DOCSLIB.ORG

Tunas and Billfishes in the Eastern Pacific Ocean in 2004

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tunas and Billfishes in the Eastern Pacific Ocean in 2004 0 WCPFC–SC1 FR WP–3 1st Meeting of the Scientific Committee of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission WCPFC–SC1 Noumea, New Caledonia 8–19 August 2005 Tunas and billfishes in the Eastern Pacific Ocean in 2004 D–Y Moon, Soon-Song Kim and J-R Koh IATTC. Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. La Jolla, California, USA. August 2005 INTER-AMERICAN TROPICAL TUNA COMMISSION COMISIÓN INTERAMERICANA DEL ATÚN TROPICAL DRAFT 25-JUL-05; NOT TO BE CITED FISHERY STATUS REPORT 3 TUNAS AND BILLFISHES IN THE EASTERN PACIFIC OCEAN IN 2004 A. The fishery for tunas and billfishes in the eastern Pacific Ocean........................................... 1 B. Yellowfin tuna...................................................................................................................... 50 C. Skipjack tuna......................................................................................................................... 59 D. Bigeye tuna........................................................................................................................... 63 E. Pacific bluefin tuna ............................................................................................................... 73 F. Albacore tuna........................................................................................................................ 75 G. Swordfish .............................................................................................................................. 78 H. Blue marlin............................................................................................................................ 80 I. Striped marlin........................................................................................................................ 82 J. Ecosystem considerations..................................................................................................... 84 INTRODUCTION This report provides a summary of the fishery for tunas in the eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO), an assessment of the stocks of tunas and billfishes that are exploited in the fishery, and an evaluation of the pelagic ecosystem in the EPO. The report is based on data available to the IATTC staff in March 2005. In Section E (Pacific bluefin tuna), and the three sections on billfishes (G, H, I), only the catch information and/or figures have been updated from IATTC Fishery Status Report 2, published in 2004. All weights of catches and discards are in metric tons (t). The following abbreviations are used: Species: Fishing gears: ALB Albacore tuna (Thunnus alalunga) FX Unknown BET Bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) HAR Harpoon BIL Unidentified billfishes GO Gillnet BKJ Black skipjack (Euthynnus lineatus) LL Longline BLM Black marlin (Makaira indica) LP Pole-and-line BUM Blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) LT Troll BZX Bonito (Sarda spp.) PS Purse seine CGX Carangids RO Recreational DOX Dorados TX Trawl MLS Striped marlin (Tetrapturus audax) MZZ Unidentified marine fishes PBF Pacific bluefin tuna (Thunnus orientalis) SFA Indo-Pacific sailfish (Istiophorus platypterus) SKJ Skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) SKX Unidentified elasmobranchs SSP Shortbill spearfish (Tetrapturus angustirostris) SWO Swordfish (Xiphias gladius) TUN Unidentified tunas YFT Yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) DRAFT 25-JUL-05; not to be cited Flags: Set types: BLZ Belize DEL Dolphin BOL Bolivia NOA Unassociated school CAN Canada OBJ Floating object CHN People’s Republic of China FLT: Flotsam COL Colombia FAD: Fish-aggregating device CRI Costa Rica Ocean areas: ECU Ecuador ESP Spain EPO Eastern Pacific Ocean GTM Guatemala WCPO Western and Central Pacific Ocean HND Honduras Miscellaneous: JPN Japan AMSY Average maximum sustainable yield KOR Republic of Korea OTR Other MEX Mexico UNK Unknown NIC Nicaragua PAN Panama PER Peru PYF French Polynesia SLV El Salvador TWN Chinese Taipei USA United States of America VEN Venezuela VUT Vanuatu DRAFT 25-JUL-05; not to be cited DRAFT 25-JUL-05; not to be cited A. THE FISHERY FOR TUNAS AND BILLFISHES IN THE EASTERN PACIFIC OCEAN 1. Catches and landings of tunas, billfishes, and associated species........................................................1 1.1. Catches by species ...........................................................................................................................2 1.2. Distribution of catches of tunas .......................................................................................................5 1.3. Size compositions of the catches of tunas........................................................................................5 1.4. Catches of scombrids, by flag and gear ...........................................................................................7 