DOCSLIB.ORG

Bycatch Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bycatch Plan MANAGING THE NATION’S BYCATCH: PRIORITIES, PROGRAMS AND ACTIONS FOR THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON, D.C. JUNE 1998 CONTENTS Page Acknowledgments ............................................................v Executive Summary .......................................................... vi National Perspective National Overview ............................................................2 Background ...............................................................2 Purpose of the National Marine Fisheries Service Bycatch Plan .......................3 The Role of National Marine Fisheries Service in Addressing Bycatch .................4 Input from Constituents ......................................................6 Terms and Definitions Used in the Bycatch Plan ..................................7 Common Issues and Needs Among Regions ......................................11 Bycatch as a Component of Stock Assessment ...................................11 Bycatch of Protected and Regulated Species .....................................12 A Conceptual Approach to the Bycatch Problem .................................14 Adequacy of Monitoring Programs ............................................18 National Bycatch Assessment ..................................................20 Evaluation of Information on Discards and Discard Management ....................20 National Bycatch Goal and Objectives ..........................................31 National Goal .............................................................31 National Objectives ........................................................32 National Recommendations ...................................................39 Monitoring and Data Collection Programs ......................................39 Gear Technology and Selectivity Research ......................................40 Effects of Bycatch .........................................................40 Incentive Programs ........................................................41 Conservation and Management Measures .......................................41 Information Exchange and Cooperation ........................................41 Regional Perspectives Northeast Fisheries .......................................................43 Regional Characteristics .................................................43 Regional Bycatch Issues ..................................................44 Regional Bycatch Programs ...............................................47 Regional Recommendations ..............................................51 Atlantic and Gulf Pelagic Highly Migratory Species Fisheries ....................53 Regional Characteristics .................................................53 iii Regional Bycatch Issues ..................................................54 Regional Bycatch Programs ...............................................56 Regional Recommendations ..............................................57 Southeast Fisheries ........................................................59 Regional Characteristics .................................................59 Regional Bycatch Issues ..................................................60 Regional Bycatch Programs ...............................................62 Regional Recommendations ..............................................64 Pacific Pelagic and Insular Fisheries .........................................66 Regional Characteristics .................................................66 Regional Bycatch Issues ..................................................66 Regional Bycatch Programs ...............................................74 Regional Recommendations ..............................................75 West Coast Fisheries ......................................................77 Regional Characteristics .................................................77 Regional Bycatch Issues ..................................................78 Regional Recommendations ..............................................84 Alaska Fisheries ..........................................................87 Regional Characteristics .................................................87 Regional Bycatch Issues ..................................................89 Regional Bycatch Programs ...............................................93 Regional Research Initiatives .............................................100 Regional Recommendations .............................................101 Resource Material References .................................................................105 Glossary ..................................................................113 Appendices Appendix A. Bycatch Matrix .................................................118 Appendix B. Case Studies of the Benefits of Reducing Bycatch .....................154 Appendix C. Response to Comments on First Draft of Managing the Nation’s Bycatch ................................................187 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The bycatch plan was developed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) over an 18-month period from early 1996 to mid-1997. The planning team was made up of fisheries managers and scientists from all of the NMFS administrative regions. The bycatch team was assisted in development of the bycatch plan by a facilitator from the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. Members of the Bycatch Team are: Anneka W. Bane, Office of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, Silver Spring, Maryland Christofer H. Boggs, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Honolulu, Hawaii Ramon Conser, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Newport, Oregon Elizabeth