 61 35 43 50 0 Number Number of stocks Overfishing? Overfished? Stock status Yes No Unknown/Undefined Figure 1: Stock status for 235 federally managed stocks in the United States (NMFS, 2004d). Discarding also results in substantial waste of potential food resources. As global marine fisheries catches have plateaued (FAO, 2004a) and competition for increasingly depleted stocks has intensified, the moral and economic arguments to decrease bycatch have been received greater emphasis from policy makers, industry, and the general public (Pitcher and Chuenpagdee, 1994; Alverson and Hughs, 1996; FAO, 2004b; UN, 2005). Internationally and nationally, the conservation problems associated with bycatch have been well recognized in the scientific community (Alverson et al. 1994; Alverson and Hughs,1996; Hall, 1996;Crowder and Murawski, 1998; ICES, 2005; FAO, 2004a) as well as in policy instruments (UN 1995; NOAA Fisheries, 1996; NMFS, 2004b,c). The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO, 1995) states that, as a general principle, “States and users of aquatic ecosystems should minimize waste, catch of non-target species, both fish and non-fish species, and July 2005 U.S. Fisheries Atlas of Bycatch Page 9 impacts on associated or dependent species” (FAO, 1995). While the Code of Conduct is voluntary, this same principle is carried forward in international treaties such as the U.N. Treaty on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UN, 1995). Domestically, the U.S. Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 1996 has, as one of the national standards for management of marine fisheries, the requirement that, “Conservation and management measures shall, to the extent practicable, (A) minimize bycatch and (B) to the extent bycatch cannot be avoided, minimize the mortality of such bycatch” (NOAA Fisheries, 1996). In response to these requirements, there has been a substantial effort to reduce bycatch internationally and domestically (NMFS, 2004b). A recent draft report from FAO indicated that discards of marine species may be as low as 8% of the total global fisheries catch, although it is important to realize that an additional, and perhaps much larger, amount of non-target species may be caught and landed that are not included in this estimate (FAO, 2004a). Within the United States, authorities have required implementation of various measures to reduce bycatch. In general, there are three possible means of bycatch reduction: modifying fishing methods including gear, timing or location of fishing or other aspects of the methodology, such as the introduction of bycatch reduction devices in shrimp fisheries in New England, the South Atlantic Bight and the Gulf of Mexico (Nance et al. 1997; Epperly et al. 2002; Morgan and Chuenpagdee, 2003); changing fishing gear or fishing methods entirely, such the change from drift gill net fishing to trolling for tunas or changing from trawls to traps for groundfish such as lingcod (Morgan and Chuenpagdee, 2003); and reducing fishing effort and therefore the amount of fishing gear in use overall, as has occurred in the New England and Alaska groundfish fisheries. Any one of these methods alone does not necessarily guarantee the reduction of bycatch, but one or more must be a component of any conservation program to reduce the loss of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES and RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: a Guide for USAID Staff and Partners
    SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES AND RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: A Guide for USAID Staff and Partners June 2013 ABOUT THIS GUIDE GOAL This guide provides basic information on how to design programs to reform capture fisheries (also referred to as “wild” fisheries) and aquaculture sectors to ensure sound and effective development, environmental sustainability, economic profitability, and social responsibility. To achieve these objectives, this document focuses on ways to reduce the threats to biodiversity and ecosystem productivity through improved governance and more integrated planning and management practices. In the face of food insecurity, global climate change, and increasing population pressures, it is imperative that development programs help to maintain ecosystem resilience and the multiple goods and services that ecosystems provide. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem functions are central to maintaining ecosystem integrity, health, and productivity. The intent of the guide is not to suggest that fisheries and aquaculture are interchangeable: these sectors are unique although linked. The world cannot afford to neglect global fisheries and expect aquaculture to fill that void. Global food security will not be achievable without reversing the decline of fisheries, restoring fisheries productivity, and moving towards more environmentally friendly and responsible aquaculture. There is a need for reform in both fisheries and aquaculture to reduce their environmental and social impacts. USAID’s experience has shown that well-designed programs can reform capture fisheries management, reducing threats to biodiversity while leading to increased productivity, incomes, and livelihoods. Agency programs have focused on an ecosystem-based approach to management in conjunction with improved governance, secure tenure and access to resources, and the application of modern management practices.
