Pelagic Fisheries Research Program (PFRP) Over the Period 1993–2003
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Sturgeon Making Comeback in Lake Ontario He Lake Sturgeon Is a Living Dinosaur of Sorts
by Bill Hilts, Jr. Sturgeon Making Comeback in Lake Ontario he lake sturgeon is a living dinosaur of sorts. The origin Tof this interesting species can be traced back 200 million years, which is one heck of a long time ago, maintaining the same physical characteristics as its ancestors. To people associated with fish and fish- ing, they appeared to be a limitless resource here in New York and the Province of Ontario. Despite this longevity, our knowledge of these fish is amazingly limited. Tales of long stringers of sturgeons were backed up with photos and filled area bragging boards in the 19th Sturgeon along the shoreline of the Niagara Gorge in May. and 20th centuries. Overfishing for meat and caviar combined with “We are trying to collect as Niagara River — with most of them habitat degradation and pollution much information as possible,” says being in the Niagara River. The to whittle away population levels Gorsky, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife receiver is anchored to the bottom for this fish. In less than 200 years, Service employee. “So far in five of the river with a concrete block lake sturgeon numbers were declin- years of setting overnight setlines in and picks up signals from the fish ing rapidly. It was feared that they the Niagara River, we have managed transmitter. When it comes time to would soon be going the way of the to catch, tag and release in excess collect the data, they simply scuba- blue pike (now extinct) and stur- of 800 lake sturgeons. The amazing dive into the river or lake and pick geon became a protected species. -
New Jersey FREE Fish & Wildlife Digest a Summary of Rules and Management Information VOL
New Jersey FREE Fish & Wildlife Digest A Summary of Rules and Management Information VOL. 15 NO. 3 MAY 2002 20022002 MarineMarine IssueIssue Visit our website at: www.njfishandwildlife.com New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection © Carol Decker New Jersey Fish & Wildlife Digest The Director’s Published by the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 400, Trenton, NJ 08625-0400 Message www.njfishandwildlife.com State of New Jersey By Bob McDowell James E. McGreevey, Governor Department of Environmental Protection Bradley M. Campbell, Commissioner Value of the Marine Resource— Division of Fish and Wildlife Robert McDowell, Director Cost of Management: Who Pays the Bill? David Chanda, Assistant Director Martin McHugh, Assistant Director ew Jersey is fortunate to have a rich coastal heritage. The state has 120 miles of ocean coastline, Thomas McCloy, Marine Fisheries Administrator James Joseph, Chief, Bureau of Shellfisheries Nover 390,000 acres of estuarine area and inlets spread all along the coast allowing easy access Rob Winkel, Chief, Law Enforcement between bays and the ocean. Fishery resources are both abundant and diverse with northern species in Jim Sciascia, Chief, Information and Education Cindy Kuenstner, Editor the winter, southern species in the summer and others available year round. Large recreational fisheries are supported by these diverse resources. Every year about one million recreational anglers spend over The Division of Fish and Wildlife is a professional, five million days fishing New Jersey’s marine waters. New Jersey’s recreational saltwater anglers spend environmental organization dedicated to the protection, management and wise use of the state’s about $750 million annually on fishing related products, with a resultant sales tax income to the state of fish and wildlife resources. -
2020 Journal