W. Lauck, Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, Maryland James K. McCallum, Southwest Regional Office, Honolulu, Hawaii Rodney R. McInnis, Southwest Regional Office, Long Beach, California Steven A. Murawski, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Woods Hole, Massachusetts James M. Nance, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Galveston, Texas Scott Nichols, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, Mississippi William L. Robinson, Northwest Regional Office, Seattle, Washington Susan J. Salveson, Alaska Regional Office, Juneau, Alaska Gary J. Smith, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Gladstone, Oregon Joseph M. Terry, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, Washington John F. Witzig, Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, Maryland Our colleagues throughout NMFS provided numerous reviews, comments, suggestions, and access to the most recent bycatch data throughout the plan’s development. We thank them for their efforts in ensuring that all perspectives were heard and for providing insight into frequently contentious aspects of bycatch in their regions. The economic case studies prepared by Joesph Terry, Steven Edwards, Steven Murawski, Richard Raulerson, Eric Thunberg, and James Waters contributed to the team’s understanding of the economic implications of bycatch; their contribution to this plan is gratefully acknowledged. John Ward provided critical assistance in rewriting a key portion of the plan. Comments and reviews by the fishery management councils, the Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee, several state fishery management agencies and commissions, fishing industry associations, conservation organizations and individuals concerned about bycatch were invaluable in preparing the final plan and were appreciated. v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bycatch—defined as fishery discards, retained incidental catch, and unobserved mortalities resulting from a direct encounter with fishing gear—has become a central concern of the commercial and recreational fishing industries, resource managers, scientists, and the public, both nationally and globally. Bycatch concerns stem from the apparent waste that discards represent when so many of the world’s marine resources either are utilized to their full potential or are overexploited. These issues apply to fishery resources as well as to marine mammals, sea turtles, seabirds, and other components of marine ecosystems. Congress has responded to these concerns by increasing requirements of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and, most recently, the Sustainable Fisheries Act1 to reduce or eliminate bycatch. The Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act highlighted the need for bycatch management in fishery management plans by requiring that conservation and management measures shall, to the extent practicable, minimize bycatch and to the extent that bycatch cannot be avoided, minimize the mortality of such bycatch. Globally, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization’s Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, to which the United States is a signatory, also emphasizes bycatch reduction. The national goal of the National Marine Fisheries Service’s bycatch plan activities is to implement conservation and management measures for living marine resources that will minimize, to the extent practicable, bycatch and the mortality of bycatch that cannot be avoided. Inherent in this goal is the need to avoid bycatch, rather than create new ways to utilize bycatch. Responding to these issues and increasing regulatory requirements, in 1992 the U.S. commercial fishing industries initiated a series of workshops to develop strategies to reduce bycatch and to increase the industry’s and the public’s understanding of bycatch issues. Their recommendations,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Evaluation of Cetacean Bycatch in UK Fisheries: Problems and Solutions
    AN EVALUATION OF CETACEAN BYCATCH IN UK FISHERIES: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS A report to WDC and HSI Russell Leaper | February 2021 1 SUMMARY Cetacean bycatch has been a serious and persistent welfare and conservation issue in UK waters for many years. The most recent estimates indicate that over 1000 cetaceans are killed each year in UK fisheries. The species most affected are harbour porpoise, common dolphin, minke and humpback whale, but all cetaceans in UK waters are vulnerable. The level of suffering for mammals that become entangled in fishing gear has been described as ‘one of the grossest abuses of wild animal sensibility in the modern world’. Although potential solutions exist, the mitigation efforts to date have only achieved small reductions in the numbers of animals that are killed. The Fisheries Act 2020 commits the UK to minimise and, where possible, eliminate bycatch of sensitive species. The Act does not include details of how to achieve this, but requires reconsideration of fisheries management and practices, the phasing out of some gears, and a change of approach from strategies previously pursued. While gill nets are recognised as the highest risk gear category globally for cetacean bycatch, there are also serious bycatch problems associated with trawl fisheries and with creel fisheries using pots and traps. The different characteristics of these gear types and the types and size of vessels involved, require different approaches to bycatch monitoring and mitigation. Acoustic deterrent devices (ADDs), such as ‘pingers’, have been shown to be effective at reducing harbour porpoise bycatch in gill nets, but the reduction achieved so far has been small, they may cause unwanted disturbance or displacement, and they may not be effective for other species.
