California Yellowtail Isla Natividad, Mexico

California Yellowtail

Seriola lalandi (Seriola dorsalis)

Isla Natividad, Mexico Caught by Sociedad Cooperativa de Producción Pesquera Buzos y Pescadores de Baja California, S.C.L

Handline

February 24, 2014 Elizabeth Joubert, Consulting Researcher

Disclaimer Seafood Watch® strives to ensure all our Seafood Reports and the recommendations contained therein are accurate and reflect the most up-to-date evidence available at time of publication. All our reports are peer- reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science or aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch program or its recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. We always welcome additional or updated data that can be used for the next revision. Seafood Watch and Seafood Reports are made possible through a grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. 2

Final Seafood Recommendation

Stock / Fishery Impacts on Impacts on Management Habitat and Overall the Stock other Ecosystem Recommendation Species California yellowtail Green (3.32) Green (5.00) Yellow (3.00) Green (4.47) Best Choice (3.862) Baja Eastern Central Pacific - Handline

Scoring note – Scores range from zero to five where zero indicates very poor performance and five indicates the fishing operations have no significant impact. Final Score = geometric mean of the four Scores (Criterion 1, Criterion 2, Criterion 3, Criterion 4).

Best Choice = Final Score between 3.2 and 5, and no Red Criteria, and no Critical scores

Good Alternative = Final score between 2.2 and 3.199, and Management is not Red, and no more than one Red Criterion other than Management, and no Critical scores

Avoid = Final Score between 0 and 2.199, or Management is Red, or two or more Red Criteria, or one or more Critical scores. 3

Executive Summary

This report assesses yellowtail captured by Sociedad Cooperativa de Producción Pesquera Buzos y Pescadores de Baja California, S.C.L. (hereafter Buzos y Pescadores), a fishing cooperative at Isla Natividad, Mexico, according to criteria developed by Seafood Watch to rate the sustainability of wild capture fisheries. The remaining Mexican fisheries and the U.S. fishery are not assessed in this report. Commercial landings of yellowtail are caught using gillnets and hook and line fishing gear, though members of the Buzos y Pescadores cooperative do not use gillnets.

California yellowtail, Seriola lalandi, formally known as Seriola dorsalis, is a large member of the jack family, Carangidae. The fish is common in Eastern Pacific coastal waters from Southern Washington to Baja California. Fisheries for yellowtail in Mexico operate primarily in the coastal waters of Baja California, Mexico, where stocks are most concentrated, as well as in southern California. Yellowtail is a prized game fish and recreational fishers from California often target yellowtail off of the coast of Baja. The commercial fishery in Mexico is relatively small as market demand is low.

Given the yellowtail’s moderate inherent vulnerability to fishing pressure and low susceptibility to fishing mortality, Seafood Watch considers that the yellowtail fishery has a low impact on the stock. Yellowtail considered to have a moderate inherent vulnerability to fishing pressure given a suite of its life history parameters (e.g., moderate age and size at maturity; broadcast spawner). Because market demand for yellowtail is low and yellowtail are only fished opportunistically, fishing mortality is likely to be below Fmsy, and therefore of low concern. Overall, Seafood Watch considers that the fishery at Isla Natividad has a low impact on yellowtail.

Bycatch in the yellowtail fishery is assessed as low concern. The hook and line fishery is thought to have minimal bycatch overall, and because of the nature of the fishing technique, incidentally caught species can be released unharmed. Further, expert opinion is that bycatch in the Natividad fishery is at or near zero. This leads Seafood Watch to deem bycatch in the hook and line fishery a low conservation concern.

Management consistently follows scientific advice and enforces regulations, however there are few data to determine the efficacy of management actions in maintaining the health of the stock and in restricting bycatch. Therefore, management is considered moderately effective.

The impact of fishing gear on the substrate is considered very low, and some management efforts reduce the impacts of fishing gear. Hook and line gear in the yellowtail fishery do not contact the seafloor and have benign habitat impacts. In addition, two marine protected areas in the region reduce the spatial footprint of fishing and may provide refuge for yellowtail. Yellowtail are generalist predators and the effects of their removal from the food web are unknown. An assessment of the impacts of this fishery on the ecosystem has not been conducted and is not yet underway. Overall, the impacts of the yellowtail fishery to habitats and ecosystem are deemed low. 4

Table of Contents

Final Seafood Recommendation ...... 2

Executive Summary ...... 3

Introduction ...... 5

Analysis ...... 12 Criterion 1: Stock for which you want a recommendation ...... 12 Criterion 2: Impacts on other retained and bycatch stocks ...... 15 Criterion 3: Management effectiveness ...... 17 Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem ...... 24

Acknowledgements ...... 27

References ...... 28

About Seafood Watch® ...... 30

Guiding Principles ...... 31

Introduction

Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendation

This report assesses the fishery for yellowtail, Seriola lalandi, also known as Seriola dorsalis, captured in the Isla Natividad region of Baja California, Mexico. The common market name for this species is Jurel, or Amberjack yellowtail.

The commercial fishery for this species in Mexico exists in Baja California on both the Pacific and Gulf sides as well as on the mainland in the gulf (SAGARPA 2006). Fish are captured with drift gillnets (3.5 inch mesh) and trolling hook and line (curricán). The cooperative Buzos y Pescadores manages the local fisheries, holds 22 finfish permits, and also has exclusive rights to harvest commercial invertebrate species in the region of Isla Natividad on the pacific side of Baja California. The size of the finfish area (also the lobster concesion) is 818.13 square km. The fishers in this cooperative use only hook and line gear to capture yellowtail. The yellowtail fishery is relatively small as market demand is low (e.g., landings data found in SAGARPA 2006; personal communication with Leonardo Vazquez, July 11, 2013), and fishing at Isla Natividad is seasonal, with fishers generally targeting fish during the summer when yellowtail around the Island are larger and more abundant (personal communication with Leonardo Vazquez, July 11, 2013).