THE OFFICIAL Supplied free to members of GFAA-affiliated clubs or $9.95 GFAA GAMEFISHING 2020 JOURNAL HISTORICAL THE OFFICIAL GAME FISHING ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA 2020 JOURNAL THE OFFICIAL GAME FISHING ASSOCIATION SPECIAL FEATURE •Capt Billy Love – Master of Sharks Including gamefish weight gauges, angling Published for GFAA by rules/regulations, plus GFAA and QGFA records www.gfaa.asn.au LEGENDARY POWER COUPLE THE LEGEND CONTINUES, THE NEW TEREZ SERIES OF RODS BUILT ON SPIRAL-X AND HI-POWER X BLANKS ARE THE ULTIMATE SALTWATER ENFORCER. TECHNOLOGY 8000HG MODELS INFINITE POWER CAST 6’6” HEAVY 50-150lb SPIN JIG 5’10” MEDIUM 24kg CAST 6’6” X-HEAVY 65-200lb SPIN JIG 5’8” HEAVY 37kg THE STELLA SW REPRESENTS THE PINNACLE OF CAST 6’6” XX-HEAVY 80-200lb SPIN JIG 5’9” MEDIUM / HEAVY 24-37kg SHIMANO TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION IN THE CAST 7’0” MEDIUM 30-65lb OVERHEAD JIG 5’10” MEDIUM 24kg PURSUIT OF CREATING THE ULTIMATE SPINNING REEL. CAST 7’0” MEDIUM / HEAVY 40-80lb OVERHEAD JIG 5’8” HEAVY 37kg SPIN 6’9” MEDIUM 20-50lb SPIN 7’6” MEDIUM 10-15kg SPIN 6’9” MEDIUM / HEAVY 40-80lb SPIN 7’6” HEAVY 15-24kg TECHNOLOGY SPIN 6’9” HEAVY 50-100lb SPIN 7’0” MEDIUM 5-10kg SPIN 6’9” X-HEAVY 65-200lb SPIN 7’0” MEDIUM / LIGHT 8-12kg UPGRADED DRAG WITH SPIN 7’2” MEDIUM / LIGHT 15-40lb SPIN 7’9” STICKBAIT PE 3-8 HEAT RESISTANCE SPIN 7’2” MEDIUM lb20-50lb SPIN 8’0” GT PE 3-8 *10000 | 14000 models only SPIN 7’2” MEDIUM / HEAVY 40-80lb Check your local Shimano Stockists today. -
Cross Seamount South Point
PFRP PI Meeting 2008 David Itano1, Kim Holland2 and Kevin Weng3 1 Pelagic Fisheries Research Program, University of Hawaii at Manoa 2 Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawaii, 3 University of Hawaii at Manoa, School of Earth Science Technology Hawaii Tuna Tagging Project (1995- 2001) (archipelagic scale, conventional dart tags for Movementbigeyeof bigeye and yellowfin and yellowfin tuna) within the Hawaii EEZ and between major fishing grounds. (exchange rates) Interaction à direct gear interaction / concurrent interaction à sequential or growth interactions à spatially segregated interaction Exploitation rates and differential vulnerability (local fishing mortality) of tuna around seamounts and FADs Aggregation effects - retention rates of bigeye and yellowfin tuna around seamounts, FADs and local HTTP: objectives and outcomes 17,986 bigeye and yellowfin tagged @ 53:47 ratio à 12.6% overall recapture rate Bulk transfer model developed to describe tag loss by all means … between offshore FADs/seamount, inshore areas and offshore LL fishery à Estimated transfer (movement) rates à Estimated size and species-specific M and F rates Calculated residence times and exploitation rates Provided a closer definition of fisheries and exploitation patterns 150 E 160 E 170 E 180 170 W 160 W 150 W 140 W 40 N USA JAPAN 30 N MEXICO Minami Tori HAWAII Shima Wake 20 N CNMI (US) Johnston (US) Guam Marshall Islands 10 N Federated States of Micronesia Palmyra Palau (US) Howland & Indonesia Nauru Kiribati Baker Jarvis 0 Papua New Guinea (US) Line Phoenix Islands Islands (Kiribati) (Kiribati) Tuvalu Solomon Islands 10 S WF SamoaAmerican Fiji Samoa Cook Islands Australia Vanuatu French Polynesia New Niue 20 S Caledonia Tonga Pitcairn (U.K.) New Zealand 180 170W 160W 150W 140W Yellowfin in red Bigeye in blue 30N 20N Johnston 10N Palmyra Line Islands 160 W 155 W Necker NOAA B-1 Nihoa Main Hawaiian Islands Kauai Niihau Oahu Kaula Kaena Pt. -
The Use of a Roving Creel Survey to Monitor Exploited Coastal Fish Species in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area, South Africa
The use of a Roving Creel Survey to monitor exploited coastal fish species in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area, South Africa by Carika Sylvia van Zyl A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Technoligae, Nature Conservation Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University 2011 i I, Carika Sylvia van Zyl (s208027504) hereby declare that the work in this document is my own. ii Abstract A fishery-dependant monitoring method of the recreational shore-based fishery was undertaken in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area (MPA) on the south coast of South Africa for a period of 17 months. The method used was a roving creel survey (RCS), with dates, times and starting locations chosen by stratified random sampling. The MPA was divided into two sections, Buffalo Bay and Groenvlei, and all anglers encountered were interviewed. Catch and effort data were collected and catch per unit effort (CPUE) was calculated from this. The spatial distribution of anglers was also mapped. A generalized linear model (GLM) was