DOCSLIB.ORG

Characterization of the Massachusetts Spring Longfin Squid Fishery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Characterization of the Massachusetts Spring Longfin Squid Fishery Characterization of the Massachusetts Spring Longfin Squid Fishery Bradley P. Schondelmeier Aquatic Biologist Fisheries Dependent Investigations William S. Hoffman Senior Marine Biologist Fisheries Dependent Investigations Daniel J. McKiernan Director Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries Department of Fish and Game Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Commonwealth of Massachusetts May 21, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose and Objectives .......................................................................................................... 1 2. BIOLOGY AND STOCK STATUS OF LONGFIN SQUID ......................................................... 1 2.1 Habitat and Growth ................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Predator and Prey ................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Stock Status ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. MANAGEMENT OF THE LONGFIN SQUID FISHERY ........................................................... 3 3.1 Description of Massachusetts Longfin Squid Trawl Fishery ................................................. 3 3.2 Reporting Areas ...................................................................................................................... 4 3.3 Vessels and Gear .................................................................................................................... 5 3.4 Permits and Endorsements ..................................................................................................... 6 3.5 Catch Restrictions .................................................................................................................. 6 3.6 Season..................................................................................................................................... 6 3.7 Description of Longfin Squid Weir Fishery ........................................................................... 7 3.8 Description of Longfin Squid Handline/Rod and Reel Fishery ............................................. 7 4. HISTORY OF LONGFIN SQUID MANAGEMENT ................................................................... 7 4.1 Significant Federal Management Actions .............................................................................. 7 4.2 Significant State Management Actions .................................................................................. 8 4.3 Regulatory Limits ................................................................................................................... 8 5. ANALYSIS METHODS OF THE LONGFIN SQUID FISHERY ............................................... 9 5.1 Definition of a Squid Trip ...................................................................................................... 9 5.2 Landings Data ...................................................................................................................... 10 5.3 At-Sea Catch, Bycatch and Biological Data......................................................................... 10 5.4 Analytical Programs ............................................................................................................. 10 5.5 Data Confidentiality Standards ............................................................................................ 10 6. LANDINGS AND VALUE OF THE LONGFIN SQUID FISHERY ......................................... 10 6.1 Coastwide Longfin Squid Landings and Value .................................................................... 10 6.2 Massachusetts Longfin Squid Landings ............................................................................... 12 6.3 Coastwide Landings During Massachusetts Spring Longfin Squid Spring Fishery ............ 13 6.4 Landings by State from Nantucket and Vineyard Sounds .................................................... 14 6.5 Landings of Longfin Squid by Bottom-Trawl Vessel Size .................................................. 14 6.6 Value of Spring Longfin Squid Landings from All Areas ................................................... 17 6.7 Value of Landings by Port.................................................................................................... 18 6.8 Incidentally Kept Species Landings and Value .................................................................... 18 6.9 Economic Significance of Spring Longfin Squid Fishery to Participating Vessels ............. 19 7. AT-SEA CATCH SAMPLING (2013-2017) ................................................................................. 20 7.1 Sampling Programs and Agencies ........................................................................................ 20 7.2 Fisheries Observer Duties .................................................................................................... 21 7.3 Catch Sampling Effort .......................................................................................................... 21 7.4 Sea Sampling Data Selection Methods ................................................................................ 22 7.5 Annual Sampling Effort ....................................................................................................... 