    [Show full text]
  • SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES and RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: a Guide for USAID Staff and Partners
    SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES AND RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: A Guide for USAID Staff and Partners June 2013 ABOUT THIS GUIDE GOAL This guide provides basic information on how to design programs to reform capture fisheries (also referred to as “wild” fisheries) and aquaculture sectors to ensure sound and effective development, environmental sustainability, economic profitability, and social responsibility. To achieve these objectives, this document focuses on ways to reduce the threats to biodiversity and ecosystem productivity through improved governance and more integrated planning and management practices. In the face of food insecurity, global climate change, and increasing population pressures, it is imperative that development programs help to maintain ecosystem resilience and the multiple goods and services that ecosystems provide. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem functions are central to maintaining ecosystem integrity, health, and productivity. The intent of the guide is not to suggest that fisheries and aquaculture are interchangeable: these sectors are unique although linked. The world cannot afford to neglect global fisheries and expect aquaculture to fill that void. Global food security will not be achievable without reversing the decline of fisheries, restoring fisheries productivity, and moving towards more environmentally friendly and responsible aquaculture. There is a need for reform in both fisheries and aquaculture to reduce their environmental and social impacts. USAID’s experience has shown that well-designed programs can reform capture fisheries management, reducing threats to biodiversity while leading to increased productivity, incomes, and livelihoods. Agency programs have focused on an ecosystem-based approach to management in conjunction with improved governance, secure tenure and access to resources, and the application of modern management practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Population Analysis
    1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 OVERVIEW There are a variety of VPA-type methods, which form powerful tools for stock assessment. At first sight, the large number of methods and their arcane names can put off the newcomer. However, this complexity is based on simple common components. All these methods use age-structured data to assess the state of a stock. The stock assessment is based on a population dynamics model, which defines how the age-structure changes through time. This model is the simplest possible description of numbers of similar aged fish where we wish to account for decreases in stock size through fishing activities. The diversity of VPA methods comes from the way they use different types of data and the way they are fitted. This manual is structured to describe the different components that make up a VPA stock assessment model: Population Model (Analytical Model) The population model is the common element among all VPA methods. The model defines the number of fish in a cohort based on the fishing history and age of the fish. A cohort is a set of fish all having (approximately) the same age, which gain no new members after recruitment, but decline through mortality. The fisheries model attempts to measure the impact catches have on the population. The population model usually will encapsulate the time series aspects of change and should include any random effects on the population (process errors), if any. Link Model Only rarely can variables in which we are interested be observed directly. Usually data consists of observations on variables that are only indirectly linked to variables of interest in the population model.
    [Show full text]
  • A COMPARATIVE ACCOUNT of the SMALL PELAGIC FISHERIES in the APFIC REGION by M
    A COMPARATIVE ACCOUNT OF THE SMALL PELAGIC FISHERIES IN THE APFIC REGION by M. Devaraj and E. Vivekanandan Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Cocbin-682014, India Abstract The production of the small pe/agics in the APFIC region was 1.2 mt/sq. km during 1995. Among the four areas in the region, the small pe/agics have registered (i) the maximum annual fluctuations in the western Indian Ocean; (ii) the highest increase duri'}i the past two decades along the west coast of Thailand in the eastern Indian Ocean; and (iii) the consistent decline in the landings during the past one decade along the Japanese coast in the northwest Pacific Ocean. The short rnackerels emerged as the largest fishery in the APFlC region, fom'ing 19.5% of the landings of the small pelagics in 1995. The group consisting afthe sardines and the anchovies has shown clear signs of decline during the past one decade in almost the entire region. Most of the small pelagics have unique biological characteristics such as fast growth, short longevity, late maturity, high nalllral mortality, shoaling behaviour, high fecundity and severe recruitment fluctuations. As many species of the small pelagics undertake migration, collaborative research programmes and close coordination are required among the APFle countries for the stock assessment of all the major species. The management measures under implementation in these countries have been reviewed, with suggestions for regional cooperation for the management of the stocks of the small pelagics. INTRODUCTION The Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission covers four oceanic areas, which have been classified by the FAO as the western Indian Ocean (FAO Statistical Area 51), eastern Indian Ocean (Area 57) , northwest Pacific Ocean (Area 61) and western central Pacific Ocean (Area 71).
