DOCSLIB.ORG

Seafood Watch Seafood Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Seafood Watch Seafood Report Seafood Watch Seafood Report Sharks and Dogfish With a focus on: Blacktip shark (Carcharhinus limbatus) Common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) Dusky smoothhound/smooth dogfish (Mustelus canis) Sandbar shark (Carcharhinus plumbeus) Shortfin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus) Spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) © Monterey Bay Aquarium Final Report December 21, 2005 Stock Status Update June 9, 2011 Santi Roberts Fisheries Research Analyst Monterey Bay Aquarium SeafoodWatch® Sharks & DogfishReport June 9, 2010 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. Seafood Watch® Fisheries Research Analysts also communicate regularly with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture scientists, and members of industry and conservation organizations when evaluating fisheries and aquaculture practices. Capture fisheries and aquaculture practices are highly dynamic; as the scientific information on each species changes, Seafood Watch’s sustainability recommendations and the underlying Seafood Reports will be updated to reflect these changes. Parties interested in capture fisheries, aquaculture practices and the sustainability of ocean ecosystems are welcome to use Seafood Reports in any way they find useful. For more information about Seafood Watch® and Seafood Reports, please contact the Seafood Watch® program at Monterey Bay Aquarium by calling (831) 647-6873 or emailing [email protected]. Disclaimer Seafood Watch® strives to have all Seafood Reports reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science, and aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch® program or its recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch® is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. Seafood Watch® and Seafood Reports are made possible through a grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. 2 SeafoodWatch® Sharks & DogfishReport June 9, 2010 Executive Summary Sharks are generally slow-growing, late-maturing organisms that give birth to very few young, and are thus well-recognized as being vulnerable to fishing pressure. However, several species of shark of importance to the U.S. market, including the large coastal blacktip shark, and several small coastal species, grow more quickly and so are thought to be able to withstand higher fishing pressure. U.S.-caught sharks More than 80% of all sharks (excluding spiny and smooth dogfish) landed in the U.S. are from the Atlantic. This percentage and all percentages in the text and tables below do not include unidentified sharks (in NMFS landing data), which account for 36% of Atlantic landings and only 2% of Pacific, North Pacific, and West Pacific landings. Thus, Atlantic landings are likely considerably more than 80% of total U.S. landings, and estimates of landings of any given species are very approximate (at least in the Atlantic). Large coastal and small coastal sharks make up approximately 90% of Atlantic shark landings. Of these, the large coastal sandbar and blacktip sharks comprise the majority (probably 80% or more), although more precise estimates are confounded by the high level of unspecified sharks and by likely mis-identification of sharks due to the removal of all identifying characteristics at sea. The multi-species nature of the directed shark and reef fish fisheries is one of the major concerns of these fisheries. Some of the shark stocks appear to be in healthy condition, notably the Gulf of Mexico blacktip and the small coastal finetooth shark. However, sharks considered to be in critical condition, including the large coastal sandbar and the small coastal blacknose shark, are also caught and landed along with healthy stocks in the multispecies fisheries. For this reason, all large coastal and small coastal multispecies fisheries that catch sharks are deemed of critical stock status. In addition, most of the large coastal sharks are also particularly slow- growing and late-maturing even for sharks, and so are inherently vulnerable to overfishing. Regardless of the other Seafood Watch® (SFW) criteria, the high conservation concern rankings for inherent vulnerability and status of stocks warrant an overall recommendation of “Avoid” for all these fisheries, including the directed shark drift gillnet and strikenet fishery, and directed shark and reef fish bottom longline fisheries. Common thresher sharks and shortfin makos are landed on both coasts of the U.S., and combined account for less than 10% of Atlantic shark landings but the majority of Pacific shark landings. These and some other pelagic species are faster growing and mature earlier than the large coastal species, and so are not as inherently vulnerable to fishing pressure. In the Atlantic, the stock status