DOCSLIB.ORG

Pandalus Jordani ) Recruitment from Environmental Models Robert W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pandalus Jordani ) Recruitment from Environmental Models Robert W HANNAH: INDex TO ImpROve fOReCASTS Of OCeAN SHRImp CalCOfI Rep., vol. 51, 2010 Use of a pre-recrUit abUndance index to improve forecasts of ocean shrimp (Pandalus jordani ) recrUitment from environmental models ROBert W. HANNAH Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Hatfield Marine Science Center 2040 Se Marine Science Drive Newport, Oregon 97365, U.S.A. Tel.: +1 541 867 0300 ext. 231; Fax: +1 541 867 0311 email: [email protected] ABSTRACT northward to southward surface currents is forced by a I investigated the potential to improve forecasts of similar shift in the predominant coastal winds in early annual loge recruitment to the ocean shrimp (Pandalus spring, and is reflected in a sharp drop in coastal sea level jordani) fishery using a pre-recruit index based on the height (Huyer et al. 1979). An early transition (gener- percentage of age-zero shrimp from fishery samples in ally in March or early April), results in a lower mean the year prior to recruitment. The index was incorpo- April sea level height (fig. 1, Crescent City, California, rated into existing models in which loge age-1 recruit- ASLHt-1), which has been associated with strong age-1 ment is forced by environmental variables related to the recruitment of ocean shrimp in Oregon waters the spring transition in coastal currents (negative correlation following year (Hannah 1993). The mechanisms under- with April sea level height at Crescent City, Califor- lying this association are not well understood. How- nia, ASLHt-1) and the strength of April–July upwelling ever, an early spring transition, with associated coastal winds at 42˚N. latitude (negative correlation, AJUt-1) upwelling, can establish near-surface ocean conditions during the pelagic larval phase. For northern Oregon, that are favorable to larval survival, including reduced the pre-recruit index improved model fit, increasing sea surface temperatures (Rothlisberg and Miller 1983). the coefficient of determination from 0.40 for a model A very late spring transition can result in continued based only on ASLHt-1 to 0.62 for the combined model. northward transport of surface waters, possibly trans- For southern Oregon, the index did not improve the porting larvae to areas where subsequent transport is fit of a model based on ASLHt-1 and AJUt-1. However, unlikely to bring them back to areas off Oregon Austin( the pre-recruit index alone had a higher correlation and Barth 2002). with age-1 recruits than the best environmental model Recently, recruitment success of ocean shrimp has (r2 of 0.43 versus 0.27). Although precision of the final also been shown to be negatively influenced by ano- models was low, both correctly predicted a stronger than molously strong coastal upwelling during the pelagic average 2009 recruitment. larval phase (Hannah in press). Specifically, recruit- ment off southern Oregon was shown to be reduced INTRODUCTION in the years following the very high April–July upwell- The trawl fishery for ocean shrimp Pandalus( jordani) ing values observed at 42˚N. latitude in 1999 and in is the second most valuable crustacean fishery operat- 2001–2003 (fig. 1). The mechanism underlying this rela- ing in California Current waters, following only Dun- tionship is also unknown, however, the excessive off- geness crab (Cancer magister) in the average annual value shore transport of larvae is a reasonable hypothesis that of landings (The Research Group 2006). The ocean has been proposed (Parrish et al. 1981; Hannah in press). shrimp fishery is considered a “recruit fishery,” in that This mechanism is also supported by data showing that annual catches are strongly influenced by the strength large concentrations of ocean shrimp are typically found of the year class entering the fishery that year (Hannah north of the zone of maximum upwelling, which is cen- and Jones 1991). Ocean shrimp are very short-lived, tered off California (fig. 2). In 1999 and in 2001–2003 recruit to the fishery at age one and contribute to fish- the upwelling index at 42˚N. latitude reached levels ery landings for just 3 years (Dahlstrom 1973; Hannah higher than had been observed previously in the com- and Jones 1991). Recruitment of ocean shrimp off Ore- plete available time series, starting in 1946. It’s possible gon has been linked to environmental variation in the that these recent years with very strong spring upwell- California Current ecosystem, specifically to the tim- ing represent normal extremes in local climate vari- ing of the spring transition in coastal currents (Huyer ability, however these observations are also consistent et al. 1979) that, on average, takes place shortly after with a hypothesis that the zone of maximum upwelling ocean shrimp release their pelagic larvae (Dahlstrom may have shifted or simply expanded northwards, which 1973; Hannah 1993). The transition from predominantly in turn is consistent with predictions of many climate 119 HANNAH: INDex TO ImpROve fOReCASTS Of OCeAN