    [Show full text]
  • Why Study Bycatch? an Introduction to the Theme Section on Fisheries Bycatch
    Vol. 5: 91–102, 2008 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Printed December 2008 doi: 10.3354/esr00175 Endang Species Res Published online December xx, 2008 Contribution to the Theme Section ‘Fisheries bycatch problems and solutions’ OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Why study bycatch? An introduction to the Theme Section on fisheries bycatch Candan U. Soykan1,*, Jeffrey E. Moore2, Ramunas ¯ 5ydelis2, Larry B. Crowder2, Carl Safina3, Rebecca L. Lewison1 1Biology Department, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr., San Diego, California 92182-4614, USA 2Center for Marine Conservation, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University Marine Laboratory, 135 Duke Marine Lab Road, Beaufort,North Carolina 28516, USA 3Blue Ocean Institute, PO Box 250, East Norwich, New York 11732, USA ABSTRACT: Several high-profile examples of fisheries bycatch involving marine megafauna (e.g. dolphins in tuna purse-seines, albatrosses in pelagic longlines, sea turtles in shrimp trawls) have drawn attention to the unintentional capture of non-target species during fishing operations, and have resulted in a dramatic increase in bycatch research over the past 2 decades. Although a number of successful mitigation measures have been developed, the scope of the bycatch problem far exceeds our current capacity to deal with it. Specifically, we lack a comprehensive understanding of bycatch rates across species, fisheries, and ocean basins, and, with few exceptions, we lack data on demographic responses to bycatch or the in situ effectiveness of existing mitigation measures. As an introduction to this theme section of Endangered Species Research ‘Fisheries bycatch: problems and solutions’, we focus on 5 bycatch-related questions that require research attention, building on exam- ples from the current literature and the contributions to this Theme Section.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management Improving the Resilience of Ocean Ecosystems to Support Fish Populations, Coastal Communities
    A brief from March 2014 Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management Improving the resilience of ocean ecosystems to support fish populations, coastal communities The fish on the end of your line, the little forage fish that feed the big fish, the corals that build reef habitats, and the catch of the day in your favorite restaurant are interconnected parts of a vibrant ocean ecosystem. Ensuring the long-term health of important marine species will depend upon our ability to understand and account for the interactions among those species, their environment, and the people who rely upon them for food, commerce, and sport. This comprehensive approach, called ecosystem-based fisheries management, is needed to conserve the healthy ecosystems essential to the sustainability of our fisheries and to deal with the increasingly complex challenges facing our oceans. The United States is a global leader in fisheries management and has made great strides in ending overfishing (the problem of catching fish faster than they can reproduce) and rebuilding vulnerable populations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act—the primary law governing U.S. ocean fisheries. In many regions of our nation, this progress has helped reestablish more abundant fish populations and created economic benefits for the fishing industry and coastal communities. Core conservation policies added to the law in 1996 and 2007 are fundamental to improving individual fish populations and returning value to fishermen. We must maintain them as the foundation for sustainable management. But the United States should make the transition from a species-by-species approach to ecosystem-based fisheries management to meet the rising and urgent challenges of damaged ocean environments and dynamic, changing oceans.