1.5. Landings by purse-seine and pole-and-line vessels .........................................................................7 1.6. Purse-seine catches per cubic meter of well volume .......................................................................7 2. Effort ....................................................................................................................................................8 2.1. Purse seine.......................................................................................................................................8 2.2. Longline...........................................................................................................................................8 3. The fleet...............................................................................................................................................8 3.1. The purse-seine and pole-and-line fleet...........................................................................................8 3.2. Other fleets of the EPO..................................................................................................................10 This section summarizes the fisheries for species covered by the IATTC Convention (tunas and other fish caught by tuna-fishing vessels) in the eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO). The most important of these are the scombrids (Family Scombridae), which include tunas, bonitos and mackerels. The principal species of tunas caught are yellowfin, skipjack, and bigeye, with lesser catches of Pacific bluefin and albacore tunas; other scombrids, such as black skipjack, bonito, wahoo, and frigate and bullet tunas, are also caught. This report also covers other species caught by tuna-fishing vessels in the EPO: swordfish and billfishes (marlins and sailfish) carangids, (yellowtail, rainbow runner, jack mackerel, and other mackerels), dorado, elasmobranchs (sharks, rays, and skates), and other marine fishes. Most of the catches are made by the purse-seine and longline fleets; the pole-and-line fleet and various artisanal and recreational fisheries account for a small percentage of the total catches. The most complete data are available for the purse-seine and pole-and-line fisheries (surface fisheries); data for the longline, artisanal and recreational fisheries are less complete. The IATTC Regional Vessel Register contains details of vessels authorized to fish for tunas in the EPO. The IATTC has detailed records of most of purse-seine or pole-and-line vessels that fish for yellowfin, skipjack, bigeye, and/or Pacific bluefin tuna in the EPO. The Register is incomplete for small vessels, and for some fleets contains records for large (>24 m) longline vessels that fish in other areas or in any ocean. Purse-seine vessels are grouped into six size classes, by carrying capacity in cubic meters (m3) of well volume, as follows: Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 Volume (m3) <53 53-106 107-212 213-319 320-425 >425 The data in this report are derived from several sources, including vessel logbooks, observer data, unloading records, export and import records, samples of landings, reports from governments and other entities, and published reports. In the tables, 0: effort or catch < 1t; blank: no data collected; *: data missing or not available. 1. CATCHES AND LANDINGS OF TUNAS, BILLFISHES, AND ASSOCIATED SPECIES Estimates of the catches and landings of tunas, mainly yellowfin, skipjack, bigeye, and Pacific bluefin, by the purse-seine and pole-and-line fleet of the EPO come from several sources, including logbooks kept by the fishermen, data recorded by observers aboard the vessels, unloading data provided by canneries and other processors, export and import records, and estimates derived from the species composition sampling program. Estimating the total catch for a fishery is difficult, for various reasons. Some fish are discarded at sea, and data for some gear types are often incomplete. Data for fish discarded at sea by Class-6 purse- Fishery Status Report 3 1 DRAFT 25-JUL-05; not to be cited seine vessels have been collected by observers since 1993. This information allows for better estimation of the total amounts of fish caught by the purse-seine fleet. Estimates of the total amount of the catch that is landed (hereafter referred to as retained catch) are based principally on data from unloadings. Beginning in this report, the unloading data for purse-seine and pole-and-line vessels have been adjusted, based on the species composition estimates for yellowfin, skipjack, and bigeye tunas. The species composition sampling program, described in Section 1.3.1, began in 2000, so the catch data for 2000- 2004 are adjusted based on estimates obtained for each year, by flag. The catch data for the previous years were adjusted by applying the average
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (Fads) Deploying, Soaking and Setting – When Is a FAD ‘Fishing’?
    THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MARINE The International Journal of AND COASTAL Marine and Coastal Law 34 (2019) 731–754 LAW brill.com/estu Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) Deploying, Soaking and Setting – When is a FAD ‘Fishing’? Quentin Hanich,a Ruth Davis,a Glen Holmes,b Elizabeth-Rose Amidjogbea and Brooke Campbella a Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security (ANCORS), University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia b GH Consulting Services, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract This article describes the proliferation of drifting fish aggregating devices (FADs) and analyses subsequent legal questions that arise for fisheries and marine litter manage- ment over who is responsible for FADs during their drifting stage. This follows recent concerns about unlicensed FADs drifting through closed areas. This article analyses a case study of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) in order to determine State obligations to manage drifting FADs. Analysis concludes that a drifting FAD in the WCPFC Area is ‘fishing’ from deployment to recovery, thereby creat- ing obligations to monitor, control and report drifting FADs, consistent with broader obligations for coastal and flag States. The article recommends strengthening regional management in three ways: implement regional drifting FAD monitoring systems; con- trol deployment of drifting FADs so as to promote recovery and minimize lost gear;
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Number of Moored Fishing Aggregating Devices Through Aerial Surveys: a Case Study from Guadeloupe
    1 Fisheries Research Achimer January 2017, Volume 185 Pages 73-82 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2016.10.003 http://archimer.ifremer.fr http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00355/46605/ © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Assessing the number of moored fishing aggregating devices through aerial surveys: A case study from Guadeloupe Guyader Olivier1, *, Bauer Robert 2, Reynal Lionel 3 1 Ifremer, Univ Brest, CNRS, UMR 6308, AMURE, Unité d’Economie Maritime, IUEM, F-29280 Plouzane, France 2 Ifremer, UMR Marbec, Avenue Jean Monnet, CS 30171, 34203 Sète Cedex, France 3 Ifremer, Unité Biodiversité et Environnement, Département Ressources Biologiques et Environnement (RBE), Délégation de Martinique 79 Route de Pointe-Fort, 97231 Le Robert, Martinique * Corresponding author : Olivier Guyader, email address : [email protected] Abstract : Moored fish aggregating devices (MFADs) are increasingly being used in small-scale tropical fisheries to access pelagic fish species that are otherwise difficult to harvest in large numbers. Little attention has yet been paid to monitoring MFADs in coastal areas, however. This is most likely due to the small-scale nature of most fisheries that utilize them and the presumed lower impact of those fisheries on fish stocks and their ecosystems. In this paper, we examined the abundance and density of MFADs around Guadeloupe, using aerial line transect surveys. Estimated MFAD densities were found to be high compared with previously reported densities in this area, especially within the 22–45 km range offshore. We examine and discuss possible reasons for these high densities. The main drivers appear to be the target species dolphinfish (Coryphaena hippurus) and yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) and related fishing behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • Victorian Fish Aggregation Devices
    Photos courtesy of NSW Fisheries Victorian Fish Aggregation Devices Feasibility Assessment and Concept Design Recreational Fishing Grants Program Research Report Victorian Fish Aggregation Devices Feasibility Assessment and Concept Design Project number: RFGP/11/12/13 March 2013 Recreational Fishing Grants Program Research Report If you would like to receive this information/publication in an accessible format (such as large print or audio) please call the Customer Service Centre on 136 186, TTY 1800 122 969, or email [email protected]. Published by the Department of Primary Industries Fisheries Victoria, March 2013 © The State of Victoria 2013. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Preferred way to cite this publication: Green C. P. Victorian Fish Aggregation Devices - Feasibility Assessment and Concept Design. Recreational Fishing Grant Program – Research Report. Department of Primary Industries, Victoria ISBN 978-1-74326-414-0 (print) 978-1-74326-415-7 (online) Copies are available from the website: www.dpi.vic.gov.au/fishing Authorised by the Department of Primary Industries 1 Spring Street, Melbourne 3000. Author Attribution: Please contact Dr Corey Green (03) 5258 0111 for information on this project. Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Video Monitoring to Quantify Spatial and Temporal Patterns in Fishing Activity Across Sectors at Moored Fish Aggregating Devices Off Puerto Rico