Overview of the species and management bodies

Yellowtail were once thought to be distributed around the globe in subtropical waters, and that the portion of the stock distributed from Mazatlan, Mexico to southern Washington was comprised of two populations that diverged around Cedros Island, Mexico (Eschmeyer et al. 1983,CDFG 2001). However, recent genetic data provide evidence that Seriola lalandi is comprised of four cryptic species that were placed into synonymy in 1986, and that the stock in the northeast Pacific from California to Mexico is a single species that should revert to its original name, Serioloa dorsalis. There are two populations within Seriola dorsalis, roughly divided at central Baja California, Mexico (Larry Allen, personal communication, May 31, 2013).

Yellowtail can be found in a variety of habitats throughout their lifecycle including rocky areas, coastal and oceanic waters (Eschmeyer et al. 1983) and off kelp forests. Yellowtail can often be found in schools offshore, near islands and on seamounts throughout the year (Sala et al. 2003). Yellowtail forage on sardines, anchovies, jack mackerel, squid, and red crab (Baxter 1960, Crooke 1983,CDFG 2001). Since yellowtail are opportunistic, daytime feeders (Baxter 1960,CDFG 2001) their location is more dependent on warm water temperatures than food availability (Baxter 1960).

Spawning occurs in aggregations (Sala et al. 2003) between June and October (CDFG 2001) off Baja California (Collins 1973). Nearly all females reach maturity at two years (CDFG 2001). However, many do not begin spawning until three years at which time, nearly 100% of the female population will spawn (Baxter 1960,CDFG 2001). A three year old, 10 pound female will spawn once in a season and will 6

produce approximately 450,000 eggs (Baxter 1960). Conversely, a seven-year-old, twenty pound female will spawn multiple times in a season and produce nearly one million eggs (Baxter 1960, Collins 1973, CDFG 2001).

Yellowtail make seasonal migrations, following warmer water. Juvenile survival rates and fishery catches are strongly correlated with water temperature, with greater survival rates and fishing success during periods of warmer water temperatures and El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events (Radovich 1961; Leonardo Vazquez, unpublished data).

The commercial fishery for yellowtail in Mexico is relatively small as market demand is low, and fish around Isla Natividad are targeted opportunistically by members of Buzos y Pescadores, who tend to make fishing trips for yellowtail primarily during the summer months and/or periods of warm water temperature, when yellowtail can be found in greater abundance and large fish are more common (Leonardo Vazquez, personal communication, July 11, 2013).

The commercial fishery for yellowtail in Mexico is managed by the federal government, under the Comisión Nacional de Acuacultura y Pesca (Conapesca), which is a branch of the Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alementación (SAGARPA). Yellowtail is managed along with 23 other species in the Carangidae family under the National Fishing Plan (SAGARPA 2006). The last report of stocks managed under this umbrella was in 2006 and stated that fish managed under this plan are harvested at maximum sustainable yield (SAGARPA 2006). There is currently no formal stock assessment, and most data available are fishery-dependent.

The fishery is additionally managed at the local scale. Fishing rights are granted to a federation of 14 cooperatives along the pacific coast of the Baja peninsula (CONAPESCA 2004; Figure 1 (Baja Concessions)), with each cooperative holding a given number of permits for various fisheries (McCay 2014). This report focuses on the cooperative Buzos y Pescadores de Baja California, which manages local harvesting of finfish and has exclusive fishing rights to invertebrate stocks in a region surrounding Isla Natvidad, west of Punta Eugenia and south-east of Isla Cedros (fishing region 4, Figure 1). Isla Natividad is approximately 1000 ha, and had 400 permanent residents in the southern portion of the island as of the year 2000 (Donlan et al. 2000). The current active fishing population is approximately 130 people, and 83 of these are actively involved governing the cooperative and have access to quotas for the most valuable local fisheries, which are lobster (Panularis interruptus), abalone (Haliotis fulgens and H. corrugata), sea snail (Megastraea undosa), and sea cucumber (Parastichopus parvimensis) (Leonardo Vazquez, personal communication, July 23, 2013). The cooperative has 22 general finfish permits, which include rights to harvest yellowtail; individual fishers are not allowed to hold permits. There has not historically been a large commercial fishery for yellowtail in the Isla Natividad region.

Figure 1: Fishing concessions granted to cooperatives by the federal government (image courtesy of CONAPESCA).

Production Statistics

Yellowtail landings in Mexico in recent years have been relatively low and variable, as driven by market demand and fluctuations in water temperature (personal communication with Leonardo Vazquez, July 11, 2013). Landings of Yellowtail in Baja California Sur between 2000 and 2009 hit a low of about 5,000 kg (5 tonnes) in 2008, and a high of about 10,000 kg (10 tonnes) in 2007 (Figure 2; data from SAGARPA; compiled by Comunidad y Biodiversidad (COBI)). 8

Figure 2: Total yellowtail landed in Baja California Sur.

Figure 3: Landings of yellowtail at Isla Natividad from 2006-2012 (data courtesy Leonardo Vazquez).

