DOCSLIB.ORG

NOAA Tech Memo NMFS NE. 257; 195 P

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NOAA Tech Memo NMFS NE. 257; 195 P NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-266 Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology 3-year Review Report - 2020 Reviewing SBRM Years 2018, 2019, and 2020 US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Fisheries Science Center Woods Hole, Massachusetts March 2021 NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-266 This series represents a secondary level of scientific publishing. All issues employ thorough internal scientific review; some issues employ external scientific review. Reviews are transparent collegial reviews, not anonymous peer reviews. All issues may be cited in formal scientific communications. Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology 3-year Review Report - 2020 Reviewing SBRM Years 2018, 2019, and 2020 by Susan Wigley1 (chair), Sam Asci2, Sharon Benjamin6, Glenn Chamberlain3, Sarah Cierpich3, Jason Didden4, Katie Drew5, Chris Legault1, Dan Linden6, Kimberly Murray1, Douglas Potts6, Kate Sampson6, 7 and Chris Tholke 1NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026 2New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950 3Technical and Engineering Support Alliance, 15850 Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 380, Rockville, MD 20855 in support of Northeast Fisheries Science Center 4Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 North State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901-3910 5Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission,1050 N. Highland Street Suite 200 A-N, Arlington, VA 22201 6NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2276 7Ocean Associates, Incorporated, 4007 North Abingdon Street, Arlington, VA 22207 US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Fisheries Science Center Woods Hole, Massachusetts March 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................. ix LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES ............................................................................................................. xii LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................... xiii LIST OF PREPARERS .......................................................................................................................... xiv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... xv BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 3 1. OBSERVER COVERAGE ............................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 7 2. OBSERVED ENCOUNTERS .......................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 9 3. DISCARD ESTIMATION, PRECISION, AND SAMPLE SIZE .................................................. 10 3.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 12 3.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 15 4. DISCARD REASONS FOR FISH AND INVERTEBRATES....................................................... 18 4.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 18 4.2 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 19 4.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 19 5. EFFECTIVENESS OF SBRM........................................................................................................ 20 5.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 20 5.2 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 21 5.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 23 6. REFINEMENTS TO SBRM METHODS ...................................................................................... 25 7. ACCURACY AND POTENTIAL SOURCES OF BIAS ANALYSES ......................................... 27 7.1 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 27 7.2 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 28 iv 7.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 29 8. IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................... 30 8.1 Consequences to Management when SBRM Performance Standard Is Not Met ................... 30 8.2 Other Management Implications: Nonfederally Managed Species ......................................... 34 8.3 Management Implications: Summary ..................................................................................... 34 9. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................... 35 REFERENCES CITED ........................................................................................................................... 38 TABLES ................................................................................................................................................. 42 FIGURES .............................................................................................................................................. 117 APPENDIX TABLES ........................................................................................................................... 175 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Species groups, fleets, and time frames of data used for the discard estimation, precision, and sample size analyses for the 14 fish/invertebrate species groups, and the corresponding sea day schedule for Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology (SBRM) 2018, 2019, and 2020. ........................................................................................ 42 Table 2. Time series for most recent sea turtle discard estimates and the Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology (SBRM) year informed by these estimates................................ 