fitted to the effort data to determine the effects of month and day type on the variability of effort in each section. Fitted values showed that effort was significantly higher on weekends than on week days, in both sections. A total average of 3662 anglers fishing 21 428 hours annually is estimated within the reserve with a mean trip length of 5.85 hours. Angler numbers were higher per unit coastline length in Buffalo Bay than Groenvlei, but fishing effort (angler hours) was higher in Groenvlei. Density distributions showed that anglers were clumped in easily accessible areas and that they favored rocky areas and mixed shores over sandy shores. -
South Carolina Marine Game Fish Tagging Program 1978 -2009
South Carolina Marine Game Fish Tagging Program 1978 -2009 Robert K. Wiggers SEDAR68-RD23 June 2019 This information is distributed solely for the purpose of pre-dissemination peer review. It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any agency determination or policy. South Carolina Marine Game Fish Tagging Program 1978 - 2009 By Robert K. Wiggers South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Marine Resources Division DNR SOUTH CAROLINA MARINE GAME FISH TAGGING PROGRAM 1978 - 2009 By Robert K. Wiggers Marine Resources Division South Carolina Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 12559 Charleston, South Carolina 29422 June 2010 This project was funded through the South Carolina Saltwater Fishing License. Table of Contents Page List of Tables……………………………………………………………………..ii List of Figures……………………………………………………………………iii Introduction………………………………………………………………………1 Methods…..………………………………………………………………………2 Results…………………………………………………………………………… 5 Results by Species……………………………………………………………….. 9 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………45 Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………….51 Literature Cited……………………………………………………………………52 Appendix I………………………………………………………………………...53 Appendix II……………………………………………………………………….54 Appendix III………………………………………………………………………55 i List of Tables Table Page 1. Number of target species tagged and recovered in the Marine Game Fish Tagging Program, 1978-2009…………………………………………………………6 2. Tagged greater amberjack recovered in the Gulf of Mexico…………………………9 3. Tagged bluefish recovered outside South Carolina…………………………………..11 4. Tagged cobia from the MGFTP recovered in the Gulf of Mexico…………………....14 5. Tagged dolphin recoveries from the MGFTP………………………………………..15 6. Tagged black drum recovered outside South Carolina………………………………16 7. Tagged flounder (species not identified) recovered outside South Carolina…………18 8. Tagged red drum with 6 recapture occurrences………………………………………23 9. Tagged crevalle jack recovered outside South Carolina……………………………..25 10. Examples of king mackerel recoveries by month…………………………………...28 11. -
Effects of Pelagic Longline Fishing on Seamount Ecosystems Based on Interviews with Pacific Island Fishers
Effects of Pelagic Longline Fishing on Seamount Ecosystems Based on Interviews with Pacific Island Fishers This publication was prepared by IUCN as a part of the Oceanic Fisheries Management Project, funded by the Global Environment Facility, through the United Nations Development Program. The Project aims to achieve global environmental benefits by enhanced conservation and management of transboundary oceanic fishery resources in the Pacific Islands region and the protection of the biodiversity of the Western Tropical Pacific Warm Pool Large Marine Ecosystem. It is executed by the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency in conjunction with the Secretariat of the Pacific Community and IUCN. Website: http://www.ffa.int/gef/. The designation of geographical entities in this document, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN or contributory organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN or contributory organizations, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement. Published by: IUCN Oceania Regional Office, Suva, FIJI Copyright: © 2010 International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Oceania Regional Office. Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holders. Cover photos: Interviewing fishermen in Tonga, courtesy of Telmo Morato. -