of both species is highly uncertain, but studies indicate serious declines in thresher shark stocks and declines up to 50% in shortfin mako shark stocks. Both of these stocks are thus deemed to be in poor condition. While the gears used to catch these pelagic species have very little impact on habitat, they currently have critical bycatch of sea turtles (pelagic longline fishery) and bottlenose dolphins (mid-Atlantic gillnet fishery). Bycatch concerns thus warrant an overall recommendation of “Avoid”, regardless of other criteria. Common thresher sharks and shortfin makos comprise the majority of shark landings on the Pacific coast (excluding dogfish). Little is known about the stocks of shortfin makos in the Pacific, but managers believe that the stock(s) is probably not overfished and not experiencing 3 SeafoodWatch® Sharks & DogfishReport June 9, 2010 overfishing. No robust stock assessment has been conducted for West Coast common thresher, but recent increases in catch-per-unit-effort rates indicate the stock is improving and the stock is also considered to be not overfished and overfishing not occurring. The stocks are a moderate conservation concern. Off the West Coast, common threshers and shortfin makos are both primarily landed in the California drift gillnet fishery as no pelagic longlining is currently permitted in state or federal waters (although there may be a small quantity of shark entering the U.S. from Californian pelagic longliners operating on the high seas). Both are also landed in Hawaiian pelagic longline fisheries. Despite improvements in the nature and extent of bycatch in both the California drift gillnet and Hawaiian pelagic longline fisheries, serious concerns remain over the sheer quantity of bycatch in the gillnet fishery and of threatened and endangered sea turtle bycatch in the pelagic longline fishery. As bycatch in the only severe concern in these fisheries, common thresher and shortfin mako from US fisheries in the Pacific are deemed a Good Alternative. U.S.-caught dogfish Spiny dogfish are caught on both coasts of the U.S., while smooth dogfish are caught only on the Atlantic side. Almost 90% of total U.S. dogfish landings are of spiny dogfish, with Atlantic fisheries currently accounting for approximately two thirds of this amount. Spiny dogfish are among the slowest-growing and longest-lived sharks known, especially in the Pacific, and so are inherently vulnerable to fishing. Management of the Atlantic spiny dogfish fisheries is conducted on behalf of the New England and Mid-Atlantic states by the Atlantic Marine Fisheries Commission. The regime has a history of state non-compliance and state rejection of scientific advice, leading to overly high fishing pressure. As a result, stock status experienced serious declines throughout the 1990s. However, recent management actions in the early 2000s, including significant quota reductions, appear to have had a positive impact on Atlantic spiny dogfish stock. In 2009, the abundances reached levels high enough for the stock to be considered rebuilt, and annual quotas have been increased by the National Marine Fisheries Service. Atlantic spiny dogfish are caught in several
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Status of the Pacific Spiny Dogfish Shark Resource Off the Continental U.S
    Agenda Item G.5 Attachment 3 (Electronic Only) June 2021 DRAFT Disclaimer: These materials do not constitute a formal publication and are for information only. They are in a pre-review, pre-decisional state and should not be formally cited or reproduced. They are to be considered provisional and do not represent any determination or policy of NOAA or the Department of Commerce. Status of the Pacific Spiny Dogfish shark resource off the continental U.S. Pacific Coast in 2021 by Vladlena Gertseva1, Ian Taylor1, John Wallace1, and Sean E. Matson2 1Northwest Fisheries Science Center National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Seattle, Washington 98112, USA 2West Coast Region National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Seattle, Washington 98115, USA 2021 1 This report may be cited as: Gertseva, V. Taylor, I.G., Wallace, J.R., Matson, S.E. 2021. Status of the Pacific Spiny Dogfish shark resource off the continental U.S. Pacific Coast in 2021. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Portland, OR. Available from http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/stock-assessments/ 2 Table of Contents: Acronyms used in this document .............................................................................................. 6 Executive Summary................................................................................................................. 7 Stock ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating Life History Differences Between Finetooth Sharks, Carcharhinus Isodon, in the Northern Gulf of Mexico and the Western North Atlantic Ocean