Importance to the US/North American market

Various stocks/species of yellowtail are fished around the globe. There is a large market for yellowtail in Japan, which lands most of the global yellowtail catch ((FAO 2004); Figures 4 and 5). 9

Figure 4: Global yellowtail landings by country (figure courtesy FAO 2004; figure110).

Figure 5: Global yellowtail catch (figure courtesy FAO 2004; figure 108)

In 2009, the price of yellowtail fluctuated between 7.5 and 13.7 pesos per kilogram (0.578 and 1.05 USD per kilogram) among fishing regions in Mexico (Figure 6, Leonardo Vazquez unpublished data). Since 2010, the price of yellowtail captured in the Isla Natividad region has fluctuated between 8 and 25 pesos per kilogram (0.616 and 1.9 USD per kilogram) (Figure 6, Leonardo Vazquez unpublished data). 10

Figure 6: Landings (kg) and price (pesos per kg) of yellowtail landed in Isla Natividad, Mexico.

Figure 7: Price of yellowtail in pesos per kilogram among fishing regions of Mexico in 2009. Total imports of bonito, yellowtail, and pollock to the United States were 1,630 metric tonnes worth $6.58 million in 2011 and 462 metric tonnes worth $2.797 million in 2012 (NOAA 2012). 11

Common and market names

The common market name for this species in Mexico is Medregal cola amarilla, or Amberjack yellowtail (SAGARPA 2006). In the US, common and market names include California yellowtail, amberjack, forktail, mossback, white salmon, horse-eye bonito, Coronado, and yellowtail jack.

Primary product forms

Yellowtail is sold as fillets, which can be fresh, frozen, or salted and dried (Smith-Vaniz 1995). 12

Analysis Scoring Guide

• All scores result in a zero to five final score for the criterion and the overall final rank. A zero score indicates poor performance, while a score of five indicates high performance.

• The full Seafood Watch Fisheries Criteria that the following scores relate to are available on our website at http://www.seafoodwatch.org Criterion 1: Stock for which you want a recommendation This criterion evaluates the impact of fishing mortality on the species, given its current abundance. The inherent vulnerability to fishing rating influences how abundance is scored, when abundance is unknown. The final Criterion 1 Score is determined by taking the geometric mean of the abundance and fishing mortality scores.

CALIFORNIA YELLOWTAIL Region / Method Inherent Stock Status Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality Baja Eastern Central Pacific 2.00:Medium 3.00:Moderate 3.67:Low Green (3.318) Handline Concern Concern

Justification of Ranking

CALIFORNIA YELLOWTAIL

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability to Fishing

• Low = FishBase vulnerability score for species 0-35 OR species exhibits life history characteristics that make it resilient to fishing, e.g., early maturing (<5 years), short lived (< 10 years), small maximum size, and low on food chain. • Medium = FishBase vulnerability score for species 36-55 OR life history characteristics that make it neither particularly vulnerable or resilient to fishing, e.g. moderate age at sexual maturity (5-15 years), moderate maximum age (10-25 years), moderate maximum size, and middle of food chain. • High = FishBase vulnerability score for species 56-100 OR life history characteristics that make is particularly vulnerable to fishing, e.g. long-lived (>25 years), late maturing (>15 years), low reproduction rate, large body size, and top-predator.

Note: The FishBase vulnerability scores is an index of the inherent vulnerability of marine fishes to fishing based on life history parameters: maximum length, age at first maturity, longevity, growth rate, natural mortality rate, fecundity, spatial behaviors (e.g. schooling, 13

aggregating for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or reproduction) and geographic range.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Medium

California Yellowtail is considered to be of moderate inherent vulnerability based on a collection of life history criteria. Yellowtail are relatively small (size range reported by Baxter 1960 is between 35.7 and 97.0 cm) with a moderate size at maturity (50.6 - 63.4 cm; Baxter 1960). Yellowtail have a medium maximum age (see detailed rationale) and age at maturity (20 months to 3 years; Baxter 1960), which are estimated to impart moderate inherent vulnerability. Yellowtail are broadcast spawners, which is considered to impart lower vulnerability than other reproductive strategies, though the fact that yellowtail form spawning aggregations that can be targeted by fishers is not considered here. Finally, yellowtail are high trophic level species (4.1; Fishbase).

Rationale: Aging yellowtail is difficult after 7 years of age, but Baxter (1960) reports that the age of maturity for yellowtail is between 20 months and 3 years, and the oldest captured yellowtail was reported to be 12 years old (Collins 1973). Based on these data, we placed yellowtail in the moderate category for maximum fish age (between 10 and 25 years). It is important to note that the final calculation for inherent vulnerability is robust to this estimation; moving yellowtial into 'high' or 'low' categories for maximum age results in the same determination that the fish are of moderate inherent vulnerability.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

• 5 (Very Low Concern) = Strong evidence that population is above target abundance level (e.g. biomass at maximum sustainable yield, BMSY) or near virgin biomass • 4 (Low Concern) = Population may be below target abundance level, but it is considered not overfished. • 3 (Moderate Concern) = Abundance level is unknown and species has a low or medium inherent vulnerability to fishing • 2 (High Concern) = Population is overfished, depleted, or a species of concern OR Abundance is unknown and species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing. • 1 (Very High Concern) = Population is listed as threatened or endangered.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.00 Moderate Concern

There are no stock assessments for Yellowtail in Mexico. The federal fishing agency, SAGARPA, states in the national fishing plan that the resource is fished at its maximum sustainable yield (SAGARPA 2006), 14

however as there are no data to support this statement, Seafood Watch considers that there is no evidence that the stock is above or below target reference limits. As the inherent vulnerability of the stock is moderate, Seafood Watch considers that the stock is a moderate conservation concern.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