REFERENCE LIST Status Report: Focus on Staple Crops
AGRA (Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa). 2013. Africa Agriculture REFERENCE LIST Status Report: Focus on Staple Crops. Nairobi: AGRA. http://agra-alliance.org/ AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 2012. download/533977a50dbc7/. “Statement by the AAAS Board of Directors on Labeling of Genetically AgResearch. 2016. “Shortlist of Five Holds Key to Reduced Methane Modified Foods.” Emissions from Livestock.” AgResearch News Release. http://www. Abalos, D., S. Jeffery, A. Sanz-Cobena, G. Guardia, and A. Vallejo. 2014. agresearch.co.nz/news/shortlist-of-five-holds-key-to-reduced-methane- “Meta-analysis of the Effect of Urease and Nitrification Inhibitors on Crop emissions-from-livestock/. Productivity and Nitrogen Use Efficiency.” Agriculture, Ecosystems, and AHDB (Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board). 2017. “Average Milk Environment 189: 136–144. Yield.” Farming Data. https://dairy.ahdb.org.uk/resources-library/market- Abalos, D., S. Jeffery, C.F. Drury, and C. Wagner-Riddle. 2016. “Improving information/farming-data/average-milk-yield/#.WV0_N4jyu70. Fertilizer Management in the U.S. and Canada for N O Mitigation: 2 Ahmed, S.E., A.C. Lees, N.G. Moura, T.A. Gardner, J. Barlow, J. Ferreira, and R.M. Understanding Potential Positive and Negative Side-Effects on Corn Yields.” Ewers. 2014. “Road Networks Predict Human Influence on Amazonian Bird Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment 221: 214–221. Communities.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 281 (1795): 20141742. Abbott, P. 2012. “Biofuels, Binding Constraints and Agricultural Commodity Ahrends, A., P.M. Hollingsworth, P. Beckschäfer, H. Chen, R.J. Zomer, L. Zhang, Price Volatility.” Paper presented at the National Bureau of Economic M. -
Indecon International Economic Consultants
An Economic/Socio-Economic Evaluation of Wild Salmon in Ireland Submitted to the Central Fisheries Board by Indecon International Economic Consultants INDECON International Economic Consultants www.indecon.ie April 2003 © Copyright Indecon. No part of this document may be used or reproduced without Indecon’s expressed permission in writing. Contents Page Glossary of Terms i Executive Summary iii 1 Introduction and Background 1 Introduction 1 Background and Context to Review 1 Scope and Terms of Reference of Evaluation 2 Approach 4 Acknowledgements 4 2 Review of Existing Research on Socio-economic Value of Atlantic Salmon 5 Irish-based Research 5 International Evaluations on the Economic Value of Salmon 13 Conclusion 18 3 Review of Salmon Management in Ireland 19 Developments in Salmon Management Policy 19 Historical Trends in the Salmon Catch 28 Conclusions 39 4 Economic Impact of Commercial Salmon Fishing 41 Regional Structure of Commercial Salmon Catch 41 Analysis of Commercial Catch by Type of Fishing Licence 46 Indecon Survey of Commercial Salmon Fishermen 49 Estimates of Total Commercial Salmon Revenue 59 Summary and Conclusions 68 Indecon April 2003 i Contents Page 5 Economic Impact of Salmon Angling 70 Regional breakdown of Rod & Line Salmon Catch 70 Value of Overseas Salmon Tourism 72 Value of Domestic Salmon Angling 95 Indecon Survey of Tourism Interests 104 Analysis of Salmon Angling Accommodation 108 Summary and Conclusions 110 6 Views of Commercial Salmon Fishermen, Tourism and Angling Interests 111 Views of Commercial Salmon -
Rough Skate (Rsk)
ROUGH SKATE (RSK) ROUGH SKATE (RSK) (Zearaja nasuta) Waewae 1. FISHERY SUMMARY 1.1 Commercial fisheries Rough skate (Zearaja nasuta, RSK) are fished commercially in New Zealand in close association to smooth skates, which are also known as barndoor skates. Although rough skates grow considerably smaller than smooth skates, RSK is still landed and processed. Two other species of deepwater skate (Bathyraja shuntovi and Raja hyperborea) are large enough to be of commercial interest but are relatively uncommon and probably comprise a negligible proportion of the landings. Skate flesh ammoniates rapidly after death, so the wings are removed at sea, and chilled or frozen. On arrival at the shore factories, the wings are machine-skinned, graded and packed for sale. Most of the