43 Table 3. List of management actions associated with monitoring of federal fisheries since the implementation of original Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology (SBRM) in 2008................................................................................................................................... 44 Table 4. Fleet stratification abbreviations used in fish/invertebrate sections ............................... 46 Table 5. List of the 14 fish and invertebrate species groups (in bold), with species group abbreviations in parentheses and scientific names in italics, and the species that compose these groups, corresponding to the 13 federal fishery management plans implemented in the waters off the northeastern United States. .................................................................. 47 Table 6. Number of observed (OB) and Vessel Trip Report (VTR) trips and percentage of observer coverage, by fleet for Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology (SBRM) 2018 (July 2016 through June 2017), SBRM 2019 (July 2017 through June 2018) and SBRM 2020 (July 2018 through June 2019). ................................................................... 48 Table 7. Number of observed (OB) and Vessel Trip Report (VTR) sea days and percentage
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecography ECOG-01937 Hattab, T., Leprieur, F., Ben Rais Lasram, F., Gravel, D., Le Loc’H, F
    Ecography ECOG-01937 Hattab, T., Leprieur, F., Ben Rais Lasram, F., Gravel, D., Le Loc’h, F. and Albouy, C. 2016. Forecasting fine- scale changes in the food-web structure of coastal marine communities under climate change. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ecog.01937 Supplementary material Forecasting fine-scale changes in the food-web structure of coastal marine communities under climate change by Hattab et al. Appendix 1 List of coastal exploited marine species considered in this study Species Genus Order Family Class Trophic guild Auxis rochei rochei (Risso, 1810) Auxis Perciformes Scombridae Actinopterygii Top predators Balistes capriscus Gmelin, 1789 Balistes Tetraodontiformes Balistidae Actinopterygii Macro-carnivorous Boops boops (Linnaeus, 1758) Boops Perciformes Sparidae Actinopterygii Basal species Carcharhinus plumbeus (Nardo, 1827) Carcharhinus Carcharhiniformes Carcharhinidae Elasmobranchii Top predators Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758) Dasyatis Rajiformes Dasyatidae Elasmobranchii Top predators Dentex dentex (Linnaeus, 1758) Dentex Perciformes Sparidae Actinopterygii Macro-carnivorous Dentex maroccanus Valenciennes, 1830 Dentex Perciformes Sparidae Actinopterygii Macro-carnivorous Diplodus annularis (Linnaeus, 1758) Diplodus Perciformes Sparidae Actinopterygii Forage species Diplodus sargus sargus (Linnaeus, 1758) Diplodus Perciformes Sparidae Actinopterygii Macro-carnivorous (Geoffroy Saint- Diplodus vulgaris Hilaire, 1817) Diplodus Perciformes Sparidae Actinopterygii Basal species Engraulis encrasicolus (Linnaeus, 1758) Engraulis
    [Show full text]
  • Jubilee Field Draft EIA Chapter 4 6 Aug 09.Pdf
    4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BASELINE 4.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter provides a description of the current environmental and socio- economic situation against which the potential impacts of the Jubilee Field Phase 1 development can be assessed and future changes monitored. The chapter presents an overview of the aspects of the environment relating to the surrounding area in which the Jubilee Field Phase 1 development will take place and which may be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed project. This includes the Jubilee Unit Area, the Ghana marine environment at a wider scale and the six districts of the Western Region bordering the marine environment. The Jubilee Unit Area and its regional setting are shown in Figure 4.1. The project area is approximately 132 km west-southwest of the city of Takoradi, 60 km from the nearest shoreline of Ghana, and 75 km from the nearest shoreline of Côte d’Ivoire. Figure 4.1 Project Location and Regional Setting ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT TULLOW GHANA LIMITED 4-1 The baseline description draws on a number of primary and secondary data sources. Primary data sources include recent hydrographic studies undertaken as part of the exploration well drilling programme in the Jubilee field area, as well as an Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) which was commissioned by Tullow and undertaken by TDI Brooks (2008). An electronic copy of the EBS is attached to this EIS. It is noted that information on the offshore distribution and ecology of marine mammals, turtles and offshore pelagic fish is more limited due to limited historic research in offshore areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean Volume