• 5 (Very Low Concern) = Highly likely that fishing mortality is below a sustainable level (e.g., below fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield, FMSY) OR fishery does not target species and its contribution to the mortality of species is negligible (≤ 5% of a sustainable level of fishing mortality) • 3.67 (Low Concern) = Probable (>50% chance) that fishing mortality is at or below a sustainable level, but some uncertainty OR fishery does not target species and does not adversely affect species, but its contribution to mortality is not negligible OR fishing mortality is unknown, but the population is healthy and the species has a low susceptibility to the fishery (low chance of being caught) • 2.33 (Moderate Concern) = Fishing mortality is fluctuating around sustainable levels OR fishing mortality is unknown and species has a moderate-high susceptibility to the fishery, and if species is depleted, reasonable management is in place. • 1 (High Concern) = Overfishing is occurring, but management is in place to curtail overfishing OR fishing mortality is unknown, species is depleted and no management is in place • 0 (Critical) = Overfishing is known to be occurring and no reasonable management is in place to curtail overfishing.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.67 Low Concern

While there is no stock assessment for yellowtail, fishing mortality is likely to be below Fmsy, and therefore of low concern, because market demand is low and yellowtail are only fished opportunistically, mostly during the summer months when the local stock biomass is higher and comprised of larger fish (Leonardo Vazquez, personal communication, July 11, 2013). The the federal management agency, SAGARPA, reports that stocks managed under the Caragidae family fishing plan are fished at MSY, there are no reported data to substatiate this claim; therefore, we give more weight to expert opinion in ranking this category.

Criterion 2: Impacts on other retained and bycatch stocks All retained and primary bycatch species in the fishery are evaluated in the same way as the species under assessment were evaluated in Criterion 1. Seafood Watch® defines bycatch as all fisheries-related mortality or injury other than the retained catch. Examples include discards, endangered or threatened species catch, and ghost fishing. To determine the final Criterion 2 score, the score for the lowest scoring retained/bycatch species is multiplied by the discard rate score (ranges from 0-1), which evaluates the amount of non-retained catch (discards) and bait use relative to the retained catch.

California yellowtail: Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

Subscore:: 5.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 5.000

Species Inherent Stock Status Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality CALIFORNIA YELLOWTAIL 2.00: Medium 3.00: 3.67: Low 3.318 Moderate Concern Concern Bycatch rates for the hook and line fishery are generally believed to be low (Chuenpagdee et al. 2003), though are not well documented in for the Natividad fishery nor for other yellowtail fisheries in Mexico or California (CDFG 2002, Charles Boch, personal communication, August 2, 2013; Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013). The bycatch rates for the Natividad yellowtail fishery in particular are estimated by local experts to be at or near zero (Amanda Lejbowicz, personal communication, August 20, 2013; Andrea Sáenz-Arroyo, personal communication August 30, 2013).

Justification of Ranking

Baja/Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

1.00 < 20%

The discard to landings ratio for the yellowtail hook and line fishery has not been estimated.

The discard to landings rate for the hook and line halibut fishery observed in central California in 2011 was 19.5% (Frey et al. 2012). The California halibut fishery has a similar geographic range as California Yellowtail.

The globally estimated discard rate for handlines is 2.0% and for finfish jigs is 3.5% (Kelleher 2005). In general, the impact of bycatch in hook and line fisheries is considered moderate to low (Chuenpagdee, R., L. E. Moran, S. M. Maxwell, E. A. Norse, and D. Pauly 2003, Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003), and bycatch can be released quickly, resulting in higher survival rates of returned species (CDFG 2002,Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003).

The bycatch rates for the Natividad yellowtail fishery in particular are estimated by local experts to be at 16

or near zero (Amanda Lejbowicz, personal communication, August 20, 2013; Andrea Sáenz- Arroyo, personal communication August 30, 2013).

Criterion 3: Management effectiveness Management is separated into management of retained species and management of non- retained species/bycatch. The final score for this criterion is the geometric mean of the two scores.

Region / Method Management of Management of Overall Retained Species Non-Retained Recommendation Species Baja Eastern 3.000 All Species Yellow(3.000) Central Pacific Retained Handline

Factor 3.1: Management of fishing impacts on retained species Region / Method Strategy Recovery Research Following Enforcement Track Inclusion of of Species of of Record Stakeholders of Concern Scientific Regulations Advice Baja Eastern Moderately Moderately Moderately Highly Highly Moderately Highly Central Pacific Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Handline

Justification of Ranking

Factor 3.1: Management of Fishing Impacts on Retained Species Seven subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy, Recovery of Species of Concern, Scientific Research/Monitoring, Following of Scientific Advice, Enforcement of Regulations, Management Track Record, and Inclusion of Stakeholders. Each is rated as ‘ineffective’, ‘moderately effective’, or ‘highly effective’.

• 5 (Very Low Concern) = Rated as ‘highly effective’ for all seven subfactors considered • 4 (Low Concern) = Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern rated ‘highly effective’ and all other subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective’. • 3 (Moderate Concern) = All subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective’. • 2 (High Concern) = At minimum meets standards for ‘moderately effective’ for Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern, but at least one other subfactor rated ‘ineffective’. • 1 (Very High Concern) = Management exists, but Management Strategy and/or Recovery of Species of Concern rated ‘ineffective’ • 0 (Critical) = No management exists when a clear need for management exists (i.e., fishery catches threatened, endangered, or high concern species) OR there is a high level of Illegal, Unregulated, and Unreported Fishing occurring. 18

3.1.0 - Critical?