SHRImp CalCOfI Rep., vol. 51, 2010 Fig. 1 230 200 Apr-July upwelling 42° N. lat. 170 140 110 80 50 20 Cubic m per 100 m of coastline of m 100 per Cubic m 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 A 2.40 2.35 April SLH Crescent City (m) t City t 2.30 2.25 2.20 resc (m) 2.15 2.10 LHa 2.05 lS 2.00C t enC , Apri 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Figure 1. Time series of selected environmental variables, 1946–2008. models under conditions of global warming (Yin 2005; sidered too small to be completely retained by the mesh Seidel et al. 2008; Hannah in press). Several researchers sizes typically used in ocean shrimp trawls (Rothlisberg have suggested that global warming may have begun 1975; Lo 1978; Jones et al. 1996). However, no research to intensify coastal upwelling off the U.S. west coast to try and relate the relative abundance of age-0 ocean (Bakun 1990; Schwing and Mendelssohn 1997) and to shrimp in fall fishery samples to age-1 recruitment the alter its seasonal pattern (Snyder et al. 2003), with large following year has been conducted since the devel- potential effects on the California Current ecosystem opment of the recruit-environment models discussed (Barth et al. 2007). above. The objective of this study was to develop a sim- The pelagic larval phase for ocean shrimp lasts ple index of age-0 shrimp abundance from fall fishery from larval release in March and April through about samples and determine if it could be used to improve August. early stage shrimp larvae are found in near- the forecasting ability of existing recruit- environment surface waters (<150 m, Rothlisberg 1975) and occupy models for age-1 ocean shrimp. progressively deeper portions of the water column as It should be noted that the best fitting recruit- they develop, however juveniles also migrate up into environment models for ocean shrimp have relatively near-surface waters at night (Dahlstrom 1973; Roth- low predictive power. This is not unexpected, as most lisberg 1975). By September and October, small age-0 recruit-environment relationships have been shown to ocean shrimp begin showing up in small numbers in break down over time (Myers 1998). The limitations of commercial trawl catches. The fishery is closed each recruit-environment models are not surprising because year from November through March to protect gravid the establishment of year class success is certainly a females, so additional fishery-dependent information very complex process. It is unlikely to be fully cap- on the relative abundance of the incoming year class is tured in simple linear or non-linear recruit-environment unavailable until the fishery opens again in April. No models. For marine species with pelagic larvae, recruit- fishery- independent surveys are conducted for ocean ment processes involve complex interactions between shrimp. The relative abundance of age-0 ocean shrimp factors modulating larval mortality and transport in the in fall fishery samples has long been considered a ques- open ocean, including interactions between life history, tionable index of age-1 recruitment the following year predation and larval behavior as well as variation in (although see comments in Geibel and Heimann 1976). environmental conditions. The most recent research on These young shrimp have not fully recruited to the recruit-environment relationships with ocean shrimp near-bottom waters fished by trawls and have been con- is a good example of this complexity. Prior to 1999, 120 HANNAH: INDex TO ImpROve fOReCASTS Of OCeAN SHRImp CalCOfI Rep., vol. 51, 2010 Fig. 2 April-July mean monthly upwelling (m3/s/100m of coastline) 1946-1998 -25 75 175 275 45 45 40 40 Degrees N. latitude DegreesN. 35 35 Ocean shrimp catch (t) April-July upwelling 30 30 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Average ocean shrimp catch (t, 1980-92) Figure 2. Comparison of latitudinal distribution of ocean shrimp catches (1980–92 average, t) and April–July upwelling (1946–98 average) for Oregon and California waters. ASLHt-1 predicted age-1 recruitment of ocean shrimp offset of 0.001 and 0.0005 for northern and southern in Oregon waters fairly well. When spring upwelling Oregon waters, respectively. The Box-Cox transforma- increased to truly record levels in 1999 and 2001-2003 tion employs a log-likelihood function to find a power off southern Oregon, this simple relationship broke transformation that best normalizes the data (Sokal and down for southern Oregon waters, probably because a Rolf 1981). different process was limiting local recruitment success Age-1 recruitment of ocean shrimp was indexed in those years. A primary advantage of using pre-recruit using a simple virtual population estimate (VPe, a sum indices to predict recruitment is that they may be able of catch-at-age, also called “utilized stock,” Ricker, to indicate the final result of all of these complex pro- 1975) calculated from fishery-dependent data, after cesses that influence year class success.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seafood Watch Seafood Report: Crabs Blue Crab