    Gulf of Mexico Science, 2006(1/2), pp. 2–10 Investigating Life History Differences Between Finetooth Sharks, Carcharhinus isodon, in the Northern Gulf of Mexico and the Western North Atlantic Ocean J. MARCUS DRYMON,WILLIAM B. DRIGGERS III, DOUGLAS OAKLEY, AND GLENN F. ULRICH The life history of the finetooth shark, Carcharhinus isodon, off South Carolina was studied by determining age, growth, and size and age at maturity. These data were compared to a recent study describing the same parameters for finetooth sharks in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Cervical vertebrae were extracted from 168 specimens (71 males and 97 females), ranging in size from 376 to 1,262 mm fork length (FL), and prepared for age analysis using standard techniques. Sex- specific von Bertalanffy growth models were generated and yielded the following ؍ ((Ϫ Ϫ0.19(t Ϫ (Ϫ2.17 ؍ growth equations: Lt 1,311 mm FL (1 e ) for females and Lt 1,151 mm FL (1 Ϫ eϪ0.33(t Ϫ (Ϫ1.43))) for males. The oldest female and male aged were 12.4 yr and 10.4 yr, respectively. Median length where 50% of the population was mature was 1,021 mm FL for females, corresponding to an age of 6.3 yr and 1,015 mm FL for males, corresponding to an age of 5.0 yr. Finetooth sharks in the western North Atlantic Ocean had higher observed ages and there was a sig- nificant difference in size at age between neonate finetooth sharks in the western North Atlantic Ocean and the northern Gulf of Mexico; however, there were no significant differences among von Bertalanffy growth function parameters be- tween regions examined.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Thresher Shark, Alopias Vulpinus
    4 Thresher Shark, Alopias vulpinus Thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus. Photo credit: Dale Sweetnam. History of the Fishery The common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus, is the most common commercially landed shark in California. They are primarily caught using large mesh drift gill nets and hook and line gear, but are also caught incidentally with small mesh gill nets and harpoon. Prior to 1977, all sharks were reported in one market category and not separated by species, and it is assumed threshers were caught as bycatch in gears at levels similar or greater than today. The first significant fishery for thresher sharks began the late 1970s to early 1980s when drift gill net fishers began to target them close to the southern California coastline. The fishery expanded rapidly and, because of overfishing concerns, the California Department of Fish and Game (Department) as mandated by the State Legislature began an observer program, monitored landings and implemented a logbook program. A limited entry permit program for drift gill net gear was initiated in 1982, with permits issued to fishers rather than boats to prevent false inflation in value. The drift gill net fishery for thresher sharks peaked in 1981 when 113 Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 4-1 drift gill net boats landed nearly 600 tons (544 metric tons). However, total landings using all gears were highest the following year with a total of more than 1700 tons (1542 metric tons) taken by all gears (Figure 4-1). 2000 1500 1000 Landings (short tons) (short Landings 500 0 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Year Figure 4-1.
    [Show full text]
  • Gill Morphometrics of the Thresher Sharks (Genus Alopias): Correlation of Gill Dimensions with Aerobic Demand and Environmental Oxygen
    JOURNAL OF MORPHOLOGY :1–12 (2015) Gill Morphometrics of the Thresher Sharks (Genus Alopias): Correlation of Gill Dimensions with Aerobic Demand and Environmental Oxygen Thomas P. Wootton,1 Chugey A. Sepulveda,2 and Nicholas C. Wegner1,3* 1Center for Marine Biotechnology and Biomedicine, Marine Biology Research Division, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 2Pfleger Institute of Environmental Research, Oceanside, CA 92054 3Fisheries Resource Division, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries, La Jolla, CA 92037 ABSTRACT Gill morphometrics of the three thresher related species that inhabit similar environments shark species (genus Alopias) were determined to or have comparable metabolic requirements. As examine how metabolism and habitat correlate with such, in reviews of gill morphology (e.g., Gray, respiratory specialization for increased gas exchange. 1954; Hughes, 1984a; Wegner, 2011), fishes are Thresher sharks have large gill surface areas, short often categorized into morphological ecotypes water–blood barrier distances, and thin lamellae. Their large gill areas are derived from long total filament based on the respiratory dimensions of the gills, lengths and large lamellae, a morphometric configura- namely gill surface area and the thickness of the tion documented for other active elasmobranchs (i.e., gill epithelium (the water–blood barrier distance), lamnid sharks, Lamnidae) that augments respiratory which both reflect a species’ capacity for oxygen surface area while