    [Show full text]
  • SOLUTION: Gathering and Sonic Blasts for Oil Exploration Because These Practices Can Harm and Kill Whales
    ENDANGEREDWHALES © Nolan/Greenpeace WE HAVE A PROBLEM: WHAT YOU CAN DO: • Many whale species still face extinction. • Tell the Bush administration to strongly support whale protection so whaling countries get the • Blue whales, the largest animals ever, may now number as message. few as 400.1 • Ask elected officials to press Iceland, Japan • Rogue nations Japan, Norway and Iceland flout the and Norway to respect the commercial whaling international ban on commercial whaling. moratorium. • Other threats facing whales include global warming, toxic • Demand that the U.S. curb global warming pollution dumping, noise pollution and lethal “bycatch” from fishing. and sign the Stockholm Convention, which bans the most harmful chemicals on the planet. • Tell Congress that you oppose sonar intelligence SOLUTION: gathering and sonic blasts for oil exploration because these practices can harm and kill whales. • Japan, Norway and Iceland must join the rest of the world and respect the moratorium on commercial whaling. • The loophole Japan exploits to carry out whaling for “Tomostpeople,whalingisallnineteenth- “scientific” research should be closed. centurystuff.Theyhavenoideaabout • Fishing operations causing large numbers of whale hugefloatingslaughterhouses,steel-hulled bycatch deaths must be cleaned up or stopped. chaserboatswithsonartostalkwhales, • Concerted international action must be taken to stop andharpoonsfiredfromcannons.” other threats to whales including global warming, noise Bob Hunter, pollution, ship strikes and toxic contamination.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Bycatch' Whaling a Growing Threat to Coastal Whales 23 June 2009
    'Bycatch' whaling a growing threat to coastal whales 23 June 2009 Scientists are warning that a new form of Whales are occasionally killed in entanglements unregulated whaling has emerged along the with fishing nets and the deaths of large whales are coastlines of Japan and South Korea, where the reported by most member nations of the IWC. commercial sale of whales killed as fisheries Japan and South Korea are the only countries that "bycatch" is threatening coastal stocks of minke allow the commercial sale of products killed as whales and other protected species. "incidental bycatch." The sheer number of whales represented by whale-meat products on the market Scott Baker, associate director of the Marine suggests that both countries have an inordinate Mammal Institute at Oregon State University, says amount of bycatch, Baker said. DNA analysis of whale-meat products sold in Japanese markets suggests that the number of "The sale of bycatch alone supports a lucrative whales actually killed through this "bycatch trade in whale meat at markets in some Korean whaling" may be equal to that killed through coastal cities, where the wholesale price of an adult Japan's scientific whaling program - about 150 minke whale can reach as high as $100,000," annually from each source. Baker said. "Given these financial incentives, you have to wonder how many of these whales are, in Baker, a cetacean expert, and Vimoksalehi fact, killed intentionally." Lukoscheck of the University of California-Irvine presented their findings at the recent scientific In Japan, whale-meat products enter into the meeting of the International Whaling Commission commercial supply chain that supports the (IWC) in Portugal.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fish in Water: Sustainable Canadian Atlantic Fisheries Management and International Law
    COMMENT A FISH IN WATER: SUSTAINABLE CANADIAN ATLANTIC FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND INTERNATIONAL LAW ANDREW FAGENHOLZ* 1. INTRODUCTION The health and viability of the world's fisheries have declined dramatically over the past twenty years, and today most fisheries are too close to collapse.' Overexploitation of world fisheries has resulted from traditional international law that treated the oceans as a commons, or mare liberum,2 and their fish as susceptible to * J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, 2004; B.A., Williams College, 1998. The author wishes to thank Professor Jason Johnston for teaching the course that inspired this paper, Professor Harry N. Scheiber for assistance, the members of this Journal, and R. Andrew Price. 1 See The State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture: Part I - World Review of Fisheries and Aquaculture, U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization ("FAO") (2002) (designating global fisheries in 2002 as forty-seven percent fully exploited, eight- een percent overexploited, twenty-five percent moderately exploited or underex- ploited, ten percent depleted or recovering), available at http://www. fao.org/docrep/ 005/y7300e/y7300e04.htm (last visited Mar. 26, 2004). The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization has been called the "most authoritative statis- tical source on the subject" of global fisheries populations. Christopher J. Carr & Harry N. Scheiber, Dealing with a Resource Crisis: Regulatory Regimes for Managing the World's Marine Fisheries, 21 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 45, 46 (2002). 2 HUGO GROTIUS, MARE LIBERUM (THE FREEDOM OF THE SEAS) 28 (James B. Scott ed., Ralph Van Deman Magoffin trans., 1916) (1633). In the seventeenth century it was generally thought that global fish resources were incapable of exhaustion by humankind.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Experiments Show That Acoustic Pingers Reduce Marine Mammal Bycatch in the California Drift Gill Net Fishery
