U.S. Atlantic, U.S. Gulf of Mexico

Home , Atka mackerel, Bluefish, Cero (fish), Grammatorcynus, King mackerel, Scomberomorus

King mackerel, Spanish mackerel

Scomberomorus cavalla and Scomberomorus maculatus

Image © Duane Raver

U.S. Atlantic, U.S. Gulf of Mexico

Troll/Pole, Handline, Midwater gillnet, Cast Net

April 29, 2015

Jen Hunter, Consulting researcher

Disclaimer

Seafood Watch® strives to have all Seafood Reports reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science and 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.

About Seafood Watch®

Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild- caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States 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 in the form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from 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 on the regional pocket guides 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 upon request. 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. 3

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.

Based on this principle, Seafood Watch had developed four sustainability criteria for evaluating wild- catch fisheries for consumers and businesses. These criteria are: • How does fishing affect the species under assessment? • How does the fishing affect other, target and non-target species? • How effective is the fishery’s management? • How does the fishing affect habitats and the stability of the ecosystem?

Each criterion includes: • Factors to evaluate and score • Guidelines for integrating these factors to produce a numerical score and rating

Once a rating has been assigned to each criterion, we develop an overall recommendation. Criteria ratings and the overall recommendation are color-coded to correspond to the categories on the Seafood Watch pocket guide and online guide:

Best Choice/Green: Are well managed and caught in ways that cause little harm to habitats or other wildlife.

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

Avoid/Red: Take a pass on these for now. These items are overfished or caught 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. 4

Summary This report focuses on the king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) and Spanish mackerel (S. maculatus) fisheries in the U.S. Southeastern Atlantic region and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Both species are targeted by recreational and commercial operators fishing in coastal pelagic areas. In the Atlantic, king mackerel are landed primarily with hook-and-line gears (handline and troll), whereas Spanish mackerel are landed with cast nets, handline, and midwater gillnet gears. In the Gulf of Mexico, both species are captured with handline and midwater gillnet gears. In Spanish and king mackerel fisheries midwater gillnets are termed runaround gillnets and are set in a specific way so as to minimize bycatch.

King and Spanish mackerel are confined to warm tropical and subtropical waters and are distributed along the East Coast of the United States and through the Gulf of Mexico; the range of king mackerel extends south in the coastal zone of Central and South America, to Brazil. During their first few years, these species grow quickly. King mackerel reaches sexual maturity at approximately 4 years of age; it breeds prolifically, spawning repeatedly during the breeding season. Spanish mackerel typically reach sexual maturity in their first year (male) or second year (female), and also exhibit high levels of fecundity. King mackerel is considered to have high inherent vulnerability to fishing pressure, whereas Spanish mackerel is only moderately vulnerable. A full assessment each of U.S. king and Spanish mackerel stocks was recently conducted by the Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico king mackerel were assessed in 2014 and the stocks were deemed to be not currently overfished or experiencing overfishing. Spanish mackerel were assessed in 2012 (South Atlantic) and 2013 (Gulf of Mexico). The Atlantic Spanish mackerel were determined to be neither in an overfished state nor experiencing overfishing. Some concerns about the population model parameters were raised in the review stage of the Gulf of Mexico Spanish mackerel assessment process. As a result, no population or fishing mortality estimates were endorsed in the SEDAR report. Although the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC) revisited these critiques via their Statistical and Science Committee and affirmed the SEDAR findings, Gulf Spanish mackerel stocks are neither in an overfished state nor experiencing overfishing. Overall, king and Spanish mackerel stocks are robust and are being exploited at appropriate levels.

King and Spanish mackerel are targeted by both recreational and commercial fishers in the coastal pelagic zone. In the Gulf of Mexico, both species are captured primarily by handline gear and runaround gillnets. Both gear types have relatively low rates of bycatch of protected resources and low discard rates. However, the Gulf handline fishery is responsible for a significant portion of greater amberjack landings, a species that is considered imperiled. Despite recent efforts to rebuild the stock, greater amberjacks continue to be both overfished and experiencing overfishing. In addition to handlines, Spanish mackerel in the U.S. Atlantic are landed with cast nets and runaround gillnets. These nets are deployed on schools of Spanish mackerel and traditionally have very low rates of bycatch and discards. Due to bycatch stock status and/or fishing mortality concerns, the Gulf of Mexico handline fisheries (targeting both Spanish and king mackerel) received red scores for this criterion. 5

In the United States, king and Spanish mackerels are managed under the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Coastal and Migratory Pelagic Resources (Mackerels) (1983), managed jointly by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC) and the GMFMC. The strategy and goals set forth by the original FMP and subsequent amendments are appropriate to the fisheries, and the most recent stock assessments suggest that the current restrictions in place are adequate to maintain the integrity of both Atlantic and Gulf stocks of king and Spanish mackerel. All U.S. stocks of both species have been assessed via SEDAR, which provides rigorous and independent assessment that considers both scientific advice and stakeholder concerns. Enforcement of fishery regulations is carried out jointly by a number of state and federal agencies, including state departments of wildlife and/or fisheries resources, the U.S. Coast Guard, and NOAA. The SAFMC and GMFMC each also have law enforcement panels to make recommendations on enforcement strategies. Bycatch management for all fisheries is appropriate and, although U.S. gillnet fisheries do have some observer coverage, runaround gillnets fisheries generally retain all their catch, so bycatch is of little concern. Overall, king and Spanish mackerel stocks are well- managed, although recovery of associated species such as amberjack contributed to a yellow rather than a green score for Gulf of Mexico handline fisheries (targeting both king and Spanish mackerel).