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Productivity and Susceptibility Indices to Determine the Vulnerability of a Stock: with Example Applications to Six U.S
    Use of productivity and susceptibility indices to determine the vulnerability of a stock: with example applications to six U.S. fisheries. Wesley S. Patrick1, Paul Spencer2, Olav Ormseth2, Jason Cope3, John Field4, Donald Kobayashi5, Todd Gedamke6, Enric Cortés7, Keith Bigelow5, William Overholtz8, Jason Link8, and Peter Lawson9. 1NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315 East- West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 2 NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA 98115; 3NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, WA 98112; 4NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, 110 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060; 5NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, 2570 Dole Street, Honolulu, HI 96822; 6NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 75 Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, FL 33149; 7NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 3500 Delwood Beach Road, Panama City, FL 32408; 8NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543; 9NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2030 South Marine Science Drive, Newport, OR 97365. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Wesley S. Patrick, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315 East-West
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guide to Requiem Sharks (Elasmobranchiomorphi: Carcharhinidae) of the Western North Atlantic
    Field guide to requiem sharks (Elasmobranchiomorphi: Carcharhinidae) of the Western North Atlantic Item Type monograph Authors Grace, Mark Publisher NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service Download date 24/09/2021 04:22:14 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/20307 NOAA Technical Report NMFS 153 U.S. Department A Scientific Paper of the FISHERY BULLETIN of Commerce August 2001 (revised November 2001) Field Guide to Requiem Sharks (Elasmobranchiomorphi: Carcharhinidae) of the Western North Atlantic Mark Grace NOAA Technical Report NMFS 153 A Scientific Paper of the Fishery Bulletin Field Guide to Requiem Sharks (Elasmobranchiomorphi: Carcharhinidae) of the Western North Atlantic Mark Grace August 2001 (revised November 2001) U.S. Department of Commerce Seattle, Washington Suggested reference Grace, Mark A. 2001. Field guide to requiem sharks (Elasmobranchiomorphi: Carcharhinidae) of the Western North Atlantic. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS 153, 32 p. Online dissemination This report is posted online in PDF format at http://spo.nwr.noaa.gov (click on Technical Reports link). Note on revision This report was revised and reprinted in November 2001 to correct several errors. Previous copies of the report, dated August 2001, should be destroyed as this revision replaces the earlier version. Purchasing additional copies Additional copies of this report are available for purchase in paper copy or microfiche from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161; 1-800-553-NTIS; http://www.ntis.gov. Copyright law Although the contents of the Technical Reports have not been copyrighted and may be reprinted entirely, reference to source is appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • White-Tip Reef Shark (Triaenodon Obesus) Michelle S
    White-tip Reef Shark (Triaenodon obesus) Michelle S. Tishler Common Name There are several common names for the Triaenodon obesus, which usually describes the “white tips” on their dorsal and caudal fins. Common names include: White-tip Reef Shark, Blunthead Shark, Light-Tip Shark and Reef Whitetip. Names in Spanish Cazón, Cazón Coralero Trompacorta and Tintorera Punta Aleta Blanca. Taxonomy Domain Eukarya Kingdom Anamalia Phylum Chordata Class Chondrichthyes Order Carcharhiniformes Family Carcharhinidae Genus Triaenodon Species obesus Nearest relatives Sharks are cartilaginous fishes in the class Chondrichthyes with skates, rays and other sharks. Within the family Carcharhinidae (requiem sharks), the White-tip Reef Shark is related to the Galapagos Shark, Bull Shark, Oceanic Whitetip, Tiger Shark and Blue Sharks. The White-tip Reef Shark does not share their genus name with any other organism. Island They are found amongst the reefs surrounding most or all of the Galapagos Islands. Geographic range White-tip Sharks range geographically from Costa Rica, Ecuador, Galapagos, Cocos, South Africa, Red Sea, Pakistan and etc. to primarily residing in the Indo-West Pacific region. (Red region indicates distribution of White-tip Reef Shark) Habitat Description As described in their name, White-tip Reef Sharks live amongst coral reefs with a home range of a couple square miles. They are also found in sandy patches and deeper waters. During the day these sharks tend to rest on the seabed or within caves and crevices. Physical description White-tip Reef sharks are named after the white tip on the dorsal (first and sometimes second) fins, and caudal fin lobes.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Louisiana Recreational Fishing Regulations