product is exported to Europe, especially France and Italy. Skates of all sizes are processed, though some factories impose a minimum weight limit of about 1 kg (200 g per wing), and occasionally wings from very large smooth skates are difficult to market. Rough skates occur throughout New Zealand, but are most abundant around the South Island in depths down to 500 m. Most of the catch is taken as bycatch by bottom trawlers, but skates are also taken by longliners. Significant longline bycatch has been reported from the Bounty Plateau in QMA 6. There is no clear separation of the depth ranges inhabited by rough and smooth skates; however, smooth skate tend to occur slightly deeper than rough skate (Beentjes & Stevenson 2000, 2001, Stevenson & Hanchet 2000). Many fishers and processors do not distinguish rough and smooth skates in their landing returns, and code them instead as “skates” (SKA). -
Analysis of Hawaii Tuna Tagging Project Data
SCTB14 Working Paper /I" M. Shiham AdamI, John Sibertl, David Itanol and Kim Holland2 Ipelagic Fisheries Program,University of Hawaii 2Hawaiian Institute of Marine Biology, University oa Hawaii 14th Standing Committee on Tuna and Billfish Noumea, New Caledonia, 9 -16th August 2001 Yellowfin Research Group Size-specific tag attrition in bulk transfer models: Analysis of Hawaii Tuna Tagging Project data M. Shiham AdamI, John SibertI, David Itanol and Kim Holland2 SCTB 14 -Presentation Summary Introduction The Hawaiian Islands are home to a mixture of recreationaVsubsistence and commercial fisheries for tuna, billfish and other pelagic species. There is a large mix of handline and troll vessels that seek tuna, billfish, wahoo (Acanthocybium solandri) and dolphinfish (Coryphaena hippurus) operating in the waters surrounding the main Hawaiian Islands and an offshore pelagic longline fishery. For the most part, all of these fisheries depend heavily on the tendency of their target species to aggregate in certain areas where they become more vulnerable to hook and line gear. This is especially true for the offshore handline fishery that concentrates on bigeye and yellowfin tuna found in aggregation with a productive offshore seamount (Cross Seamount) and four offshore meteorological buoys that act as productive fish aggregation devices. The Cross Seamount -Offshore Handline Fishery Hawaii based longline vessels targeting medium and large bigeye tuna have fished the Cross Seamount for decades using deep set tuna longline gear. Coastal handline boats began to fish the seamount and four offshore weather buoys in the late 1980s, concentrating on juvenile and sub-adult bigeye and yellowfin taken by a mix of shallow set handline and troll gears. -
Glossary for Hawaiian and Other Polynesian Terms
Glossary for Hawaiian and Other Polynesian Terms Pronunciation Hawaiian vowels are as in English: a, e, i, o, and u. But with respect to pronunciation, the letter “a” is pronounced as the soft ah sound in papa; “e” as the ā sound in play; “i” as the ē sound in need; “o” as used in bowl; and “u” as the ew sound in tune. Diacritical marks are used to indicate stress on particular vowels, and as glottal stops. Te macron (called kahakō in Hawaiian) is used to stress and elongate any of the vowel sounds. For example, the ā sound in pāhoe- hoe (sheet lava) is stressed and lengthened, as in pahh-ho-ay-ho-ay. Te reverse apostrophe (called an okina in Hawaiian) is used as a glot- tal stop, as in the closed throat sound that should precede formation of the word ‘ahi (pronounced ah-hee), or between sounds, as in Punalu‘u (pronounced poo-nah-lew-ew). Certain vowel combinations (diph- thongs) are also pronounced in a manner dissimilar to the way they are pronounced in English, with stress on the frst vowel. For instance, the “ou” sound in Hawaiian is pronounced with stress on the o, as in pouli © Te Editor(s) (if applicable) and Te Author(s), under exclusive license 247 to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 E. W. Glazier, Tradition-Based Natural Resource Management, Palgrave Studies in Natural Resource Management, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14842-3 248 Glossary for Hawaiian and Other Polynesian Terms (Hawaiian for dark or eclipse, pronounced poh-lee).