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

0.00 No

Subfactor 3.1.1 - Management Strategy and Implementation Considerations: What type of management measures are in place, are there appropriate management goals, and is there evidence that management goals are being met. To achieve a highly effective rating, there must be appropriate management goals and evidence that the measures in place have been successful at maintaining/rebuilding species.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Moderately Effective

The yellowtail fishery is monitored using fishery-dependent data and managed using a target reference limit that is established by the federal agency, SAGARPA (SAGARPA 2006; SAGARPA other available data), and various input controls applied by local management such as gear restrictions and marine protected areas (Leonardo Vazquez, personal communication, July 11, 2013; Charles Boch, personal communication, August 2, 2013; COBI 2010; SAGARPA 2006). However, there is no stock assessment for the species and though fishing is reported by SAGARPA to be sustained at MSY, there are apparently no data to support this claim (Leonardo Vazquez, personal communication, July 11, 2013; SAGARPA 2006).

Subfactor 3.1.2 - Recovery of Species of Concern Considerations: When needed, are recovery strategies/management measures in place to rebuild overfished/threatened/ endangered species or to limit fishery’s impact on these species and what is their likelihood of success. To achieve a rating of highly effective, rebuilding strategies that have a high likelihood of success in an appropriate timeframe must be in place when needed, as well as measures to minimize mortality for any overfished/threatened/endangered species.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Moderately Effective

While no concrete data are available, overfished, depleted, endangered, or threatened species are presumed to be rarely captured in the Natividad yellowtail fishery (Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013). The fishers at Natividad have banned the use of gillnets, which are 19

more likely to interact with non-target (and, thus, with sensitive species) than hook and line fisheries (Chuenpagdee, R., L. E. Moran, S. M. Maxwell, E. A. Norse, and D. Pauly 2003).

Subfactor 3.1.3 - Scientific Research and Monitoring Considerations: How much and what types of data are collected to evaluate the health of the population and the fishery’s impact on the species. To receive a highly effective score, population assessments must be conducted regularly and they must be robust enough to reliably determine the population status.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Moderately Effective

Data on yellowtail stock status are collected, but they are entirely fishery-dependent (e.g., commercial landings data) (SAGARPA 2006); no independent stock assessment has been conducted. As landings data are a poor measure of stock status, there is high uncertainty around stock status estimates drawn from these data.

However, the Buzos y Pescadores cooperative has decided to implement basic data collection to assess the status of the yellowtail stock (Amanda Lejbowicz, personal communication, January 31, 2014). These data will better inform future decisions of how yellowtail fishing is managed by the cooperative.

Subfactor 3.1.4 - Management Record of Following Scientific Advice Considerations: How often (always, sometimes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scientific recommendations/advice (e.g. do they set catch limits at recommended levels). A highly effective rating is given if managers nearly always follow scientific advice.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.00 Highly Effective

The Buzos y Pescadores cooperative has a track record of following scientific advice to manage stocks and the habitats within their concession area in general, though there is little advice that pertains specifically to yellowtail. The cooperative typically adopts target limits that are 40% to 50% lower than those required by the Federal government (Leonardo Vasquez, personal communication, July 11, 2013), though there is no clear target limit for yellowtail set either by the federal government or by the cooperative. Cooperative members also adopted no-take marine reserves as advised by scientific bodies, in order to protect not only their most valuable fisheries, which are all invertebrate stocks (abalone, lobster, sea cucumber, and sea snail), but to also protect other species and habitats around 20

Isla Natividad (Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013).

Subfactor 3.1.5 - Enforcement of Management Regulations Considerations: Is there a monitoring/enforcement system in place to ensure fishermen follow management regulations and what is the level of fishermen’s compliance with regulations. To achieve a highly effective rating, there must be regular enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.00 Highly Effective

Local and federal regulations are enforced by the vigilancia, one of the cooperative’s administrators. All administrators are elected by members of the cooperative. If major infractions occur, the vigilancia may notify the federal wardens, or federales. Additionally, all catch data are recorded in logbooks that are maintained by the cooperative, and bycatch are reported to the cooperative office, though the office does not maintain written records of these reports (Charles Boch, personal communication, August 2, 2013).

Subfactor 3.1.6 – Management Track Record Considerations: Does management have a history of successfully maintaining populations at sustainable levels or a history of failing to maintain populations at sustainable levels. A highly effective rating will be given if measures enacted by management have been shown to result in the long-term maintenance of species overtime.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Moderately Effective

As there is no stock assessment for yellowtail, no written records to document bycatch (or lack thereof), and no assessment of the impact of the MPAs on the yellowtail fishery in particular, the track record of management efforts are uncertain and therefore moderately effective.

Subfactor 3.1.7 - Stakeholder Inclusion Considerations: Are stakeholders involved/included in the decision-making process. Stakeholders are individuals/groups/organizations that have an interest in the fishery or that may be affected by the management of the fishery (e.g. fishermen, conservation groups, etc.). A highly effective will be given if the management process is transparent and includes stakeholder input.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.00 Highly Effective

Participation in the Buzos y Pescadores cooperative is highly inclusive and transparent. The residential population on Isla Natividad is 400 ((Donlan et al. 2000)); 83 residents are actively involved in the cooperative (Leonardo Vazquez, personal communication, July 11, 2013), and most of the remaining residential population is indirectly involved ((Donlan et al. 2000); Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013). The cooperative meets regularly and the meetings are open to participation of all members (Charles Boch, personal communication, August 2, 2013); members (associos) gather at biannual meetings, where all members are given an opportunity to speak during facilitated sessions (Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013). Leadership postions are rotated every two years to minimize concentration of power and to allow full participation by all members of the cooperative (Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013). Several members of the Buzos y Pescadores cooperative are also members of the Baja state cooperative administration (Charles Boch, personal communication, August 2, 2013; Ashley Greenley, personal communication, August 8, 2013).