    2021 LOUISIANA RECREATIONAL FISHING REGULATIONS www.wlf.louisiana.gov 1 Get a GEICO quote for your boat and, in just 15 minutes, you’ll know how much you could be saving. If you like what you hear, you can buy your policy right on the spot. Then let us do the rest while you enjoy your free time with peace of mind. geico.com/boat | 1-800-865-4846 Some discounts, coverages, payment plans, and features are not available in all states, in all GEICO companies, or in all situations. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. In the state of CA, program provided through Boat Association Insurance Services, license #0H87086. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, DC 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. © 2020 GEICO CONTENTS 6. LICENSING 9. DEFINITIONS DON’T 11. GENERAL FISHING INFORMATION General Regulations.............................................11 Saltwater/Freshwater Line...................................12 LITTER 13. FRESHWATER FISHING SPORTSMEN ARE REMINDED TO: General Information.............................................13 • Clean out truck beds and refrain from throwing Freshwater State Creel & Size Limits....................16 cigarette butts or other trash out of the car or watercraft. 18. SALTWATER FISHING • Carry a trash bag in your car or boat. General Information.............................................18 • Securely cover trash containers to prevent Saltwater State Creel & Size Limits.......................21 animals from spreading litter. 26. OTHER RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES Call the state’s “Litterbug Hotline” to report any Recreational Shrimping........................................26 potential littering violations including dumpsites Recreational Oystering.........................................27 and littering in public. Those convicted of littering Recreational Crabbing..........................................28 Recreational Crawfishing......................................29 face hefty fines and litter abatement work.
    [Show full text]
  • 01 Carlson MFR70(1)
    The Status of the United States Population of Night Shark, Carcharhinus signatus JOHN K. CARLSON, ENRIC CORTES, JULIE A. NEER, CAMILLA T. MCCANDLESS, and LAWRENCE R. BEERKIRCHER Introduction coastal, small coastal, and pelagic) based Generally, species are considered for on known life history, habitat, market, listing under the ESA if they meet the The first fishery management plan and fishery characteristics (NMFS, definition of an endangered or threat- for shark populations in waters of the 1993). The Fishery Management Plan ened species and that status is the result United States (U.S.) Atlantic Ocean and of the Atlantic tunas, swordfish, and of one or any combination of the fol- Gulf of Mexico was developed in 1993 sharks (NMFS, 1999) added a fourth lowing factors: 1) present or threatened (NMFS, 1993). Because species-spe- category and prohibited the retention destruction, modification, or curtailment cific catch and life history information of 19 species of sharks (Prohibited Spe- of its habitat or range; 2) overutilization was limited, sharks were grouped and cies management category) based on a for commercial, recreational, scientific, managed under three categories (large precautionary approach for species with or educational purposes; 3) disease or little or no biological information that predation; 4) inadequacy of existing reg- were thought to be highly susceptible ulatory mechanisms; or 5) other natural to overexploitation. or manmade factors affecting its contin- The U.S. Endangered Species Act ued existence. In establishing its species John K. Carlson and Enric Cortés are with the (ESA) is designed to provide for the con- of concern list, NMFS determined that National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 3500 Del- servation of endangered and threatened factors related to the demography and wood Beach Road, Panama City, FL 32408.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermoregulation Strategies of Deep Diving Ectothermic Sharks