    [Show full text]
  • FISH LIST WISH LIST: a Case for Updating the Canadian Government’S Guidance for Common Names on Seafood
    FISH LIST WISH LIST: A case for updating the Canadian government’s guidance for common names on seafood Authors: Christina Callegari, Scott Wallace, Sarah Foster and Liane Arness ISBN: 978-1-988424-60-6 © SeaChoice November 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY . 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 4 Findings . 5 Recommendations . 6 INTRODUCTION . 7 APPROACH . 8 Identification of Canadian-caught species . 9 Data processing . 9 REPORT STRUCTURE . 10 SECTION A: COMMON AND OVERLAPPING NAMES . 10 Introduction . 10 Methodology . 10 Results . 11 Snapper/rockfish/Pacific snapper/rosefish/redfish . 12 Sole/flounder . 14 Shrimp/prawn . 15 Shark/dogfish . 15 Why it matters . 15 Recommendations . 16 SECTION B: CANADIAN-CAUGHT SPECIES OF HIGHEST CONCERN . 17 Introduction . 17 Methodology . 18 Results . 20 Commonly mislabelled species . 20 Species with sustainability concerns . 21 Species linked to human health concerns . 23 Species listed under the U .S . Seafood Import Monitoring Program . 25 Combined impact assessment . 26 Why it matters . 28 Recommendations . 28 SECTION C: MISSING SPECIES, MISSING ENGLISH AND FRENCH COMMON NAMES AND GENUS-LEVEL ENTRIES . 31 Introduction . 31 Missing species and outdated scientific names . 31 Scientific names without English or French CFIA common names . 32 Genus-level entries . 33 Why it matters . 34 Recommendations . 34 CONCLUSION . 35 REFERENCES . 36 APPENDIX . 39 Appendix A . 39 Appendix B . 39 FISH LIST WISH LIST: A case for updating the Canadian government’s guidance for common names on seafood 2 GLOSSARY The terms below are defined to aid in comprehension of this report. Common name — Although species are given a standard Scientific name — The taxonomic (Latin) name for a species. common name that is readily used by the scientific In nomenclature, every scientific name consists of two parts, community, industry has adopted other widely used names the genus and the specific epithet, which is used to identify for species sold in the marketplace.
    [Show full text]
  • A COMPARATIVE ACCOUNT of the SMALL PELAGIC FISHERIES in the APFIC REGION by M
    A COMPARATIVE ACCOUNT OF THE SMALL PELAGIC FISHERIES IN THE APFIC REGION by M. Devaraj and E. Vivekanandan Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Cocbin-682014, India Abstract The production of the small pe/agics in the APFIC region was 1.2 mt/sq. km during 1995. Among the four areas in the region, the small pe/agics have registered (i) the maximum annual fluctuations in the western Indian Ocean; (ii) the highest increase duri'}i the past two decades along the west coast of Thailand in the eastern Indian Ocean; and (iii) the consistent decline in the landings during the past one decade along the Japanese coast in the northwest Pacific Ocean. The short rnackerels emerged as the largest fishery in the APFlC region, fom'ing 19.5% of the landings of the small pelagics in 1995. The group consisting afthe sardines and the anchovies has shown clear signs of decline during the past one decade in almost the entire region. Most of the small pelagics have unique biological characteristics such as fast growth, short longevity, late maturity, high nalllral mortality, shoaling behaviour, high fecundity and severe recruitment fluctuations. As many species of the small pelagics undertake migration, collaborative research programmes and close coordination are required among the APFle countries for the stock assessment of all the major species. The management measures under implementation in these countries have been reviewed, with suggestions for regional cooperation for the management of the stocks of the small pelagics. INTRODUCTION The Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission covers four oceanic areas, which have been classified by the FAO as the western Indian Ocean (FAO Statistical Area 51), eastern Indian Ocean (Area 57) , northwest Pacific Ocean (Area 61) and western central Pacific Ocean (Area 71).