    SCIENTIA MARINA 82(2) June 2018, 107-117, Barcelona (Spain) ISSN-L: 0214-8358 https://doi.org/10.3989/scimar.04730.09A Use of video monitoring to quantify spatial and temporal patterns in fishing activity across sectors at moored fish aggregating devices off Puerto Rico Wessley Merten 1, Roberto Rivera 2, Richard Appeldoorn 3, Kelvin Serrano 4, Omar Collazo 4, Nilda Jimenez 4 1 Collaborative FAD Research Programme, Beyond Our Shores, Inc., PO Box 662, Rockville, MD 20848, USA. (WM) (Corresponding author) E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8746-0058 2 College of Business, University of Puerto Rico Mayagüez, PO Box 9000, Mayagüez, PR 00681, USA. (RR) E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2890-6966 3 Department of Marine Sciences, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez, PO Box 9000, Mayagüez, PR 00681, USA. (RA) E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2179-7496 4 Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, Fish and Wildlife Bureau, Marine Ecology Division, PO Box 366147, SJ, PR 00926, USA. (KS) E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5963-193X (OC) E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2478-7285 (NJ) E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7515-8951 Summary: A key challenge in small-scale fisheries that use moored fish aggregating devices (mFADs) is the ability to accurately quantify multi-sector fishing activity through fishery-independent methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Aggregating Devices (Fads) Prathibha Rohit Principal Scientist, Pelagic Fisheries Division CMFRI Research Centre, Mangalore P.B
    Fish aggregating devices (FADs) Prathibha Rohit Principal Scientist, Pelagic Fisheries Division CMFRI Research Centre, Mangalore P.B. 244, Mangalore, Karnataka-575 001 Fish aggregating devices, more commonly called FADs, are anchored or drifting objects that are placed in the ocean to attract fish. They may be a permanent, semi-permanent or temporary structure or device made from any material and used to lure fish. They have been used for thousands of years in various forms. The earliest surface/ midwater FADs were elements from nature such as driftwood and trees. Fishermen from Indonesia and Philippines began building floating rafts of bamboo and other materials to attract fish as early as 1900. Now surface and midwater artificial FADs are systematically used in a large number of countries. Present practices vary considerably, sometimes involving advanced technology. Traditional FADs, based on long-term fishing experience, are made on-the-spot with local materials and used in shallow coastal waters (depth 50-200 m) by small-scale fishers to catch small pelagic fish and bait, e.g. payaos (Philippines), unjang (Malaysia), rumpon (Indonesia). Modern FADs, the result of imported technology and materials, can be anchored to over 3000 m. Drifting FADs are not tethered to the bottom and can be natural objects such as logs or man-made. Certain models have large surface dimensions. Moored FADs occupy a fixed location and attach to the sea bottom using a weight such as a concrete block. A rope made of floating synthetics such as polypropylene attaches to the mooring and in turn attaches to a buoy. The buoy can float at the surface (lasting 3–4 years) or lie subsurface (mid water FAD) to avoid detection and surface hazards such as weather and ship traffic.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Aggregating Devices Drift Like Oceanographic Drifters in the Near-Surface Currents of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans
    Fish aggregating devices drift like oceanographic drifters in the near-surface currents of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans T. Imzilena, E. Chassotb, J. Bardec, H. Demarcqa, A. Maufroya,d, L. Roa-Pascualia, J-F. Ternona, C. Lette,∗ aMARBEC, IRD, Ifremer, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, S`ete,France bIRD, Seychelles Fishing Authority, PO BOX 449, Victoria, Seychelles cInstitut de Recherche pour le D´eveloppement (IRD), Indian Ocean Commission, Eb`ene,´ Mauritius dORTHONGEL, 11 bis rue des sardiniers, 29 900 Concarneau, France eIRD, Sorbonne Universit´e,UMMISCO, F-93143, Bondy, France Abstract Knowledge of ocean surface dynamics is crucial for oceanographic and cli- mate research. The satellite-tracked movements of hundreds of drifters de- ployed by research and voluntary observing vessels provide high-frequency and high-resolution information on near-surface currents around the globe. Consequently, they constitute a major component of the Global Ocean Ob- serving System (GOOS). However, maintaining this array is costly and in some oceanic regions such as the tropics, spatio-temporal coverage is lim- ited. Here, we demonstrate that the GPS-buoy equipped fish aggregating devices (FADs) used in tropical tuna fisheries to increase fishing success are also capable of providing comparable near-surface current information. We analyzed millions of position data collected between 2008 and 2014 from more than 15,000 FADs and 2,000 drifters, and combined this information with remotely-sensed near-surface current data to demonstrate that the sur- face velocity components of FADs and drifters are highly correlated in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. While it was noted that the subsurface struc- tures of FADs did slow them down relative to the drifters, particularly in the Atlantic Ocean, this bias was measurable and could be accounted for ∗Corresponding author Email address: [email protected] (C.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Lionfish Summit Report