23 7.6 Coverage Rates ..................................................................................................................... 23 7.7 Spring Fishery Bottom Trawl Fishing Grounds ................................................................... 24 7.8 Location of Sampled Hauls .................................................................................................. 25 i 7.8.1 Effort by Area ....................................................................................................... 26 7.8.2 Effort by Month .................................................................................................... 26 7.9 Summary of Sampled Catches ............................................................................................. 27 7.9.1 Finfishes ................................................................................................................ 28 7.9.2 Shellfishes ............................................................................................................. 29 7.10 Target Species Catch ............................................................................................................ 29 7.10.1 Longfin Squid ....................................................................................................... 29 7.11 Vessel Size and Haul Duration Effects ................................................................................ 30 7.12 Standardized Catch Rates ..................................................................................................... 30 7.13 Catch Rate Seasonality ......................................................................................................... 31 7.14 Squid Lengths ....................................................................................................................... 32 7.14.1 Reason for Discarding Longfin Squid .................................................................. 32 7.15 Non-Target Species Catch .................................................................................................... 32 7.15.1 Scup ...................................................................................................................... 32 7.15.2 Butterfish .............................................................................................................. 33 7.15.3 Summer Flounder.................................................................................................. 34 7.15.4 Black Sea Bass ...................................................................................................... 36 7.15.5 Additional Kept Catches ....................................................................................... 37 7.15.6 Additional Discarded Catches ............................................................................... 37 7.16 Summary of Discards by Category ...................................................................................... 39 7.16.1 Market-Related Discards ...................................................................................... 39 7.16.2 Regulatory Discards .............................................................................................. 39 7.16.3 Other Discards ...................................................................................................... 39 7.16.4 Notable Catches .................................................................................................... 39 8. DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................. 40 8.1 Factors Contributing to Sustainability .................................................................................. 40 8.1.1 Species Resiliency ................................................................................................ 40 8.2 Catch and Bycatch Data ......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission
    32nd Annual Report of the PACIFIC MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION FOR THE YEAR 1979 TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES AND TO THE GOVERNORS AND LEGISLATURES OF WASHINGTON, OREGON, CALIFORNIA, IDAHO, AND ALASKA Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission 528 S.W. Mill Street Portland, Oregon 97201 July 8, 1980 32nd Annual Report of the PACIFIC MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION FOR THE YEAR 1979 PREFACE The Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission was created in 1947 with the consent of Congress. The Commission serves five member States: Alaska, California, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. The purpose of this Compact, as stated in its Goal and Objectives, is to promote the wise management, utilization, and development of fisheries of mutual concern, and to develop a joint program of protection, enhancement, and prevention of physical waste of such fisheries. The advent of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act {FCMA) of 1976 and amendments thereto has caused spectacular and continuing changes in the management of marine fisheries in the United States. The FCMA created the Fishery Conservation Zone (FCZ) between 3 and 200 nautical miles offshore, established 8 Regional Fishery Management Councils with authority to develop fishery management plans within the FCZ, and granted the Secretary of Commerce the power to regulate both domestic and foreign fishing fleets within the FCZ. The FCMA greatly modified fishery management roles at state, interstate, national and international levels. The Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission recognized early that its operational role would change as a result of possible functional overlaps with the two regional fishery management councils established on the Pacific Coast. On the one hand, the FCMA provides non-voting Council membership to the Executive Directors of the interstate Marine Fisheries Commissions, thus assuring active participation as the Councils deliberate on fishery matters of concern to the States.