    ISBN 0-9689167-4-x Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean (Davis Strait, Southern Greenland and Flemish Cap to Cape Hatteras) Volume One Acipenseriformes through Syngnathiformes Michael P. Fahay ii Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean iii Dedication This monograph is dedicated to those highly skilled larval fish illustrators whose talents and efforts have greatly facilitated the study of fish ontogeny. The works of many of those fine illustrators grace these pages. iv Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean v Preface The contents of this monograph are a revision and update of an earlier atlas describing the eggs and larvae of western Atlantic marine fishes occurring between the Scotian Shelf and Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (Fahay, 1983). The three-fold increase in the total num- ber of species covered in the current compilation is the result of both a larger study area and a recent increase in published ontogenetic studies of fishes by many authors and students of the morphology of early stages of marine fishes. It is a tribute to the efforts of those authors that the ontogeny of greater than 70% of species known from the western North Atlantic Ocean is now well described. Michael Fahay 241 Sabino Road West Bath, Maine 04530 U.S.A. vi Acknowledgements I greatly appreciate the help provided by a number of very knowledgeable friends and colleagues dur- ing the preparation of this monograph. Jon Hare undertook a painstakingly critical review of the entire monograph, corrected omissions, inconsistencies, and errors of fact, and made suggestions which markedly improved its organization and presentation.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Species of Cretaceous Acanthomorph from Canada 15 February 2016, by Sarah Gibson
    A new species of Cretaceous acanthomorph from Canada 15 February 2016, by Sarah Gibson to sit flush along the body, helping the fish swim faster by reducing drag, or they can be extended completely out to act as a defense mechanism, in case you are a predator looking for a quick bite. Near the base of the Acanthomorpha phylogenetic tree is a small group of fishes, Polymixiiformes, comprised of a single living genus, Polymixia, more commonly known as the beardfish. This innocuous fish seems harmless, but according to many ichthyologists, Polymixia is just one key to understanding acanthomorph relationships. Unraveling the evolutionary relationships is difficult with a single living genus, but thankfully, polymixiiforms have a fossil record dating back to the Cretaceous, containing an increasing number of taxa as new discoveries are being made, particularly in deposits in North America, where fewer acanthomorph fossils are known compared to Figuring out fish relationships is no small feat. Credit: the more-studied Eastern Tethys Ocean deposits in Near et al. 2013 Europe. For being one of the largest groups of vertebrates, and having one of the richer fossil records among organisms, the relationships of fishes are still hotly debated. Humongous datasets are being compiled that involve molecular (both nuclear and mitochondrial) data, compared and contrasted with thorough morphological analyses. (I'm not going to get into all of it here, simply because of its sheer complexity.) What I am going to get into, however, is the fossil record of one subset of fishes, the acanthomorphs. The stout beardfish, Polymixia nobilis. Credit: Wikipedia Acanthomorphs are teleost fishes that possess true fin spines: a set of prominent, sharp, unsegmented spines in the front portion of their dorsal and/or anal fins, followed by a portion of One such new species was recently described by pliable, segmented, "softer" looking rays.
    [Show full text]
  • Updated Checklist of Marine Fishes (Chordata: Craniata) from Portugal and the Proposed Extension of the Portuguese Continental Shelf
    European Journal of Taxonomy 73: 1-73 ISSN 2118-9773 http://dx.doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2014.73 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2014 · Carneiro M. et al. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Monograph urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9A5F217D-8E7B-448A-9CAB-2CCC9CC6F857 Updated checklist of marine fishes (Chordata: Craniata) from Portugal and the proposed extension of the Portuguese continental shelf Miguel CARNEIRO1,5, Rogélia MARTINS2,6, Monica LANDI*,3,7 & Filipe O. COSTA4,8 1,2 DIV-RP (Modelling and Management Fishery Resources Division), Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera, Av. Brasilia 1449-006 Lisboa, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 3,4 CBMA (Centre of Molecular and Environmental Biology), Department of Biology, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] * corresponding author: [email protected] 5 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:90A98A50-327E-4648-9DCE-75709C7A2472 6 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:1EB6DE00-9E91-407C-B7C4-34F31F29FD88 7 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:6D3AC760-77F2-4CFA-B5C7-665CB07F4CEB 8 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:48E53CF3-71C8-403C-BECD-10B20B3C15B4 Abstract. The study of the Portuguese marine ichthyofauna has a long historical tradition, rooted back in the 18th Century. Here we present an annotated checklist of the marine fishes from Portuguese waters, including the area encompassed by the proposed extension of the Portuguese continental shelf and the Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ). The list is based on historical literature records and taxon occurrence data obtained from natural history collections, together with new revisions and occurrences.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Fishes a Field Guide to Common Species Caught by Bottom, Midwater, and Surface Fishing Cover Photos: Top – Kingfish (Seriola Lalandi), Malcolm Francis