    2018 Lionfish Summit October 2-4, 2018 Cocoa Beach, Florida Hosted by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Table of Contents Media and Resources…………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………. 2 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………… 3 Theme I: Policy and Regulations……………………………………………………………..……………………..…….….. 6 Theme II: Control Efforts/Research and Monitoring………………………………………………………..……… 11 Theme III: Outreach and Education…………………………………………………………………………………..……. 18 Future Directions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…… 23 Appendix A: Lionfish Summit Agenda……………………………………………………………………………….……. 24 Appendix B: Presentation Abstracts…………………………………………………………………………………….…. 28 Appendix C: iClicker Survey Results……………………………………..…………………..………….…………………. 65 Appendix D: Evaluations…………………………………………………………………………………….…………………… 66 Appendix E: Attendee List………………………………………………………………………………………………….…… 67 Appendix F: FWC Lionfish Program Overview 2014 – 2018……………………………….……………………. 72 1 | P a g e Media and Resources ▪ View photos in the Lionfish Summit Flickr album. ▪ Live video footage broadcast by the Florida Channel: o 10/02/18 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Lionfish Summit o 10/03/18 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Lionfish Summit Part 1 o 10/03/18 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Lionfish Summit Part 2 ▪ Video recordings of the oral presentations are available upon request by contacting [email protected]. ▪ Visit MyFWC.com/Lionfish or FWCReefRangers.com for agency information
    [Show full text]
  • Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans : Modalities of Use, Fishing Efficiency and Potential Management Alexandra Maufroy
    Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans : modalities of use, fishing efficiency and potential management Alexandra Maufroy To cite this version: Alexandra Maufroy. Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans : modalities of use, fishing efficiency and potential management. Animal biology. Université Montpellier, 2016. English. NNT : 2016MONTT150. tel-01663770 HAL Id: tel-01663770 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01663770 Submitted on 14 Dec 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. THESE Pour obtenir le grade de Docteur Délivré par l’Université de Montpellier Préparée au sein de l’école doctorale GAIA Et de l’unité de recherche UMR MARBEC Spécialité EFSA Présentée par: Alexandra MAUFROY Drifting Fish Aggregating Devices of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans: modalities of use, fishing efficiency and potential management SoutenueSoutenance le 30prévue Juin le2016 30 Juindevant devant le jury le composéjury: de: Mme Jocelyne FERRARIS, IRD, UMR Entropie, Rapporteur M. Paul MARCHAL, Ifremer Centre Manche Mer du Nord, Rapporteur M. Didier GASCUEL, Agrocampus Ouest Rennes, Examinateur M. Roger PRADEL, CEFE - CNRS, Examinateur M. Nicolas BEZ, IRD - UMR MARBEC, Directeur de thèse M. Emmanuel Chassot, IRD - UMR MARBEC, Co-Directeur de thèse M.
    [Show full text]
  • The Benefits of Fish Aggregating Devices in the Pacific
    The benefits of fish aggregating devices in the Pacific Michael Sharp Fisheries Development Officer (Economics) Nearshore Fisheries Development Section, Coastal Fisheries Programme Secretariat of the Pacific Community. Email: [email protected] Introduction important to recognise that FADs provide an array of benefits. Anderson and Gates (1996) define the benefits Fish aggregating devices (FADs) are widely used in Pa- of FADs as follows. cific Island countries and territories (PICTs) as a means to improve fisheries production in oceanic and, more Increased fishery production – Due to the aggregating recently, inshore fisheries. Traditional FADs have been phenomenon of FADs, they are known to increase catch used since the early 1900s, when Indonesian and Filipi- per unit of effort (CPUE), which allows for increased no fishermen used floating rafts of bamboo to aggregate access to protein or saleable product. Increased produc- schools of fish. Recent developments in and experimen- tion plays an important role in food security at the sub- tation with modern FAD design, deployment site, and sistence level while allowing for increased revenue in the deployment depth has occurred throughout the Pacific commercial sector. Detolle et al (1998) claim that catch- as a means to improve yields of and access to artisanal es at Reunion Island increased by 143% over a period of fish stocks. eight years subsequent to the deployment of FADs. Significant government capital and human resources Reduced pressure on reef resources – Factors such have been allocated to the fabrication, deployment and as modern fishing gear and techniques, increasing maintenance of FADs, and training of fishermen in FAD population, exports, and tourism — to name a few — are fishing techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • Anchored Fish Aggregating Devices in Hawaiian Waters