    [Show full text]
  • Why International Catch Shares Won't Save Ocean Biodiversity
    Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law Volume 2 Issue 2 2013 Why International Catch Shares Won't Save Ocean Biodiversity Holly Doremus University of California, Berkeley Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjeal Part of the Environmental Law Commons, International Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, and the Natural Resources Law Commons Recommended Citation Holly Doremus, Why International Catch Shares Won't Save Ocean Biodiversity, 2 MICH. J. ENVTL. & ADMIN. L. 385 (2013). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjeal/vol2/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Doremus_Final_Web_Ready_FINAL_12May2013 7/18/2013 4:24 PM WHY INTERNATIONAL CATCH SHARES WON’T SAVE OCEAN BIODIVERSITY Holly Doremus* Skepticism about the efficacy and efficiency of regulatory approaches has produced a wave of enthusiasm for market-based strategies for dealing with environmental conflicts. In the fisheries context, the most prominent of these strategies is the use of “catch shares,” which assign specific proportions of the total allowable catch to individuals who are then free to trade them with others. Catch shares are now in wide use domestically within many nations, and there are increasing calls for implementation of internationally tradable catch shares. Based on a review of theory, empirical evidence, and two contexts in which catch shares have been proposed, this Article explains why international catch shares are not likely to arrest the decline of ocean biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Barndoor Skate, Dipturus Laevis, Life History and Habitat Characteristics
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-173 Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Barndoor Skate, Dipturus laevis, Life History and Habitat Characteristics U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Region Northeast Fisheries Science Center Woods Hole, Massachusetts March 2003 Recent Issues in This Series: 155. Food of Northwest Atlantic Fishes and Two Common Species of Squid. By Ray E. Bowman, Charles E. Stillwell, William L. Michaels, and Marvin D. Grosslein. January 2000. xiv + 138 p., 1 fig., 7 tables, 2 app. NTIS Access. No. PB2000-106735. 156. Proceedings of the Summer Flounder Aging Workshop, 1-2 February 1999, Woods Hole, Massachusetts. By George R. Bolz, James Patrick Monaghan, Jr., Kathy L. Lang, Randall W. Gregory, and Jay M. Burnett. May 2000. v + 15 p., 5 figs., 5 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2000-107403. 157. Contaminant Levels in Muscle of Four Species of Recreational Fish from the New York Bight Apex. By Ashok D. Deshpande, Andrew F.J. Draxler, Vincent S. Zdanowicz, Mary E. Schrock, Anthony J. Paulson, Thomas W. Finneran, Beth L. Sharack, Kathy Corbo, Linda Arlen, Elizabeth A. Leimburg, Bruce W. Dockum, Robert A. Pikanowski, Brian May, and Lisa B. Rosman. June 2000. xxii + 99 p., 6 figs., 80 tables, 3 app., glossary. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-107346. 158. A Framework for Monitoring and Assessing Socioeconomics and Governance of Large Marine Ecosystems. By Jon G. Sutinen, editor, with contributors (listed alphabetically) Patricia Clay, Christopher L. Dyer, Steven F. Edwards, John Gates, Tom A. Grigalunas, Timothy Hennessey, Lawrence Juda, Andrew W. Kitts, Philip N.
    [Show full text]
  • Seafood Traceability for Fisheries Compliance – Country- Level Support for Catch Documentation Schemes
    ISSN 2070-7010 FAO 619 FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER 619 Seafood traceability for fisheries compliance Country-level support for catch documentation schemes Seafood traceability for fisheries compliance This document explores ways in which individual countries in seafood supply chains can, in their capacities as coastal, flag, port, processing or end-market states, contribute to maximizing the effectiveness of catch documentation schemes. The focus is on the traceability of seafood consignments, but the authors also explore other important compliance mechanisms that are not directly related to traceability but – that support the effective implementation of catch documentation schemes at the Country-level support for catch documentation schemes country level. The document explains which traceability mechanisms are built into catch documentation schemes, and which additional support mechanisms must be provided by individual countries along seafood supply chains. The study finds that traditional fisheries monitoring, inspection and sanctioning mechanisms are of primary importance with regard to flag, coastal and end-market states, whereas effective country-level traceability mechanisms are critical of particular importance in port and processing states. ISBN 978-92-5-130040-4 978 9251 300404 FAO I8183EN/1/11.17 Cover photograph: Weighing and recording of catch to be transhipped off a longline fishing vessel. Noro, Solomon Islands. © Francisco Blaha (Photo serves an illustrative purpose and was not taken in the context of IUU fishing)