    New Zealand fishes A field guide to common species caught by bottom, midwater, and surface fishing Cover photos: Top – Kingfish (Seriola lalandi), Malcolm Francis. Top left – Snapper (Chrysophrys auratus), Malcolm Francis. Centre – Catch of hoki (Macruronus novaezelandiae), Neil Bagley (NIWA). Bottom left – Jack mackerel (Trachurus sp.), Malcolm Francis. Bottom – Orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus), NIWA. New Zealand fishes A field guide to common species caught by bottom, midwater, and surface fishing New Zealand Aquatic Environment and Biodiversity Report No: 208 Prepared for Fisheries New Zealand by P. J. McMillan M. P. Francis G. D. James L. J. Paul P. Marriott E. J. Mackay B. A. Wood D. W. Stevens L. H. Griggs S. J. Baird C. D. Roberts‡ A. L. Stewart‡ C. D. Struthers‡ J. E. Robbins NIWA, Private Bag 14901, Wellington 6241 ‡ Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, PO Box 467, Wellington, 6011Wellington ISSN 1176-9440 (print) ISSN 1179-6480 (online) ISBN 978-1-98-859425-5 (print) ISBN 978-1-98-859426-2 (online) 2019 Disclaimer While every effort was made to ensure the information in this publication is accurate, Fisheries New Zealand does not accept any responsibility or liability for error of fact, omission, interpretation or opinion that may be present, nor for the consequences of any decisions based on this information. Requests for further copies should be directed to: Publications Logistics Officer Ministry for Primary Industries PO Box 2526 WELLINGTON 6140 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 00 83 33 Facsimile: 04-894 0300 This publication is also available on the Ministry for Primary Industries website at http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-and-resources/publications/ A higher resolution (larger) PDF of this guide is also available by application to: [email protected] Citation: McMillan, P.J.; Francis, M.P.; James, G.D.; Paul, L.J.; Marriott, P.; Mackay, E.; Wood, B.A.; Stevens, D.W.; Griggs, L.H.; Baird, S.J.; Roberts, C.D.; Stewart, A.L.; Struthers, C.D.; Robbins, J.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Order ZEIFORMES PARAZENIDAE Parazens P.C
    click for previous page Zeiformes: Parazenidae 1203 Order ZEIFORMES PARAZENIDAE Parazens P.C. Heemstra, South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity, South Africa iagnostic characters: Small to moderate-sized (to 30 cm) oblong fishes, the head and body com- Dpressed; body depth slightly less than head length, contained 2.6 to 2.9 times in standard length; head naked, the bones thin and soft; opercular bones weakly serrate; mouth large, terminal, the upper jaw extremely protrusile; maxilla widely expanded posteriorly, and mostly exposed when mouth is closed; no supramaxilla; jaws with 1 or 2 rows of small, slender, conical teeth; vomer with a few short stout teeth;gill rakers (including rudiments) 2 on upper limb, 8 on lower limb.Eye diameter about 1/3 head length and slightly less than snout length.Branchiostegal rays 7.Dorsal fin divided, with 8 slender spines and 26 to 30 soft rays; anal fin with 1 minute spine and 30 to 32 soft rays; dorsal-, anal-, and pectoral-fin rays un- branched; caudal fin forked, with 11 principal rays and 9 branched rays; pectoral fin with 15 or 16 rays, shorter than eye diameter; pelvic fins with 1 unbranched and 5 or 6 branched soft rays, but no spine, fin origin posterior to a vertical at pectoral-fin base. Scales moderate in size, weakly ctenoid, and deciduous; 2 lateral lines originating on body at upper end of operculum and running posteriorly about 4 scale rows apart, gradually converging to form a single line on caudal peduncle. Caudal peduncle stout, the least depth about equal to its length and slightly less than eye diameter.Vertebrae 34.Colour: body reddish or silvery; large black blotch on anterior margin of dorsal fin.
    [Show full text]
  • Ahead of Print Online Version New Genus of Opecoelid Trematode From
    Ahead of print online version FoliA PArAsitologicA 61 [3]: 223–230, 2014 © institute of Parasitology, Biology centre Ascr issN 0015-5683 (print), issN 1803-6465 (online) http://folia.paru.cas.cz/ doi: 10.14411/fp.2014.033 New genus of opecoelid trematode from Pristipomoides aquilonaris (Perciformes: Lutjanidae) and its phylogenetic affinity within the family Opecoelidae Michael J. Andres, Eric E. Pulis and Robin M. Overstreet Department of coastal sciences, University of southern Mississippi, ocean springs, Mississippi, UsA Abstract: Bentholebouria colubrosa gen. n. et sp. n. (Digenea: opecoelidae) is described in the wenchman, Pristipomoides aq- uilonaris (goode et Bean), from the eastern gulf of Mexico, and new combinations are proposed: Bentholebouria blatta (Bray et Justine, 2009) comb. n., Bentholebouria longisaccula (Yamaguti, 1970) comb. n., Bentholebouria rooseveltiae (Yamaguti, 1970) comb. n., and Bentholebouria ulaula (Yamaguti, 1970) comb. n. the new genus is morphologically similar to Neolebouria gibson, 1976, but with a longer cirrus sac, entire testes, a rounded posterior margin with a cleft, and an apparent restriction to the deepwater snappers. Morphologically, the new species is closest to B. blatta from Pristipomoides argyrogrammicus (Valenciennes) off New caledonia but can be differentiated by the nature of the internal seminal vesicle (2–6 turns or loops rather than constrictions), a longer internal seminal vesicle (occupying about 65% rather than 50% of the cirrus sac), a cirrus sac that extends further into the hindbody (averaging 136% rather than 103% of the distance from the posterior margin of the ventral sucker to the ovary), and a narrower body (27% rather than 35% mean width as % of body length).