    Anchored Fish Aggregating Devices in Hawaiian Waters WALTER M. MATSUMOTO, THOMAS K. KAZAMA, and DONALD C. AASTED Introduction tions was well over 4: 1 in favor of sets tional Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) made around drifting logs as compared Southwest Fisheries Center and the Tunas have long been known to ag­ with sets made on schools independent PTDF embarked on a joint project to gregate around floating objects such as of logs. test anchored fish aggregating devices in logs, masses of drifting seaweed, debris, While the value of drifting logs to Hawaiian waters in May J977. The proj­ and other flotsam. Both Japanese and successful seining has been well demon­ ect was funded largely by PTDF with American fishermen have utilized this strated by these questions, such logs, additional support from NMFS. This knowledge and routinely seek such ob­ which abound in the western equatorial report covers the procedures and results jects while fishing for skipjack tuna, Pacific, especially in waters north of of the project. Kalsuwonus pelamis, and yellowfln Papua ew Guinea, are only seldom tuna, Thunnus albacares, in the east­ found around islands in the central Pa­ Objectives ern and western Pacific (Uda, 1933; cific. Moreover, whenever an occasion­ The primary objectives of the project Kimura, 1954; McNeely, 1961; Inoueet allog is encountered in the latter areas, were to: 1) Develop and test anchored aI., 1963, 1968). it is available to the local fishermen only fi~h aggregating devices (hereafter called In recent years, the Japanese began for a short time before it drifts off be­ buoys) in open ocean areas and 2) de­ seining for skipjack and small yellowfln yond the range of their boats.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawaii Fishing Regulations
    HAWAI‘I FISHING REGULATIONS August 2015 CONTENTS Regulated marine species . 4 How to measure and determine sex . .14 Scientific names of regulated species . 16 Regulated freshwater species . .18 Regulated fishing areas O‘ahu . .20 Hawai‘i . 28 Kaua‘i. .39 Maui . 46 Lāna‘i . .49 Moloka‘i . .51 Other management areas . .52 Northwestern Hawaiian Islands . .53 Gear restrictions . 54 Special provisions, licenses, permits . .57 Commercial fishing . .58 Bottom fishing . .59 Sharks and manta rays . 62 David Y. Ige, Governor Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) . 62 Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) offices . .63 To report violations . .63 What’s new in this revision O‘ahu: New rules pertain to aquarium fishing (p. 55). BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES Maui: New minimum size and bag limit rules pertain to all parrotfish and goat- fish species (pp. 4-7). Hā‘ena, Kaua‘i: New Community Based Subsistence Fishing area established Suzanne D. Case, Chairperson (p. 44). This information is presented to acquaint sport and commercial fishermen with Members State laws and rules pertaining to fishing in Hawai‘i. It is not to be used as a legal document. Failure to include complete statutes or administrative rules in this summary does not relieve persons from abiding by those statutes and Keith "Keone" Downing James A. Gomes rules. Any discrepancies between this summary and the statutes or rules from which it was prepared will be enforced and adjudicated according to the official statutes and rules in effect on the date the activity took place. The full text of Thomas Oi Stanley H. Roehrig the statutes and rules is available for review at most public libraries in the State and at Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) and Division of Conservation and Ulalia Woodside Christopher Yuen Resources Enforcement (DOCARE) offices.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Best Practice Framework for the Management of Fishing Gear
    DEVELOPMENT OF A BEST PRACTICE FRAMEWORK FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FISHING GEAR Part 1: Overview and Current Status Author: Tim Huntington of Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd Photo credits (cover page): Alessio Viora / Marine Photobank 2 Development of a best practice framework for the management of fishing gear TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF STUDY 08 1.1 Background 08 1.2 Objective 08 1.3 Methodology 09 1.3.1 Part 1: Overview and current status 09 1.3.2 Part 2: Developing a best practice framework for the management of fishing gear 09 2. DEFINING THE SCOPE OF THE FRAMEWORK 11 2.1 Fishing Gears and their Global Use 12 2.1.1 Review of fishing gear usage around the world 12 2.1.2 Summary of the main fishing gears and their characteristics 17 2.2 Proposed Scope for the Remainder of the Study 26 3. IDENTIFYING MANAGEMENT OPTIONS AND MECHANISMS FOR RESPONSIBLE FISHING GEAR USE 27 3.1 Outlining Why We Need to Manage Fishing Gear 28 3.2 Current Management Options for Fishing Gear 30 3.2.1 Preventative measures 30 3.2.2 Mitigation 35 3.2.3 Cure 37 3.3 Implementation Mechanisms for Fishing Gear Management 39 3.3.1 Voluntary actions and guidance 40 3.3.2 Third-party fisheries certification 41 3.3.3 Mandatory legislation 42 3.3.4 Improved awareness, information and other initiatives 43 4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A BEST PRACTICE FRAMEWORK FOR MANAGING FISHING GEAR 45 4.1 Basic Principles of the Framework 46 4.2 Structure of the Framework 47 APPENDICES 48 Appendix A: References 48 Global Ghost Gear Initiative 3 TABLES, FIGURES AND BOXES
    [Show full text]