    [Show full text]
  • Seasonal and Size-Based Predation on Two Species of Squid by Four Fish
    605 Abstract-Longfin inshore (Loligo Seasonal and size-based predation on pealeii) and northern shortfin (lllex illecebrosus) squids are considered two species of squid by four fish predators important prey species in the North­ west Atlantic shelf ecosystem. The on the Northwest Atlantic continental shelf diets of four major squid predators, bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), goose­ Michelle D. Staudinger fish (Lophius americanus), silver hake (Merluccius bilinearis), and summer Department of Natural Resources Conservation flounder (Paralichthys dentatus), were 160 Holdsworth Way examined for seasonal and size-based University of Massachusetts, Amherst changes in feeding habits. Summer Amherst, Massachusetts 01003-9285 and winter, two time periods largely Email address: [email protected] absent from previous evaluations, were found to be the most impor­ tant seasons for predation on squid, and are also the periods when the majority of squid are landed by the regional fishery. Bluefish >450 mm, silver hake >300 mm, and summer Global depletion of marine predators significant predators of squid (Bow­ flounder >400 mm were all found has had dramatic effects on ecosys­ man et al., 2000). Squid represented to be significant predators of squid. tem structure and function (May et between 17% and 95% of the total These same size fish correspond to al., 1979; Jackson et al., 2001; Pauly mass consumed by these four finfish age classes currently targeted for et al., 2002). In many systems, the regionally. Dramatic changes in stock biomass expansion by management ramifications of such changes may not abundance and population structure committees. This study highlights be fully realized. Groundfish declines have occurred since specimens for the importance of understanding how have been linked to simultaneous Bowman et al.'s study were collect­ squid and predator interactions vary increases in cephalopod landings temporally and with changes in com­ ed 25-45 years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance & Best Practices for Federally-Managed Fisheries
    DISCUSSION DRAFT Electronic Monitoring and Electronic Reporting: Guidance & Best Practices for Federally-Managed Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service in collaboration with Regional Fishery Management Councils Interstate Marine Fisheries Commissions State Marine Fisheries Agencies Tribes Commercial and Recreational Fishermen Fishing Community Organizations Environmental and Non-Governmental Organizations Electronic Technology Service Providers August 2013 EM/ER Discussion Draft Page ii Foreword What is a “Discussion Draft”? A discussion draft is a draft work in progress intended to stimulate reader thought and to extract reader’s reaction to a topic. The purpose is to mine reader’s additional ideas and contributions for completion of a final document. What is the intended use for this document? The objective of the discussion draft is to promote discussion and thinking within regions and across regions about electronic monitoring (EM) and electronic reporting (ER). Our collective goal for the final document, scheduled for completion this Fall, is to help managers and stakeholders consider the questions of how EM/ER tools can help contribute to a more cost-effective and sustainable collection of fishery dependent data in our federally- managed fisheries. Are these Mandatory Requirements? No. The guidance in the document is not prescriptive or regulatory in nature and is offered simply as preliminary advice and suggested best practices. As consideration of EM/ER proceeds in the eight Council regions it is hoped that additional feedback and guidance will be submitted for addition to this document over time as a “living document” to improve the knowledge base and information available to assist decision makers.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Framework for Fishery Monitoring and Catch Reporting in the Pacific Fisheries
    Strategic Framework for Fishery Monitoring and Catch Reporting in the Pacific Fisheries Fisheries and Oceans Canada Pacific Region Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Final March 2012 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 Policy context 1 Key drivers for change 2 The current status of monitoring and reporting 5 A risk‐based strategic framework 7 2. Goal and Guiding Principles 8 Goal 9 Principle 1: Conservation and sustainable use 9 Principle 2: Consistency and transparency 10 Principle 3: Tailored requirements 11 Principle 4: Shared accountability and access 11 Principle 5: Cost‐effectiveness 12 3. Strategic Approach 12 Strategy 1: Monitoring and Reporting Requirements 13 Strategy 2: Monitoring and reporting programs 16 Strategy 3: Data management 17 Strategy 4: Other program support 18 Strategy 5: Integrated Compliance Management 18 Strategy 6: Continual