    Seafood Watch Seafood Report: Crabs Volume I Blue Crab Callinectes sapidus Writer/Editor:AliceCascorbi Fisheries Research Analyst Monterey Bay Aquarium Additional Research: Heather Blough Audubon Living Oceans Program Final 14 February 2004 Seafood Watch® Blue Crab Report February 14, 2004 About Seafood Watch® and the Seafood Reports Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch® defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long- term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch® makes its science-based recommendations available to the public in the form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from the Internet (seafoodwatch.org) or obtained from the Seafood Watch® program by emailing [email protected]. The program’s goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservation issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans. Each sustainability recommendation on the regional pocket guides is supported by a Seafood Report. Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluates this information against the program’s conservation ethic to arrive at a recommendation of “Best Choices”, “Good Alternatives” or “Avoid.” The detailed evaluation methodology is available upon request. In producing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch® seeks out research published in academic, peer-reviewed journals whenever possible. Other sources of information include government technical publications, fishery management plans and supporting documents, and other scientific reviews of ecological sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • Shrimp: Oceana Reveals Misrepresentation of America's
    Shrimp: Oceana Reveals Misrepresentation of America’s Favorite Seafood October 2014 Authors: Kimberly Warner, Ph.D., Rachel Golden, Beth Lowell, Carlos Disla, Jacqueline Savitz and Michael Hirshfield, Ph.D. Executive Summary With shrimp, it is almost impossible to know what you are getting. Shrimp is the most commonly consumed seafood in the United States and the most highly traded seafood in the world. However, this high demand has led to many environmental and human rights abuses in the fishing, farming and processing of shrimp. Despite the popularity of shrimp, as well as the associated sustainability, human rights and environmental concerns, U.S. consumers are routinely given little information about the shrimp they purchase, making it nearly impossible to find and follow sound sustainability recommendations. Oceana’s previous studies have shown that species substitution, a form of seafood fraud, is common in the U.S. Last year, Oceana found that one-third of the more than 1,200 fish samples it tested nationwide were mislabeled, according to Food and Drug Administration guidelines. We have now turned our attention to shrimp, American’s most popular seafood, to investigate mislabeling as well as the information that consumers are given about the products they purchase. Consumers may wish to choose their shrimp more carefully for many important social and ecological reasons. For instance, consumers may wish to avoid shrimp caught in fisheries that are not responsibly managed, that have high rates of waste or discards, or that are associated with human rights abuses. At the same time, consumers may wish to avoid farmed shrimp due to health and environmental impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • 14862 Federal Register / Vol
    14862 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2001 / Rules and Regulations Authority: Section 1848 of the Social DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE environmental consequences of the gray Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–4). whale harvest. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance National Oceanic and Atmospheric NOAA completed a draft EA on Program No. 93.774, Medicare— Administration January 12, 2001 and solicited public Supplementary Medical Insurance Program) comments. NMFS is currently preparing Dated: March 8, 2001. 50 CFR Part 230 a final EA. NOAA set the 2000 quota at Brian P. Burns, [Docket No. 001120325-1053-02, I.D. zero (65 FR 75186) and is now setting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information 122800B] the 2001 quota at zero pending Resources Management. completion of the NEPA analysis. RIN 0648-AO77 [FR Doc. 01–6310 Filed 3–13–01; 8:45 am] Dated: March 5, 2001. BILLING CODE 4120–01–P Whaling Provisions: Aboriginal William T. Hogarth, Subsistence Whaling Quotas Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries [FR Doc. 01–6350 Filed 3–13–01; 8:45 am] FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and BILLING CODE 3510–22–S COMMISSION Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. 47 CFR Part 73 ACTION: Aboriginal subsistence whaling DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE quota. [DA 01–333; MM Docket No. 98–112, RM– National Oceanic and Atmospheric 9027, RM–9268, RM–9384] SUMMARY: NMFS announces the 2001 Administration aboriginal subsistence whaling quota for Radio Broadcasting Services; gray whales. For 2001, the quota is zero 50 CFR Part 622 Anniston and Ashland, AL, and gray whales landed, but may be revised College Park, GA later in the year.