    [Show full text]
  • Zeidae Rafinesque, 1815 - True Dories [=Zeusidi Rafinesque, 1810, Zedia Rafinesque, 1815, ?Aplodia Rafinesque, 1815] Notes: Zeusidi Rafinesque, 1810B:15 [Ref
    FAMILY Zeidae Rafinesque, 1815 - true dories [=Zeusidi Rafinesque, 1810, Zedia Rafinesque, 1815, ?Aplodia Rafinesque, 1815] Notes: Zeusidi Rafinesque, 1810b:15 [ref. 3595] (ordine) Zeus [published not in latinized form before 1900; not available, Article 11.7.2] Zedia Rafinesque, 1815:83 [ref. 3584] (family) Zeus [stem corrected to Ze- by Latreille 1825:131 [ref. 31889], confirmed by Bonaparte 1831:158, 174 [ref. 4978]; stem changed to Zen- by Lowe 1839:82 [ref. 2829], confirmed by Gill 1873:787 [ref. 17631]; stem Ze- confirmed by Nelson 1976:192 [ref. 32838] and by Nelson 2006:307 [ref. 32486]] ?Aplodia Rafinesque, 1815:84 [ref. 3584] (subfamily) ? Zeus [no stem of the type genus, not available, Article 11.7.1.1] GENUS Zenopsis Gill, 1862 - John dories [=Zenopsis Gill [T. N.], 1862:126, Parazenopsis Cligny [A.], 1909:874 [1]] Notes: [ref. 1659]. Fem. Zeus nebulosus Temminck & Schlegel, 1845. Type by original designation (also monotypic). •Valid as Zenopsis Gill, 1862 -- (Wheeler 1973:349 [ref. 7190], Heemstra 1980:11 [ref. 14195], Machida in Masuda et al. 1984:118 [ref. 6441], Quéro in Whitehead et al. 1986:770 [ref. 13676], Heemstra 1986:437 [ref. 5660], Paxton et al. 1989:389 [ref. 12442], Parin 1989 [ref. 14116], Gomon et al. 1994:420 [ref. 22532], Heemstra 1999:2259 [ref. 24791], Tyler et al. 2003:36 [ref. 26742], Heemstra 2003:1209 [ref. 27043], Nakabo et al.2006:91 [ref. 28907], Paxton et al. 2006:800 [ref. 29077], Bray 2008:439 [ref. 30620], Shinohara et al. 2011:41 [ref. 31715]). Current status: Valid as Zenopsis Gill, 1862. Zeidae. (Parazenopsis) [ref. 850].
    [Show full text]
  • FISHES (C) Val Kells–November, 2019
    VAL KELLS Marine Science Illustration 4257 Ballards Mill Road - Free Union - VA - 22940 www.valkellsillustration.com [email protected] STOCK ILLUSTRATION LIST FRESHWATER and SALTWATER FISHES (c) Val Kells–November, 2019 Eastern Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico: brackish and saltwater fishes Subject to change. New illustrations added weekly. Atlantic hagfish, Myxine glutinosa Sea lamprey, Petromyzon marinus Deepwater chimaera, Hydrolagus affinis Atlantic spearnose chimaera, Rhinochimaera atlantica Nurse shark, Ginglymostoma cirratum Whale shark, Rhincodon typus Sand tiger, Carcharias taurus Ragged-tooth shark, Odontaspis ferox Crocodile Shark, Pseudocarcharias kamoharai Thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus Bigeye thresher, Alopias superciliosus Basking shark, Cetorhinus maximus White shark, Carcharodon carcharias Shortfin mako, Isurus oxyrinchus Longfin mako, Isurus paucus Porbeagle, Lamna nasus Freckled Shark, Scyliorhinus haeckelii Marbled catshark, Galeus arae Chain dogfish, Scyliorhinus retifer Smooth dogfish, Mustelus canis Smalleye Smoothhound, Mustelus higmani Dwarf Smoothhound, Mustelus minicanis Florida smoothhound, Mustelus norrisi Gulf Smoothhound, Mustelus sinusmexicanus Blacknose shark, Carcharhinus acronotus Bignose shark, Carcharhinus altimus Narrowtooth Shark, Carcharhinus brachyurus Spinner shark, Carcharhinus brevipinna Silky shark, Carcharhinus faiformis Finetooth shark, Carcharhinus isodon Galapagos Shark, Carcharhinus galapagensis Bull shark, Carcharinus leucus Blacktip shark, Carcharhinus limbatus Oceanic whitetip shark,