improvement 19 5. Summary and Next Steps 19 References 22 Appendix 1 24 Appendix 2 26 D 1. Introduction Faced with a myriad of challenges, including climate change, declining fish stocks, reduced economic viability, an evolving global marketplace, and heightened competition for aquatic resources, Canada’s Pacific fisheries are undergoing reform. Demands for sustainable management that considers the larger ecosystem, respects Aboriginal rights, strengthens engagement of resource users in decision‐making, and finds solutions to allocate scarce resources are putting pressure on governments and fishery interests alike. In many fisheries, the distrust of reported catch data and inconsistent monitoring has helped to fuel conflicts between harvesting groups. Reliable, timely and accessible fisheries information is the foundation of sustainable management. While the importance of good catch data is certainly not new to the Pacific Region, the worldwide trend towards sustainable fisheries and supporting management practices is calling for significant improvements in monitoring and reporting.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconstruction of Original Body Size and Estimation of Allometric
    101 Reconstruction of original body size tie length in squid) in population and other types of surveys, information and estimation of allometric relationships on total length may not always be for the Iongtin inshore squid <Loligo pealeit1 readily available. Therefore, knowl­ edge of allometric relationships may and northern shortfin squid (///ex il/ecebrosus> be useful to. accurately assess trophic interactions and predator-prey rela­ Michelle D. Staudinger' tionships. For the majority of ceph­ alopod species, there are currently 1 Francis Juanes no predictive equations to estimate Suzanne Carlson2 total length from mantle length and Email address for contact author: [email protected] to account for variability in growth. 1 Department of Natural Resources Conservation To improve descriptions of the feed­ University of Massachusetts Amherst ing habits of teuthophagous preda­ Amherst, Massachusetts, 01003-9285 tors and to increase the number of 2 School of Natural Science evaluations of size-based predation Hampshire CoRege on cephalopod prey we present 1) pre­ Amherst, Massachusetts, 01002 dictive equations for reconstructing original prey size and 2) allometric relationships of mantle length to total body length for the two most common species of cephalopods in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean, L. pealeii Quantification of predator-prey body mammals (Gannon et al., 1997; Wil­ and I. illecebrosus. size relationships is essential to under­ liams, 1999). standing trophic dynamics in marine As with the bones and otoliths of ecosystems. Prey lengths recovered prey fish, cephalopod beaks are often Materials and methods from predator stomachs help deter­ recovered from predator stomachs mine the sizes of prey most influential and may be used for identification of Loligo pealeii were collected by otter in supporting predator growth and prey species and the reconstruction trawl from coastal waters off Mas­ to ascertain size-specific effects of of original prey body size (Clarke, sachusetts during the months of May natural mortality on prey populations 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • Vessel Monitoring Systems and Their Role in Fisheries Management and Monitoring, Control and Surveillance
    Vessel Monitoring Systems and their Role in Fisheries Management and Monitoring, Control and Surveillance 1.0 Vessel Monitoring Systems: Overview Fisheries managers started utilizing Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) in the 1990si to track the locations and monitor the activities of fishing vessels in order to bolster the efficacy of fisheries management measures. This capability also enhanced enforcement capacity by facilitating more effective and cost efficient enforcement actions by providing a level of monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) not possible with traditional and more conventional methods of aerial and surface surveillance. Satellite-based VMS are described by the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as: “…comprised of several components. Each participating vessel must carry a VMS unit. This shipboard electronic equipment is installed permanently onboard a fishing vessel and assigned a unique identifier. Most shipboard VMS equipment types use satellite communication systems that have an integrated Global Positioning System (GPS). The system calculates the unit’s position and sends a data report to shoreside users. The standard data report includes the VMS unit’s unique identifier, date, time and position in latitude and longitude…” Initially, VMS was used as an instrument for flag States to track the activities of their own domestic fishing vessels, and for coastal States to monitor foreign-flagged fishing vessels licensed to operate within their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provided the legal basis for this as it gave coastal States the primary responsibility for managing all living marine resources within their 200 nautical mile EEZ. The United Nations (UN) Fish Stocks Agreement specifically called for the implementation of VMS by flag States in the framework of sub- regional, regional and global agreementsii.