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule Onlinepdf
    Detailed schedule 8:30 Opening session 9:00 Keynote lecture: Impacts of climate change on flatfish populations - patterns of change 100 days to 100 years: Short and long-term responses of flatfish to sea temperature change David Sims 9:30 Nine decades of North Sea sole and plaice distributions Georg H. Engelhard (Engelhard GH, Pinnegar JK, Kell LT, Rijnsdorp AD) 9:50 Climatic effects on recruitment variability in Platichthys flesus and Solea solea: defining perspectives for management. Filipe Martinho (Martinho F, Viegas I, Dolbeth M, Sousa H, Cabral HN, Pardal MA) 10:10 Are flatfish species with southern biogeographic affinities increasing in the Celtic Sea? Christopher Lynam (Lynam C, Harlay X, Gerritsen H, Stokes D) 10:30 Coffee break 11:00 Climate related changes in abundance of non-commercial flatfish species in the North Sea Ralf van Hal (van Hal R, Smits K, Rijnsdorp AD) 11:20 Inter-annual variability of potential spawning habitat of North Sea plaice Christophe Loots (Loots C, Vaz S, Koubii P, Planque B, Coppin F, Verin Y) 11:40 Annual variation in simulated drift patterns of egg/larvae from spawning areas to nursery and its implication for the abundance of age-0 turbot (Psetta maxima) Claus R. Sparrevohn (Sparrevohn CR, Hinrichsen H-H, Rijnsdorp AD) 12:00 Broadscale patterns in population dynamics of juvenile plaice: W Scotland 2001-2008 Michael T. Burrows (Burrows MT, Robb L, Harvey R, Batty RS) 12:20 Impact of global warming on abundance and occurrence of flatfish populations in the Bay of Biscay (France) Olivier Le Pape (Hermant
    [Show full text]
  • Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel Off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998-2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation Robert L
    This article was downloaded by: [Oregon State University] On: 16 August 2011, At: 13:01 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Transactions of the American Fisheries Society Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utaf20 Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998-2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation Robert L. Emmett a & Gregory K. Krutzikowsky b a Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries, 2030 South Marine Science Drive, Newport, Oregon, 97365, USA b Cooperative Institute of Marine Resource Studies, Oregon State University, 2030 South Marine Science Drive, Newport, Oregon, 97365, USA Available online: 09 Jan 2011 To cite this article: Robert L. Emmett & Gregory K. Krutzikowsky (2008): Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998-2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 137:3, 657-676 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1577/T06-058.1 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and- conditions This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date.
    [Show full text]
  • Probable Discards of Cod in the Barents Sea and Ajacent Waters During Russian Bottom Trawl
    unuftp.is Final Project 2002 PROBABLE DISCARDS OF COD IN THE BARENTS SEA AND AJACENT WATERS DURING RUSSIAN BOTTOM TRAWL Konstantin Sokolov Knipovich Polar Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography (PINRO) Murmansk, Russia [email protected] Supervisor Dr. Palsson, O.K. Marine Research Institute Reykjavik, Iceland ABSTRACT Unaccounted discarding of small-sized fish is an important and acute problem in many fisheries because it affects the condition of stocks and reduces the reliability of fishery statistics. Such discards are regarded as a threat to intensively exploited species, such as the North-East Arctic cod (Gadus morhua morhua L.) which inhabits the Barents Sea and adjacent waters. In the present study an attempt is made to estimate of the quantity of small-sized cod discarded in the Russian bottom trawl fishery in 1996-2001. This work is based on cod length measurements onboard Russian commercial vessels in the period 1996-2001 and distributional features, such as density and size composition inferred from catch statistics. The calculated annual discards of small cod were estimated to be in the range of 3-80 million individuals. Discards appeared to be highest in 1998 and lowest in 1996 and 2001. This was found to be related to the abundance of cod recruits and the portion of total catch taken in the Eastern-Central part of the Barents Sea. The features of spatial and seasonal distribution of small-sized cod, the depth and duration of trawling and catch of cod influence the catch of small cod per unit of effort and, as a consequence, discards of such fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Zhang Et Al., 2015
    Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 153 (2015) 38e53 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecss Modeling larval connectivity of the Atlantic surfclams within the Middle Atlantic Bight: Model development, larval dispersal and metapopulation connectivity * Xinzhong Zhang a, , Dale Haidvogel a, Daphne Munroe b, Eric N. Powell c, John Klinck d, Roger Mann e, Frederic S. Castruccio a, 1 a Institute of Marine and Coastal Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA b Haskin Shellfish Research Laboratory, Rutgers University, Port Norris, NJ 08349, USA c Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, University of Southern Mississippi, Ocean Springs, MS 39564, USA d Center for Coastal Physical Oceanography, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 23529, USA e Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, VA 23062, USA article info abstract Article history: To study the primary larval transport pathways and inter-population connectivity patterns of the Atlantic Received 19 February 2014 surfclam, Spisula solidissima, a coupled modeling system combining a physical circulation model of the Accepted 30 November 2014 Middle Atlantic Bight (MAB), Georges Bank (GBK) and the Gulf of Maine (GoM), and an individual-based Available online 10 December 2014 surfclam larval model was implemented, validated and applied. Model validation shows that the model can reproduce the observed physical circulation patterns and surface and bottom water temperature, and Keywords: recreates the observed distributions of surfclam larvae during upwelling and downwelling events. The surfclam (Spisula solidissima) model results show a typical along-shore connectivity pattern from the northeast to the southwest individual-based model larval transport among the surfclam populations distributed from Georges Bank west and south along the MAB shelf.