Factor 3.2: Management of fishing impacts on bycatch species Region / Method Strategy Research Advice Enforce Baja Eastern Central Pacific No Moderately Moderately Highly Handline Effective Effective Effective

Justification of Ranking

Factor 3.2: Management of Fishing Impacts on Bycatch Species Four subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy, Scientific Research/Monitoring, Following of Scientific Advice, and Enforcement of Regulations. Each is rated as ‘ineffective’, ‘moderately effective’, or ‘highly effective’. Unless reason exists to rank Scientific Research/Monitoring, Following of Scientific Advice, and Enforcement of Regulations differently, these ranks are the same as in 3.1. • 5 (Very Low Concern) = Rated as ‘highly effective’ for all four subfactors considered • 4 (Low Concern) = Management Strategy rated ‘highly effective’ and all other subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective’. • 3 (Moderate Concern) = All subfactors rates at least ‘moderately effective’. • 2 (High Concern) = At minimum meets standards for ‘moderately effective’ for Management Strategy but some other factors rated ‘ineffective’. • 1 (Very High Concern) = Management exists, but Management Strategy rated ‘ineffective’ 22

• 0 (Critical) = No bycatch management even when overfished, depleted, endangered or threatened species are known to be regular components of bycatch and are substantially impacted by the fishery.

3.2.0 - All Species Retained?

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

1.00 Yes

The bycatch rate of the handline fishery is at or near zero (see Criterion 2); therefore, this criterion is not applicable.

3.2.0 - Critical?

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

0.00 No

Subfactor 3.2.1 - Management Strategy and Implementation Considerations: What type of management strategy/measures are in place to reduce the impacts of the fishery on bycatch species and how successful are these management measures. To achieve a highly effective rating the primary bycatch species must be known and there must be clear goals and measures in place to minimize the impacts on bycatch species (e.g. catch limits, use of proven mitigation measures, etc.).

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Moderately Effective

Fishers of Buzos y Pescadores have opted to ban the use of gillnets at Isla Natividad, which should reduce interactions with non-target species, and two MPAs on the island should provide additional refuge for non-target species from interactions with fishing boats and gear. However, though fishers report bycatch to the cooperative, written records of these reports are not maintained (Charles Boch, personal communication, August 2, 2013).

Subfactor 3.2.2 - Scientific Research and Monitoring Considerations: Is bycatch in the fishery recorded/documented and is there adequate 23

monitoring of bycatch to measure fishery’s impact on bycatch species. To achieve a highly effective rating, assessments must be conducted to determine the impact of the fishery on species of concern, and an adequate bycatch data collection program must be in place to ensure bycatch management goals are being met.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

2.00 Moderately Effective

There is no written documentation of bycatch in the yellowtail fishery, and thus no analysis of bycatch data is possible.

Subfactor 3.2.3 - Management Record of Following Scientific Advice Considerations: How often (always, sometimes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scientific recommendations/advice (e.g. do they set catch limits at recommended levels). A highly effective rating is given if managers nearly always follow scientific advice.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.00 Highly Effective

The same evidence employed in this category for the target species was used to determine the incorporation of scientific advice in management strategies for bycatch.

Subfactor 3.2.4 - Enforcement of Management Regulations Considerations: Is there a monitoring/enforcement system in place to ensure fishermen follow management regulations and what is the level of fishermen’s’ compliance with regulations. To achieve a highly effective rating, there must be regular enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

3.00 Highly Effective

The same evidence employed in this category for the target species was used to determine enforcement of bycatch management strategies.

Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem This Criterion assesses the impact of the fishery on seafloor habitats, and increases that base score if there are measures in place to mitigate any impacts. The fishery’s overall impact on the ecosystem and food web and the use of Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) principles is also evaluated. Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management aims to consider the interconnections among species and all natural and human stressors on the environment. The final score is the geometric mean of the impact of fishing gear on habitat score (plus the mitigation of gear impacts score) and the EBFM score.

Region / Method Gear Type and Mitigation of EBFM Overall Recomm. Substrate Gear Impacts Baja Eastern Central Pacific 5.00:None 0.00:Not 4.00:Low Green (4.472) Handline Applicable Concern

Justification of Ranking

Factor 4.1 – Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate

• 5 (None) = Fishing gear does not contact the bottom • 4 (Very Low) = Vertical Line Gear • 3 (Low) = Gears that contacts the bottom, but is not dragged along the bottom (e.g. gillnet, bottom longline, trap) and is not fished on sensitive habitats. Bottom seine on resilient mud/sand habitats. Midwater trawl that is known to contact bottom occasionally (<25% of the time) or purse seine known to commonly contact bottom • 2 (Moderate) = Bottom dragging gears (dredge, trawl) fished on resilient mud/sand habitats. Gillnet, trap, or bottom longline fished on sensitive boulder or coral reef habitat. Bottom seine except on mud/sand; • 1 (High) = Hydraulic clam dredge. Dredge or trawl gear fished on moderately sensitive habitats (e.g. cobble or boulder). • 0 (Very High) = Dredge or trawl fished on biogenic habitat, e.g. deep-sea corals, eelgrass and maerl.