    [Show full text]
  • Pandalus Jordani Range: Pink Shrimp Are Known to Inhabit Southeast
    Fishery-at-a-Glance: Pink (Ocean) Shrimp Scientific Name: Pandalus jordani Range: Pink Shrimp are known to inhabit Southeast Alaska to San Diego, California, and most abundant off the coast of Oregon. Habitat: Pink Shrimp dwell in deep waters,150 to 1,200 feet (45.7 to 365.8 meters), aggregating near the bottom during the day in well-defined areas of muddy habitat called beds and ascending into the water column at night to feed. Size (length and weight): Pink Shrimp are fast-growing. Individual growth rates vary by sex, location, year class, season, and age. Mean carapace length for 1-, 2-, and 3-year- old shrimp ranges from 0.5 to 0.7 inches (13 to 17 millimeters), 0.7 to 1.0 inches (18 to 25 millimeters), and 1.0 to 1.1 inches (25 to 29 millimeters), respectively. Life span: Pink Shrimp are short-lived at approximately 5 years. In California, few shrimp survive beyond the fourth year. Reproduction: Pink Shrimp are protandric hermaphrodites, changing sex from males to females after approximately the first year and a half. Mating occurs during September to October. Prey: Pink Shrimp feed on zooplankton, including copepods and krill. Stomach contents have also included diatoms, sponges, polychaetes, amphipods, and isopods. Predators: Many commercially important fish species, including Pacific Hake (Merluccius productus), Arrowtooth Flounder (Atheresthes stomia), Sablefish (Anoploploma fimbria), Petrale Sole (Eopsetta jordani), Spiny Dogfish (Squalus acanthias), and several species of rockfish and skates prey on Pink Shrimp. Fishery: There is only a commercial fishery for Pink Shrimp. Point Conception divides the northern and southern management regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Forage Fish Management Plan
    Oregon Forage Fish Management Plan November 19, 2016 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Marine Resources Program 2040 SE Marine Science Drive Newport, OR 97365 (541) 867-4741 http://www.dfw.state.or.us/MRP/ Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Federal action to protect Forage Fish (2016)............................................................................................ 7 The Oregon Marine Fisheries Management Plan Framework .................................................................. 7 Relationship to Other State Policies ......................................................................................................... 7 Public Process Developing this Plan .......................................................................................................... 8 How this Document is Organized .............................................................................................................. 8 A. Resource Analysis ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of Atlantic Cod – a Case Study
    The Decline of Atlantic Cod – A Case Study Author contact information Wynn W. Cudmore, Ph.D., Principal Investigator Northwest Center for Sustainable Resources Chemeketa Community College P.O. Box 14007 Salem, OR 97309 E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 503-399-6514 Published 2009 DUE # 0757239 1 NCSR curriculum modules are designed as comprehensive instructions for students and supporting materials for faculty. The student instructions are designed to facilitate adaptation in a variety of settings. In addition to the instructional materials for students, the modules contain separate supporting information in the "Notes to Instructors" section, and when appropriate, PowerPoint slides. The modules also contain other sections which contain additional supporting information such as assessment strategies and suggested resources. The PowerPoint slides associated with this module are the property of the Northwest Center for Sustainable Resources (NCSR). Those containing text may be reproduced and used for any educational purpose. Slides with images may be reproduced and used without prior approval of NCSR only for educational purposes associated with this module. Prior approval must be obtained from NCSR for any other use of these images. Permission requests should be made to [email protected]. Acknowledgements We thank Bill Hastie of Northwest Aquatic and Marine Educators (NAME), and Richard O’Hara of Chemeketa Community College for their thoughtful reviews. Their comments and suggestions greatly improved the quality of this module. We thank NCSR administrative assistant, Liz Traver, for the review, graphic design and layout of this module. 2 Table of Contents NCSR Marine Fisheries Series ....................................................................................................... 4 The Decline of Atlantic Cod – A Case Study ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Oregon Fisheries