    [Show full text]
  • The Landing Obligation and Its Implications on the Control of Fisheries
    DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES FISHERIES THE LANDING OBLIGATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON THE CONTROL OF FISHERIES STUDY This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Fisheries. AUTHORS Ocean Governance Consulting: Christopher Hedley Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science: Tom Catchpole, Ana Ribeiro Santos RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Marcus Breuer Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE Adrienn Borka Lyna Pärt LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE PUBLISHER To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its monthly newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in September 2015. © European Union, 2015. Print ISBN 978-92-823-7938-7 doi:10.2861/694624 QA-02-15-709-EN-C PDF ISBN 978-92-823-7939-4 doi:10.2861/303902 QA-02-15-709-EN-N This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES FISHERIES THE LANDING OBLIGATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON THE CONTROL OF FISHERIES STUDY Abstract This study reviews the impacts of the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) rules requiring catches in regulated fisheries to be landed and counted against quotas of each Member State ("the landing obligation and requiring that catch of species subject to the landing obligation below a minimum conservation reference size be restricted to purposes other than direct human consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Rockfish (Sebastes) That Are Evolutionarily Isolated Are Also
    Biological Conservation 142 (2009) 1787–1796 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Rockfish (Sebastes) that are evolutionarily isolated are also large, morphologically distinctive and vulnerable to overfishing Karen Magnuson-Ford a,b, Travis Ingram c, David W. Redding a,b, Arne Ø. Mooers a,b,* a Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby BC, Canada V5A 1S6 b IRMACS, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby BC, Canada V5A 1S6 c Department of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, #2370-6270 University Blvd., Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Z4 article info abstract Article history: In an age of triage, we must prioritize species for conservation effort. Species more isolated on the tree of Received 23 September 2008 life are candidates for increased attention. The rockfish genus Sebastes is speciose (>100 spp.), morpho- Received in revised form 10 March 2009 logically and ecologically diverse and many species are heavily fished. We used a complete Sebastes phy- Accepted 18 March 2009 logeny to calculate a measure of evolutionary isolation for each species and compared this to their Available online 22 April 2009 morphology and imperilment. We found that evolutionarily isolated species in the northeast Pacific are both larger-bodied and, independent of body size, morphologically more distinctive. We examined Keywords: extinction risk within rockfish using a compound measure of each species’ intrinsic vulnerability to Phylogenetic diversity overfishing and categorizing species as commercially fished or not. Evolutionarily isolated species in Extinction risk Conservation priorities the northeast Pacific are more likely to be fished, and, due to their larger sizes and to life history traits Body size such as long lifespan and slow maturation rate, they are also intrinsically more vulnerable to overfishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Study Bycatch? an Introduction to the Theme Section on Fisheries Bycatch
    Vol. 5: 91–102, 2008 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Printed December 2008 doi: 10.3354/esr00175 Endang Species Res Published online December xx, 2008 Contribution to the Theme Section ‘Fisheries bycatch problems and solutions’ OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Why study bycatch? An introduction to the Theme Section on fisheries bycatch Candan U. Soykan1,*, Jeffrey E. Moore2, Ramunas ¯ 5ydelis2, Larry B. Crowder2, Carl Safina3, Rebecca L. Lewison1 1Biology Department, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr., San Diego, California 92182-4614, USA 2Center for Marine Conservation, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University Marine Laboratory, 135 Duke Marine Lab Road, Beaufort,North Carolina 28516, USA 3Blue Ocean Institute, PO Box 250, East Norwich, New York 11732, USA ABSTRACT: Several high-profile examples of fisheries bycatch involving marine megafauna (e.g. dolphins in tuna purse-seines, albatrosses in pelagic longlines, sea turtles in shrimp trawls) have drawn attention to the unintentional capture of non-target species during fishing operations, and have resulted in a dramatic increase in bycatch research over the past 2 decades. Although a number of successful mitigation measures have been developed, the scope of the bycatch problem far exceeds our current capacity to deal with it. Specifically, we lack a comprehensive understanding of bycatch rates across species, fisheries, and ocean basins, and, with few exceptions, we lack data on demographic responses to bycatch or the in situ effectiveness of existing mitigation measures. As an introduction to this theme section of Endangered Species Research ‘Fisheries bycatch: problems and solutions’, we focus on 5 bycatch-related questions that require research attention, building on exam- ples from the current literature and the contributions to this Theme Section.