    THERMOREGULATION STRATEGIES OF DEEP DIVING ECTOTHERMIC SHARKS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAIʻI AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCOTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ZOOLOGY (MARINE BIOLOGY) AUGUST 2020 By. Mark A. Royer Dissertation Committee: Kim Holland, Chairperson Brian Bowen Carl Meyer Andre Seale Masato Yoshizawa Keywords: Ectothermic, Thermoregulation, Biologging, Hexanchus griseus, Syphrna lewini, Shark ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to my advisor Dr. Kim Holland and to Dr. Carl Meyer for providing me the privilege to pursue a doctoral degree in your lab, which provided more experiences and opportunities than I could have ever imagined. The research environment you provided allowed me to pursue new frontiers in the field and take on challenging questions. Thank you to my committee members Dr. Brian Bowen, Dr. Andre Seale, and Dr. Masato Yoshizawa, for providing your ideas, thoughts, suggestions, support and encouragement through the development of my dissertation. I would like to give my sincere thanks to all of my committee members and to the Department of Biology for taking their time to provide their support and accommodation as I finished my degree during a rather unprecedented and uncertain time. I am very grateful to everyone at the HIMB Shark Lab including Dr. Melanie Hutchinson, Dr. James Anderson, Jeff Muir, and Dr. Daniel Coffey. I learned so much from all of you and we have shared several lifetimes worth of experiences. Thank you to Dr. James Anderson for exciting side projects we have attempted and will continue to pursue in the future. Thank you to Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Black Sea Sharks at Risk
    Black Sea Sharks at Risk The Black Sea is home to world’s biggest, most productive spiny dogfish sharks, but this remarkable, global species is in danger of extinction. CITES action is needed to curb unsustainable trade … before it’s too late. What is a spiny dogfish? The spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) is a small, slender shark found in temperate waters all around the world. Spiny dogfish have been fished for their meat and liver oil for more than a century. Once the most abundant shark, spiny dogfish are now included on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species due to serious overfishing from intense, poorly regulated fisheries. Persistent European demand for meat fuels fishing and international trade. Black Sea spiny dogfish stand out Black Sea spiny dogfish are thought to be the largest and most productive in the world. For instance, they have been shown to grow up to 80 cm larger (180 cm total) and give birth to twice the number of pups (32) than their Atlantic counterparts. Atlantic and Pacific spiny dogfish are known to be pregnant for twice as long (nearly two years!) as those in the Black Sea. Despite these differences, all spiny dogfish are vulnerable. The species is among the slowest growing sharks on earth and therefore exceptionally susceptible to overexploitation and long lasting depletion. Dogfish fishing limits must be precautionary. Endangered populations A population assessment for Black Sea dogfish showed a 60% decline from 1981 to 1992. The population is less depleted than in Northeast Atlantic (where roughly 7% are left), but fishing pressure is expected to remain high and lead to further depletion.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Everything Bigger in Texas? Characterization and Trends of a Land-Based Recreational Shark Fishery
    Marine and Coastal Fisheries Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science ISSN: (Print) 1942-5120 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/umcf20 Was Everything Bigger in Texas? Characterization and Trends of a Land-Based Recreational Shark Fishery Matthew J. Ajemian, Philip D. Jose, John T. Froeschke, Mark L. Wildhaber & Gregory W. Stunz To cite this article: Matthew J. Ajemian, Philip D. Jose, John T. Froeschke, Mark L. Wildhaber & Gregory W. Stunz (2016) Was Everything Bigger in Texas? Characterization and Trends of a Land-Based Recreational Shark Fishery, Marine and Coastal Fisheries, 8:1, 553-566, DOI: 10.1080/19425120.2016.1227404 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19425120.2016.1227404 Published with license by the American Fisheries Society© Matthew J. Ajemian, Philip D. Jose, John T. Froeschke, Mark L. Wildhaber, and Gregory W. Stunz Published online: 10 Nov 2016. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 170 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=umcf20 Download by: [Texas A&M University Corpus Christi] Date: 03 February 2017, At: 09:23 Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science 8:553–566, 2016 Published with license by the American Fisheries Society ISSN: 1942-5120 online DOI: 10.1080/19425120.2016.1227404 ARTICLE Was Everything Bigger in Texas? Characterization and Trends of a Land-Based Recreational Shark Fishery Matthew J. Ajemian* and Philip D. Jose Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi, 6300 Ocean Drive, Corpus Christi, Texas 78412-5869, USA John T.
    [Show full text]