All the gear types assessed in this report generally have no impacts on the sea floor. The directed king and Spanish mackerel fisheries infrequently capture species of exceptional ecosystem importance, although there appears to be minimal attempt to use an ecosystem approach to managing the overall fishery catch. All fisheries considered here earned green scores for this criterion.

Overall, fisheries for both king mackerel and Spanish mackerel in the U.S. Atlantic are considered a Best Choice. Gulf of Mexico runaround gillnet fisheries for mackerel are also considered a Best Choice. Handline fisheries from the Gulf of Mexico are considered a Good Alternative due to the associated catch of greater amberjack.

Table of Conservation Concerns and Overall Recommendations

Stock / Fishery Impacts on Impacts on Management Habitat and Overall the Stock other Spp. Ecosystem Recommendation King mackerel: Southern Green (5.00) Yellow Green (5.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.000) Atlantic Coast (2.64) United States Atlantic - Troll/Pole King mackerel: Southern Green (5.00) Yellow Green (5.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.000) Atlantic Coast (2.64) United States Atlantic - Handline King mackerel: Gulf of Green (4.28) Red (1.41) Yellow (3.00) Green (3.87) Good Alternative Mexico (2.896) United States Gulf of Mexico - Handline 6

King mackerel: Gulf of Green (4.28) Green (5.00) Green (4.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.268) Mexico United States Gulf of Mexico - Gillnet, Midwater Spanish mackerel: Gulf of Green (5.00) Green (4.28) Green (4.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.268) Mexico United States Gulf of Mexico - Gillnet, Midwater Spanish mackerel: Gulf of Green (5.00) Red (1.41) Yellow (3.00) Green (3.87) Good Alternative Mexico (3.011) United States Gulf of Mexico - Handline Spanish mackerel: Southern Green (5.00) Yellow Green (5.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.000) Atlantic Coast (2.64) United States Atlantic - Handline Spanish mackerel: Southern Green (5.00) Green (5.00) Green (4.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.436) Atlantic Coast United States Atlantic - Cast Net Spanish mackerel: Southern Green (5.00) Green (5.00) Green (4.00) Green (3.87) Best Choice (4.436) Atlantic Coast United States Atlantic - Gillnet, Midwater

Scoring Guide

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/Green = Final Score >3.2, and no Red Criteria, and no Critical scores

• Good Alternative/Yellow = Final score >2.2, and neither Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) nor Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) are Very High Concern,2 and no more than one Red Criterion, and no Critical scores, and does not meet the criteria for Best Choice (above)

• Avoid/Red = Final Score <=2.2, or either Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern,2 or two or more Red Criteria, or one or more Critical scores.

2 Because effective management is an essential component of sustainable fisheries, Seafood Watch issues an Avoid recommendation for any fishery scored as a Very High Concern for either factor under Management (Criterion 3). 7

Table of Contents

About Seafood Watch® ...... 2

Guiding Principles ...... 3

Summary ...... 4

Introduction ...... 8

Assessment ...... 15 Criterion 1: Stock for which you want a recommendation ...... 15 Criterion 2: Impacts on Other Species ...... 23 Criterion 3: Management effectiveness ...... 34 Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem...... 53

Acknowledgements ...... 58

References ...... 59

Introduction Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendation

This report focuses on the commercial king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) and Spanish mackerel (S. maculatus) fisheries in the U.S. Southeastern Atlantic region and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Both species are targeted by recreational and commercial operators fishing in coastal pelagic areas. In the U.S. Southeast Atlantic region, king mackerel are landed primarily with hook-and-line gears (handline and troll), whereas Spanish mackerel are landed with cast nets, handline, and midwater gillnet gears. In the Gulf of Mexico, both species are captured with handline and midwater gillnet gears. In Spanish and king mackerel fisheries midwater gillnets are known as runaround gillnets (and are referred to as such throughout this report). Runaround gillnets are set around shoals of the target species and as such have reduced levels of bycatch compared to drift gillnets. The use of drift gillnets to target Spanish and king mackerel is prohibited in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico.

Overview of the species and management bodies

Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculatus) and king mackerel (S. cavalla) are coastal migratory pelagic species, found in the western Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. Both species are members of the family Scombridae, which includes the tunas, bonitos, the true mackerels (Scombrini; Genera: Scomber and Rastrelliger) and the Spanish mackerels (Scomberomorini; Genera: Acanthocybium, Scomberomorus, and Grammatorcynus).