Note: When multiple habitat types are commonly encountered, and/or the habitat classification is uncertain, the score will be based on the most sensitive plausible habitat type

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

5.00 None

The handlines used to fish for yellowtail don't contact the seafloor and therefore have no impact on the physical structure of the seafloor and associated biological communities.

Factor 4.2 - Mitigation of Gear Impacts

• +1 (Strong Mitigation) = Examples include large proportion of habitat protected from fishing (>50%) with gear, fishing intensity low/limited, gear specifically modified to reduce damage to seafloor and modifications shown to be effective at reducing damage, or an effective combination of ‘moderate’ mitigation measures. • +0.5 (Moderate Mitigation) = 20% of habitat protected from fishing with gear or other measures in place to limit fishing effort, fishing intensity, and spatial footprint of damage caused from fishing. • +0.25 (Low Mitigation) = A few measures in place, e.g., vulnerable habitats protected but other habitats not protected; some limits on fishing effort/intensity, but not actively being reduced. • 0 (No Mitigation) = No effective measures are in place to limit gear impacts on habitats.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

0.00 Not Applicable

Marine reserves off the coast of Isla Natividad incidentally reduce the spatial footprint of handlines in the Buzos y Pescadores concession (COBI 2010). MPAs represent 10.96% of the abalone concession area (Amanda Lejbowicz, pers com August 20, 2013). However, as the fishing gear does not contact the seafloor, no mitigation of habitat impacts is necessary and this criterion is not applicable.

Factor 4.3 – Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management

• 5 (Very Low Concern) = Substantial efforts have been made to protect species’ ecological roles and ensure fishing practices do not have negative ecological effects (e.g. large proportion of fishery area protected with marine reserves, abundance is maintained at sufficient levels to provide food to predators). • 4 (Low Concern) = Studies are underway to assess the ecological role of species and measures are in place to protect the ecological role of any species that plays an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem. If hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs) are used, measures are in place to minimize potential negative ecological effects. • 3 (Moderate Concern) = Fishery does not catch species that play an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem, or if it does, studies are underway to determine how to protect the ecological role of these species. OR negative ecological effects from hatchery supplementation or FADs are possible and management is not place to mitigate these impacts. 26

• 2 (High Concern) = The fishery catches species that play an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem and no efforts are being made to incorporate their ecological role into management. • 1 (Very High Concern) = The use of hatchery supplementation or Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) in the fishery is having serious negative ecological or genetic consequences. OR fishery has resulted in trophic cascades or other detrimental impacts to the food web.

Baja Eastern Central Pacific, Handline

4.00 Low Concern

Buzos y Pescadores manages their concession to protect ecosystem functioning by maintaining no-take marine reserves which represent close to 11% of the cooperative's concession (Amanda Lejbowicz, pers com August 20, 2013) and, more specifically to the yellowtail fishery, by choosing not to fish with gillnets, which have higher bycatch rates than handlines. The fishery does not capture species of exceptional concern.

Acknowledgements

Scientific review does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch® program, or its seafood recommendations, on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch® is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report.

Seafood Watch® would like to Dr. Alison Haupt, Postdoctoral researcher at Byrnes Lab, University of Massachusetts, Boston and W. Leonardo Vázquez Vera of Comunidad y Biodiversidad for graciously reviewing this report for scientific accuracy.

References

Baxter. 1960. Baxter, J. L. 1960. A study of the yellowtail Seriola dorsalis (Gill). Fish Bulletin 110:1-96.

CDFG. 2002. CDFG. 2002. White Seabass Fishery Management Plan. California Department of Fish and Game - Marine Region.

CDFG. 2001. CDFG. 2001. California's Living Marine Resources: A Status Report. California Department of Fish and Game.

Cheung et al.. 2005. Cheung, W.W.L., T.J. Pitcher and D. Pauly, 2005. A fuzzy logic expert system to estimate intrinsic extinction vulnerabilities of marine fishes to fishing. Biol. Conserv. 124:97-111.

Chuenpagdee, R., L. E. Moran, S. M. Maxwell, E. A. Norse, and D. Pauly. 2003. Chuenpagdee, R., L. E. Moran, S. M. Maxwell, E. A. Norse, and D. Pauly. 2003. Shifting gears: assessing collateral impacts of fishing methods in US waters. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1:517-524.

COBI. 2010. Comunidad y Biodiversidad (COBI). 2010. Proyecto piloto de reservas marinas en Isla Natividad: A cuatro años de trabajo por la concervación marina.

Collins. 1973. Collins, R. A. 1973. The status of the California yellowtail resource and its management. Marine Resources Technical Report No. 16:17

CONAPESCA. 2004. CONAPESCA. 2004. Atlas de localidades pesqueras: Baja California, Baja California Sur, y Sonora

Crooke. 1983. Crooke, S.J. 1983. Yellowtail, Seriola lalandei Valenciennes. Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 24:84-87.

Donlan et al.. 2000. Donlan, C.D.; B.R. Tershy, B.S.. Keitt, B. Wood, J.A. Sánchez, A. Weinstein, D.A. Croll, M.A. Hermosillo, J.L. Aguilar. 2000. Island Conservation Action in Northwest Mexico. Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium. CD-Rom), Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, 2000.