    A Guide to Oregon Fisheries A short guide to some of the commonly caught commercial seafood species in Oregon. by Jamie Doyle and Amanda J. Gladics Last updated 5/13/2020 with 2019 landings data from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Habitat & Life History • Ocean fish that swim in large schools • Migrate across the ocean • Top predators • Warm blooded • Broadcast spawners Albacore Tuna • Live 11 to 12 years Gear & Fishing • Trolling (pulling hooks and lines Management through the water) Inter-American Tropical • Jigs Tuna Commission • Individually landed and bled Season Pounds & Value 2019 ~July-Sept depending on when • Oregon: 6,566,851lbs the tuna arrive off Oregon worth $10,846,389 Fun Facts • Swim in schools up to 19 miles wide • Caught young, so have low levels of mercury Habitat & Life History • A “flat fish” that lives near on the bottom of the ocean • Oregon is the edge of their range, most are in British Columbia and Alaska Pacific Halibut Gear & Fishing • Long-lines Season Management June-July (very short- 1 or 2, • International Pacific Halibut 1-day openers) Commission • 32-in minmum size to protect Fun Facts juvenile halibut • The left eye switches to the right side while the fish grows! Only 1 in 20,000 Pounds & Value 2019 are lefties • Oregon: 252,096lbs worth $ 1,249,953 Habitat & Life History • After a planktonic larval stage, crab settle to the bottom • They are scavengers • They molt to grow larger, and can molt up to 6 times a year when young • Live up to 10 years, harvested at 4 years Dungeness Crab Gear &Fishing • Crab pots Management Season • 3 S’s: • Dec 1 – Aug 14, bulk of the • Size – Their carapace must be over 6.25” landings are Dec-Feb • Sex – Only males can be kept, allowing females to carry eggs and reproduce Fun Facts • Season – December through August, • A female crab can carry up to 2.5 with most caught in the first 8 weeks million eggs! • Limited entry (set number of permits) • Oregon has a “State Crustacean” It’s and pot limits up to 500 pots the Dungeness Crab.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Lane County, Oregon
    Overview Lane County, Oregon Historical and Geographic Information Lane County was established in 1851 and is geographically situated on the west side of Oregon, about midway down the state’s coastline. It was named for Gen. Joseph Lane, a rugged frontier hero who was Oregon's first territorial governor. Pioneers traveling the Oregon Trail in the late 1840’s came to Lane County mainly to farm. The county's first district court met under a large oak tree until a clerk's office could be built in 1852. A few years later, the first courthouse opened in what is now downtown Eugene. With the building of the railroads, the market for timber opened in the 1880’s. The county encompasses 4,722 square miles and, in many ways, typifies Oregon. The county’s lands are geographically a microcosm of the state – ranging from rugged glaciated mountains in the east, through a broad valley spreading across the Willamette River mid- county, to a beautiful and rugged coastline along the western edge. It is one of two Oregon counties that extend from the Pacific Ocean to the Cascades. Special points of interest include twenty historic covered bridges, Bohemia Mines, coastal sand dunes, Darlingtonia Botanical Wayside, numerous reservoirs, Heceta Head Lighthouse, Hendricks Park Rhododendron Garden, hot springs, Hult Center for the Performing Arts, Lane ESD Planetarium, McKenzie River, McKenzie Pass, Mt. Pisgah Arboretum, Old Town Florence, Pac-12 sports events, Proxy Falls, sea lion caves, vineyards and wineries, Waldo Lake, Washburne State Park tide pools, and Willamette Pass ski area. Lane County has 12 incorporated cities which include Coburg, Cottage Grove, Creswell, Dunes City, Eugene, Florence, Junction City, Lowell, Oakridge, Springfield, Veneta, and Westfir.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Lane County, Oregon
    Overview Lane County, Oregon Historical and Geographic Information Lane County was established in 1851 and is geographically situated on the west side of Oregon, about midway down the state’s coastline. It was named for Gen. Joseph Lane, a rugged frontier hero who was Oregon's first territorial governor. Pioneers traveling the Oregon Trail in the late 1840’s came to Lane County mainly to farm. The county's first district court met under a large oak tree until a clerk's office could be built in 1852. A few years later, the first courthouse opened in what is now downtown Eugene. With the building of the railroads, the market for timber opened in the 1880’s. The county encompasses 4,722 square miles and, in many ways, typifies Oregon. The county’s lands are geographically a microcosm of the state – ranging from rugged glaciated mountains in the east, through a broad valley spreading across the Willamette River mid- county, to a beautiful and rugged coastline along the western edge. It is one of two Oregon counties that extend from the Pacific Ocean to the Cascades. Special points of interest include twenty historic covered bridges, Bohemia Mines, coastal sand dunes, Darlingtonia Botanical Wayside, numerous reservoirs, Heceta Head Lighthouse, Hendricks Park Rhododendron Garden, hot springs, Hult Center for the Performing Arts, Lane ESD Planetarium, McKenzie River, McKenzie Pass, Mt. Pisgah Arboretum, Old Town Florence, Pac-12 sports events, Proxy Falls, sea lion caves, vineyards and wineries, Waldo Lake, Washburne State Park tide pools, and Willamette Pass ski area. Lane County has 12 incorporated cities which include Coburg, Cottage Grove, Creswell, Dunes City, Eugene, Florence, Junction City, Lowell, Oakridge, Springfield, Veneta, and Westfir.