    [Show full text]
  • Recycled Fish Sculpture (.PDF)
    Recycled Fish Sculpture Name:__________ Fish: are a paraphyletic group of organisms that consist of all gill-bearing aquatic vertebrate animals that lack limbs with digits. At 32,000 species, fish exhibit greater species diversity than any other group of vertebrates. Sculpture: is three-dimensional artwork created by shaping or combining hard materials—typically stone such as marble—or metal, glass, or wood. Softer ("plastic") materials can also be used, such as clay, textiles, plastics, polymers and softer metals. They may be assembled such as by welding or gluing or by firing, molded or cast. Researched Photo Source: Alaskan Rainbow STEP ONE: CHOOSE one fish from the attached Fish Names list. Trout STEP TWO: RESEARCH on-line and complete the attached K/U Fish Research Sheet. STEP THREE: DRAW 3 conceptual sketches with colour pencil crayons of possible visual images that represent your researched fish. STEP FOUR: Once your fish designs are approved by the teacher, DRAW a representational outline of your fish on the 18 x24 and then add VALUE and COLOUR . CONSIDER: Individual shapes and forms for the various parts you will cut out of recycled pop aluminum cans (such as individual scales, gills, fins etc.) STEP FIVE: CUT OUT using scissors the various individual sections of your chosen fish from recycled pop aluminum cans. OVERLAY them on top of your 18 x 24 Representational Outline 18 x 24 Drawing representational drawing to judge the shape and size of each piece. STEP SIX: Once you have cut out all your shapes and forms, GLUE the various pieces together with a glue gun.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of the Fishes of the Monterey Bay Area Including Elkhorn Slough, the San Lorenzo, Pajaro and Salinas Rivers
    f3/oC-4'( Contributions from the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories No. 26 Technical Publication 72-2 CASUC-MLML-TP-72-02 A CHECKLIST OF THE FISHES OF THE MONTEREY BAY AREA INCLUDING ELKHORN SLOUGH, THE SAN LORENZO, PAJARO AND SALINAS RIVERS by Gary E. Kukowski Sea Grant Research Assistant June 1972 LIBRARY Moss L8ndillg ,\:Jrine Laboratories r. O. Box 223 Moss Landing, Calif. 95039 This study was supported by National Sea Grant Program National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration United States Department of Commerce - Grant No. 2-35137 to Moss Landing Marine Laboratories of the California State University at Fresno, Hayward, Sacramento, San Francisco, and San Jose Dr. Robert E. Arnal, Coordinator , ·./ "':., - 'I." ~:. 1"-"'00 ~~ ~~ IAbm>~toriesi Technical Publication 72-2: A GI-lliGKL.TST OF THE FISHES OF TtlE MONTEREY my Jl.REA INCLUDING mmORH SLOUGH, THE SAN LCRENZO, PAY-ARO AND SALINAS RIVERS .. 1&let~: Page 14 - A1estria§.·~iligtro1ophua - Stone cockscomb - r-m Page 17 - J:,iparis'W10pus." Ribbon' snailt'ish - HE , ,~ ~Ei 31 - AlectrlQ~iu.e,ctro1OphUfi- 87-B9 . .', . ': ". .' Page 31 - Ceb1diehtlrrs rlolaCewi - 89 , Page 35 - Liparis t!01:f-.e - 89 .Qhange: Page 11 - FmWulns parvipin¢.rl, add: Probable misidentification Page 20 - .BathopWuBt.lemin&, change to: .Mhgghilu§. llemipg+ Page 54 - Ji\mdJ11ui~~ add: Probable. misidentifioation Page 60 - Item. number 67, authOr should be .Hubbs, Clark TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 AREA OF COVERAGE 1 METHODS OF LITERATURE SEARCH 2 EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4 TABLE 1
    [Show full text]