Eschmeyer et al.. 1983. Eschmeyer, W. N., E. S. Herald, and H. Hammann. 1983. A field guide to Pacific coast fishes of North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

FAO. 2004. FAO. 2004. Yellowtails. In F. Ottolenghi, C. Silvestri, P. Giordano, A. Lovatelli and M. B. New (Eds.). CAPTURE-BASED AQUACULTURE: the fattening of eels, groupers, tunas, and yellowtails. Rome.

Frey et al.. 2012. Frey, O.; G. Shester, and A. DeVogelaere. 2012. Final report: A profile of the hook and line fishery for California halibut in Monterey Bay, California. Learning from fishermen through collaborative research. MBNMS Technical Report, 46pp.

IUCN. 2012. IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Downloaded on 17 May 2013. 29

Kelleher. 2005. Kelleher, K. 2005. Discards in the world’s marine fisheries. An update. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 470. Rome, FAO. 131p.

McCay et al.. 2014. McCay, B.J.; F. Micheli, G. Ponce-Di´az, G. Murray, G. Shester, S. Ramirez-Sanchez, W. Weisman, 2014. Cooperatives, concessions, and co-management on the Pacific coast of Mexico. Marine Policy 44:49-59.

Morgan and Chuenpagdee. 2003. Morgan, L. E. and R. Chuenpagdee. 2003. Shifting gears: addressing the collateral impacts of fishing methods in US waters. Pew Science Series. Washington, DC: Island Press.

NMFS. 2012. NMFS. 2012. Imports and exports of fishery products, annual summary 2012.CURRENT FISHERIES STATISTICS NO. 2012-2.

Radovich. 1961. Radovich,J. 1961. Relationships of water temperatures to marine organisms of the northeast Pacific, particularly during 1957 through 1959. Calif. Dept. Fish Game, Fish. Bull. 112:1-62

SAGARPA. 2006. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alementación (SAGARPA). 2006. Segunda Sección. Dioaro Oficial, Viernes 25 de agosto de 2006, pages 2-3.

Sala et al.. 2003. Sala, E., O. Aburto-Oropeza, G. Paredes, and G. Thompson. 2003. Spawning aggregations and reproductive behavior of reef fishes in the Gulf of California. Bulletin of Marine Science 72:103-121.

Smith-Vaniz. 1995. Smith-Vaniz, W. F. 1995. Carangidae. Jureles, pámpanos, cojinúas, zapateros, cocineros, casabes, macarelas, chicharros, jorobados, medregales, pez pilota. Pages 940-986 in F. W., F. Krupp, W. Schneider, C. Sommer, K. E. Carpenter, and V. Niem, editors. 30

About Seafood Watch® Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild- caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the North American marketplace. Seafood Watch® defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch® makes its science-based recommendations available to the public on www.seafoodwatch.org. The program’s goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservation issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans.

Each sustainability recommendation is supported by a Seafood Report. Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluates this information against the program’s conservation ethic to arrive at a recommendation of “Best Choices,” “Good Alternatives,” or “Avoid.” The detailed evaluation methodology is available on our website. In producing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch seeks out research published in academic, peer- reviewed journals whenever possible. Other sources of information include government technical publications, fishery management plans and supporting documents, and other scientific reviews of ecological sustainability. Seafood Watch Research Analysts also communicate regularly with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture scientists, and members of industry and conservation organizations when evaluating fisheries and aquaculture practices. Capture fisheries and aquaculture practices are highly dynamic; as the scientific information on each species changes, Seafood Watch’s sustainability recommendations and the underlying Seafood Reports will be updated to reflect these changes.

Parties interested in capture fisheries, aquaculture practices and the sustainability of ocean ecosystems are welcome to use Seafood Reports in any way they find useful. For more information about Seafood Watch and Seafood Reports, please contact the Seafood Watch program at Monterey Bay Aquarium by calling 1-877-229-9990.

Guiding Principles Seafood Watch defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether fished1 or farmed, that can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems.

The following guiding principles illustrate the qualities that capture fisheries must possess to be considered sustainable by the Seafood Watch program:

• Stocks are healthy and abundant. • Fishing mortality does not threaten populations or impede the ecological role of any marine life. • The fishery minimizes bycatch. • The fishery is managed to sustain long-term productivity of all impacted species. • The fishery is conducted such that impacts on the seafloor are minimized and the ecological and functional roles of seafloor habitats are maintained. • Fishing activities should not seriously reduce ecosystem services provided by any fished species or result in harmful changes such as trophic cascades, phase shifts, or reduction of genetic diversity.

Based on these guiding principles, Seafood Watch has developed a set of four sustainability criteria to evaluate capture fisheries for the purpose of developing a seafood recommendation for consumers and businesses. These criteria are:

1. Impacts on the species/stock for which you want a recommendation 2. Impacts on other species 3. Effectiveness of management 4. Habitat and ecosystem impacts

Each criterion includes: • Factors to evaluate and rank • Evaluation guidelines to synthesize these factors and to produce a numerical score • A resulting numerical score and rank for that criterion

Once a score and rank has been assigned to each criterion, an overall seafood recommendation is developed on additional evaluation guidelines. Criteria ranks and the overall recommendation are color- coded to correspond to the categories on the Seafood Watch pocket guide:

Best Choices/Green: Are well managed and caught or farmed in environmentally friendly ways.

Good Alternatives/Yellow: Buy, but be aware there are concerns with how they’re caught or farmed.

Avoid/Red: Take a pass on these. These items are overfished or caught or farmed in ways that harm other marine life or the environment.

1 “Fish” is used throughout this document to refer to finfish, shellfish and other invertebrates.