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Publications, Agencies and Staff of the U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. Department of Commerce 2003 FIELD EXPERIMENTS SHOW THAT ACOUSTIC PINGERS REDUCE MARINE MAMMAL BYCATCH IN THE CALIFORNIA DRIFT GILL NET FISHERY Jay Barlow National Marine Fisheries Service, [email protected] Grant A. Cameron UCSD Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdeptcommercepub Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Barlow, Jay and Cameron, Grant A., "FIELD EXPERIMENTS SHOW THAT ACOUSTIC PINGERS REDUCE MARINE MAMMAL BYCATCH IN THE CALIFORNIA DRIFT GILL NET FISHERY" (2003). Publications, Agencies and Staff of the U.S. Department of Commerce. 236. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdeptcommercepub/236 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Commerce at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications, Agencies and Staff of the U.S. Department of Commerce by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. MARINE MAMMAL SCIENCE, 19(2):265-283 (April 2003) 0 2003 by the Society for Marine Mammalogy FIELD EXPERIMENTS SHOW THAT ACOUSTIC PINGERS REDUCE MARINE MAMMAL BYCATCH IN THE CALIFORNIA DRIFT GILL NET FISHERY JAY BARLOW GRANTA. CAMERON’ Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, 8604 La Jolla Shores Drive, La Jolla, California 92037, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT A controlled experiment was carried out in 19961997 to determine whether acoustic deterrent devices (pingers) reduce marine mammal bycatch in the California drift gill net fishery for swordfish and sharks.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Upwelling Revisited: Ekman, Bakun, and Improved 10.1029/2018JC014187 Upwelling Indices for the U.S
    Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans RESEARCH ARTICLE Coastal Upwelling Revisited: Ekman, Bakun, and Improved 10.1029/2018JC014187 Upwelling Indices for the U.S. West Coast Key Points: Michael G. Jacox1,2 , Christopher A. Edwards3 , Elliott L. Hazen1 , and Steven J. Bograd1 • New upwelling indices are presented – for the U.S. West Coast (31 47°N) to 1NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Monterey, CA, USA, 2NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, CO, address shortcomings in historical 3 indices USA, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, USA • The Coastal Upwelling Transport Index (CUTI) estimates vertical volume transport (i.e., Abstract Coastal upwelling is responsible for thriving marine ecosystems and fisheries that are upwelling/downwelling) disproportionately productive relative to their surface area, particularly in the world’s major eastern • The Biologically Effective Upwelling ’ Transport Index (BEUTI) estimates boundary upwelling systems. Along oceanic eastern boundaries, equatorward wind stress and the Earth s vertical nitrate flux rotation combine to drive a near-surface layer of water offshore, a process called Ekman transport. Similarly, positive wind stress curl drives divergence in the surface Ekman layer and consequently upwelling from Supporting Information: below, a process known as Ekman suction. In both cases, displaced water is replaced by upwelling of relatively • Supporting Information S1 nutrient-rich water from below, which stimulates the growth of microscopic phytoplankton that form the base of the marine food web. Ekman theory is foundational and underlies the calculation of upwelling indices Correspondence to: such as the “Bakun Index” that are ubiquitous in eastern boundary upwelling system studies. While generally M. G. Jacox, fi [email protected] valuable rst-order descriptions, these indices and their underlying theory provide an incomplete picture of coastal upwelling.
    [Show full text]
  • Seafood Watch® Standard for Fisheries
    1 Seafood Watch® Standard for Fisheries Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Seafood Watch Guiding Principles ...................................................................................................... 3 Seafood Watch Criteria and Scoring Methodology for Fisheries ........................................................... 5 Criterion 1 – Impacts on the Species Under Assessment ...................................................................... 8 Factor 1.1 Abundance .................................................................................................................... 9 Factor 1.2 Fishing Mortality ......................................................................................................... 19 Criterion 2 – Impacts on Other Capture Species ................................................................................ 22 Factor 2.1 Abundance .................................................................................................................. 26 Factor 2.2 Fishing Mortality ......................................................................................................... 27 Factor 2.3 Modifying Factor: Discards and Bait Use .................................................................... 29 Criterion
    [Show full text]