    [Show full text]
  • Yellowfin Trawling Fish Images 2013 09 16
    Fishes captured aboard the RV Yellowfin in otter trawls: September 2013 Order: Aulopiformes Family: Synodontidae Species: Synodus lucioceps common name: California lizardfish Order: Gadiformes Family: Merlucciidae Species: Merluccius productus common name: Pacific hake Order: Ophidiiformes Family: Ophidiidae Species: Chilara taylori common name: spotted cusk-eel plainfin specklefin Order: Batrachoidiformes Family: Batrachoididae Species: Porichthys notatus & P. myriaster common name: plainfin & specklefin midshipman plainfin specklefin Order: Batrachoidiformes Family: Batrachoididae Species: Porichthys notatus & P. myriaster common name: plainfin & specklefin midshipman plainfin specklefin Order: Batrachoidiformes Family: Batrachoididae Species: Porichthys notatus & P. myriaster common name: plainfin & specklefin midshipman Order: Gasterosteiformes Family: Syngnathidae Species: Syngnathus leptorynchus common name: bay pipefish Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Scorpaenidae Species: Sebastes semicinctus common name: halfbanded rockfish Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Scorpaenidae Species: Sebastes dalli common name: calico rockfish Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Scorpaenidae Species: Sebastes saxicola common name: stripetail rockfish Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Scorpaenidae Species: Sebastes diploproa common name: splitnose rockfish Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Scorpaenidae Species: Sebastes rosenblatti common name: greenblotched rockfish juvenile Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Scorpaenidae Species: Sebastes levis common name: cowcod Order:
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic Halibut of the Gulf of St. Lawrence (Divisions 4RST)
    Fisheries and Oceans Pêches et Océans Canada Canada Science Sciences DFO Science Laurentian Region Stock Status Report A4-02 (2000) 52 3K Québec 50 4S 4R Terre-Neuve Québec 48 4T 3L Nouveau-Brunswick 3Pn 4Vn 3Ps Atlantic Halibut of the Gulf of 46 St. Lawrence (Divisions 4RST) 44 Background The Atlantic halibut of divisions 4RST can be found 4X 4W 4Vs 3O 42 throughout the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence. In the 70 68 66 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 northern Gulf, they are more abundant in the Esquiman, Laurentian and Anticosti channels, at depths of 200 m and over. In the southern Gulf, the highest concentrations are Figure 1. Map of the Gulf of St. Lawrence and found in shallower water (less than 100 m) near the Miscou adjacent regions showing NAFO divisions 4RST. Bank, north of Prince Edward Island, northwest of Cape Breton Island and around the Magdalen Islands. This species grows fast and continuously, at a mean rate of Summary about 7.5–8.5 cm per year (Figure 2). The growth rate for • Since 1995, mean annual landings of males and females is comparable, although female halibut reach a larger maximum size than males. Based on Atlantic halibut have been around 275 t, observations made during scientific trawl surveys twice the mean annual landings for conducted in January and May, it appears that the Gulf 1992–95 (135 t), but comparable to those halibut is able to spawn during those periods. of the late 1980s. They are still well The high landings of Atlantic halibut made during the first below the values of 1000 t and over half of the 20th century indicate that the Gulf stock was regularly recorded during the first half of under very strong fishing pressure at the time.
    [Show full text]