    [Show full text]
  • Longfin Squid 2018 Data Update
    Report to the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council Regarding Fishery and Survey Data Updates, through 2017, for the Longfin Inshore Squid (Doryteuthis (Amerigo) pealeii) Stock by Lisa C. Hendrickson Population Dynamics Branch National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Fisheries Science Center Woods Hole, MA 02543 April 9, 2018 1.0 Background This report contains updates of the landings and survey relative abundance and biomass indices of longfin inshore squid (Doryteuthis (Amerigo) pealeii) through 2017. The report also contains updates of the additional information requested by members of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s (MAFMC) Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) to aid them in recommending an Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) for the D. pealeii stock in 2019. The additional information includes maps of the recent spatial distributions of the landings for the directed bottom trawl fishery and stratified mean body weights from the Northeast Fisheries Science Center’s (NEFSC) fall bottom trawl surveys. D. pealeii has a lifespan of less than one year (Macy and Brodziak 2001). The species inhabits the continental shelf and upper slope and ranges between southern Newfoundland and the Gulf of Venezuela, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea (Jereb et al. 2010). The species is most abundant between Georges Bank and Cape Hatteras, North Carolina where a small-mesh bottom trawl fishery occurs throughout the year; offshore during late fall through early spring and inshore during the remainder of the year. The U.S. East Coast longfin squid population that inhabits the region between the Gulf of Maine and Cape Hatteras, NC (Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) Subareas 5 and 6, Figure 1) is managed as a single stock based on evidence from genetic studies (Arkhipkin et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Diet Analysis of Stranded Bottlenose Dolphins (<I>Tursiops Truncatus</I
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations Biological Sciences Spring 2020 Diet Analysis of Stranded Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Virginia Kristen Marie Volker Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds Part of the Biology Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation Volker, Kristen M.. "Diet Analysis of Stranded Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Virginia" (2020). Master of Science (MS), Thesis, Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/6bas-rj82 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds/113 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DIET ANALYSIS OF STRANDED BOTTLENOSE DOLPHINS (TURSIOPS TRUNCATUS) IN VIRGINIA by Kristen Marie Volker B.S. December 2008, University of New England A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE BIOLOGY OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY MAY 2020 Approved by: Ian Bartol (Director) Holly Gaff (Member) Kent Carpenter (Member) Damon Gannon (Member) ABSTRACT DIET ANALYSIS OF STRANDED BOTTLENOSE DOLPHINS (TURSIOPS TRUNCATUS) IN VIRGINIA Kristen Marie Volker Old Dominion University, 2020 Director: Dr. Ian Bartol This study describes the diet of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) stranded in Virginia via stomach content analysis and considers factors such as proportion of numerical abundance and reconstructed mass, frequency of occurrence, average reconstructed prey size, prey diversity and quantity, and otolith degradation code.
    [Show full text]
  • Leucoraja Erinacea
    Little Skate − Leucoraja erinacea Overall Vulnerability Rank = Low Biological Sensitivity = Low Climate Exposure = High Data Quality = 88% of scores ≥ 2 Expert Data Expert Scores Plots Leucoraja erinacea Scores Quality (Portion by Category) Low Moderate Stock Status 2.0 2.8 High Other Stressors 1.5 1.4 Very High Population Growth Rate 2.9 2.4 Spawning Cycle 1.2 3.0 Complexity in Reproduction 1.3 2.2 Early Life History Requirements 1.1 3.0 Sensitivity to Ocean Acidification 1.5 2.8 Prey Specialization 1.2 3.0 Habitat Specialization 1.2 3.0 Sensitivity attributes Sensitivity to Temperature 2.1 3.0 Adult Mobility 2.3 2.2 Dispersal & Early Life History 1.9 2.8 Sensitivity Score Low Sea Surface Temperature 3.9 3.0 Variability in Sea Surface Temperature 1.0 3.0 Salinity 2.0 3.0 Variability Salinity 1.2 3.0 Air Temperature 1.0 3.0 Variability Air Temperature 1.0 3.0 Precipitation 1.0 3.0 Variability in Precipitation 1.0 3.0 Ocean Acidification 4.0 2.0 Exposure variables Variability in Ocean Acidification 1.0 2.2 Currents 2.1 1.0 Sea Level Rise 1.1 1.5 Exposure Score High Overall Vulnerability Rank Low Little Skate (Leucoraja erinacea) Overall Climate Vulnerability Rank: Low (88% certainty from bootstrap analysis). Climate Exposure: High. Two exposure factors contributed to this score: Ocean Surface Temperature (3.9) and Ocean Acidification (4.0). Little Skate are demersal and complete their life cycle in marine habitats. Biological Sensitivity: Low. Only one attribute scored above 2.5: Population Growth Rate (3.4).
    [Show full text]