    [Show full text]
  • Generic Amendment for Addressing Essential Fish Habitat Requirements in the Following Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf of Mexico
    Generic Amendment for Addressing Essential Fish Habitat Requirements in the following Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf of Mexico: < Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico, United States Waters < Red Drum Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico < Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico < Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources (Mackerels) in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic < Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico < Spiny Lobster in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic < Coral and Coral Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico (Includes Environmental Assessment) Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council 3018 U.S. Highway 301 North, Suite 1000 Tampa, Florida 33619-2266 813-228-2815 October 1998 This is a publication of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Award No. NA87FC0003. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE ................................................................................................................... 1 ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................... 10 CONVERSION CHART ....................................................................................... 12 GLOSSARY .......................................................................................................... 13 1.0 PREFACE ..................................................................................................... 20 1.1 List of Preparers ........................................................................... 20 1.2 List of Persons and Agencies
    [Show full text]
  • September 2, 2002 Volume 26, No. 9 SHRIMP OPTIONS the Shrimp
    COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE Mecairie,Louisiana70003 (504)838-I170 Fax:(504)838. I 175 Website: www.a_ccr.lsu.edu Agricultureandi_oresrry Community Leadership i_ 0 6640 REcoivenrsoimdeicDriDvee,velopmSuitee20nt0 Family and Consumer Sciences ___I EXTENSION PRO RAMS 4-H Youth Development LOUISIANA N_=uralResources b _j_/_j___ _ Environmental Sciences L__._ September 2, 2002 Volume 26, No. 9 SHRIMP OPTIONS The shrimp industry of the Gulf and South Atlantic states is easily the region's most valuable commercial fishery, but it is financially stressed. While some years are better than others, the long-term trend in prices has been downward. Texas A & M Uni- versity Extension Service economists and biologists have studied the current conditions facing the shrimp industry and reviewed suggestions on how the industry can compete in the market with shrimp imports. The scientists focused their study on the Texas offshore shrimp industry, as standardized data was available for this fishery for a longer period of time. This fleet catches primarily brown shrimp. Catches and prices were reviewed over a 37 year pe- riod. Biologically, the shrimp stocks are healthy, but since local weather patterns, such as rainfall and temperature, play such a large role in the size of each year's crop, yearly harvests could be off of the long-term average by a large percentage. Prices on the other hand were not. The graph on the left shows what has happened to the price per pound received by "_ shrimpers. The figures are ad- ._ justed (to 1982 dollars) to re- move the effects of inflation. ,_.® Looking at the big picture is even more dismal.
    [Show full text]
  • Wasted Catch: Unsolved Problems in U.S. Fisheries
    © Brian Skerry WASTED CATCH: UNSOLVED PROBLEMS IN U.S. FISHERIES Authors: Amanda Keledjian, Gib Brogan, Beth Lowell, Jon Warrenchuk, Ben Enticknap, Geoff Shester, Michael Hirshfield and Dominique Cano-Stocco CORRECTION: This report referenced a bycatch rate of 40% as determined by Davies et al. 2009, however that calculation used a broader definition of bycatch than is standard. According to bycatch as defined in this report and elsewhere, the most recent analyses show a rate of approximately 10% (Zeller et al. 2017; FAO 2018). © Brian Skerry ACCORDING TO SOME ESTIMATES, GLOBAL BYCATCH MAY AMOUNT TO 40 PERCENT OF THE WORLD’S CATCH, TOTALING 63 BILLION POUNDS PER YEAR CORRECTION: This report referenced a bycatch rate of 40% as determined by Davies et al. 2009, however that calculation used a broader definition of bycatch than is standard. According to bycatch as defined in this report and elsewhere, the most recent analyses show a rate of approximately 10% (Zeller et al. 2017; FAO 2018). CONTENTS 05 Executive Summary 06 Quick Facts 06 What Is Bycatch? 08 Bycatch Is An Undocumented Problem 10 Bycatch Occurs Every Day In The U.S. 15 Notable Progress, But No Solution 26 Nine Dirty Fisheries 37 National Policies To Minimize Bycatch 39 Recommendations 39 Conclusion 40 Oceana Reducing Bycatch: A Timeline 42 References ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank Jennifer Hueting and In-House Creative for graphic design and the following individuals for their contributions during the development and review of this report: Eric Bilsky, Dustin Cranor, Mike LeVine, Susan Murray, Jackie Savitz, Amelia Vorpahl, Sara Young and Beckie Zisser.
    [Show full text]