King mackerel is found in the Western Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, from Massachusetts south to Brazil, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea (Figure 1). This is an important commercial and recreational fish along the East Coast of the United States (DeVries et al. 2002). King mackerel prefers warm waters and is rarely found in areas with sea surface temperatures less than 68°F (20°C) (SAFMC 2013a). They form large schools and feed aggressively on smaller fishes, squid, and shrimp. King mackerel are sexually dimorphic, with females exhibiting faster growth rates and attaining larger sizes than males (DeVries and Grimes 1997). Growth rates also vary by region, with Atlantic fish growing at a faster rate than Gulf of Mexico fish (DeVries and Grimes 1997). Females reach maturity during the first year of life, upon reaching approximately 14 cm (5.5 in) FL (fork length), and males mature by 4 years, or 72 cm (28 in) FL. King mackerels are highly fecund, with females releasing multiple batches of eggs throughout the spawning season. (Finucane et al. 1986) sampled king mackerel from both the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico and found mature females contained 69,000 to 12,207,000 eggs.

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of king mackerel (www.aquamaps.org).

Spanish mackerel is distributed along the East Coast of the U.S. and through the Gulf of Mexico, and it is targeted by commercial and recreational fishers throughout its range (NMFS 2009) (Figure 2). Commercial operators are allocated only 32% of Spanish mackerel catch in the Gulf of Mexico; accordingly, recreational landings exceed commercial landings in the Gulf. In the Atlantic, the commercial catch exceeds recreational landings (NMFS 2009). This species is confined to seas with water temperatures between 21°C (70°F) and 27°C (81°F), and migrates northward during the spring and southward in the fall (Godcharles and Murphy 1986). In spring, summer, and fall months, they are abundant in the northern Gulf of Mexico and along the U.S. Atlantic coast (Godcharles and Murphy 1986). Female Spanish mackerel reach sexual maturity later and at larger sizes than males. Males become reproductively viable in their first year, with 50% of males mature at 23.9 cm (9.4 in) FL (Schmidt et al. 1993). Females become mature in their second year, with 50% of females mature at 35.8 cm (14.1 in) FL (Schmidt et al. 1993). Spawning occurs from approximately May to August in the Atlantic (Schmidt et al. 1993) and May to September in the Gulf of Mexico (Finucane and Collins 1986). Maximum ages of 6 years and 11 years have been recorded for males and females, respectively (Schmidt et al. 1993). Spanish mackerel is highly fecund, with females containing 100,000 to 2,000,000 eggs (Finucane and Collins 1986).

Figure 2. Geographical distribution of Spanish mackerel (www.aquamaps.org).

In the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), Spanish and king mackerel fisheries are managed under the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Coastal and Migratory Pelagic Resources (Mackerels) (1983). This FMP includes provisions for both Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico fish stocks and is jointly managed by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC) and the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC). This document establishes catch limits, identifies allowable gear (Table 2) and seasonal fishery closures for commercial and recreational fishers, and establishes a framework for modifying the FMP as dictated by changes in stock parameters and fishery exploitation. The FMP has been amended 20 times between 1985 and 2014.

Table 1. Gears permitted in directed coastal pelagic fisheries in the U.S. South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico EEZs (Wildlife and Fisheries 2013).

Production Statistics

King and Spanish mackerel are landed throughout their respective ranges by commercial fishers. In 2009, a total of 15,308 mt of king mackerel were landed worldwide. Major fishing nations include Brazil (4,683 mt), the United States (3,512 mt), Mexico (3,473 mt) and Venezuela (2,200 mt) (FAO 2011) (Figure 3).

In 2011, U.S. commercial fishers landed 1,381.2 mt of king mackerel in the Atlantic and 1,206.3 mt in the Gulf of Mexico. The bulk of these captures occurred in Florida (73%; both coasts), Louisiana (17.4%), and North Carolina (7.1%). Alabama (1.9%), South Carolina (<1%), Texas (<1%), and Virginia (<1%) also reported nominal landings (NMFS 2013). The primary means of king mackerel capture in the Atlantic are handlines (86%) or troll/pole gears (11.7%), whereas in the Gulf of Mexico, handlines (66.7%) and runaround gillnets (20.4%) account for the majority of king mackerel landings (Figure 4).

Figure 3. Worldwide king mackerel landings, 1960–2009 (FAO 2011). 12

Figure 4. King mackerel landings by gear type in the U.S. Atlantic (a) and Gulf of Mexico (b) EEZs. The “other” designation includes combined, longline, and unspecified gear types.

Most recently, commercial fishery captures of Spanish mackerel were reported by Mexico and the United States, with total worldwide landings of 8,211 mt (FAO 2011) (Figure 5). In 2011, US fishers landed 1,972.1 mt of Spanish mackerel in the Atlantic and 610.8 mt in the Gulf of Mexico. Florida was responsible for 61.9% (both coasts) of total U.S. Spanish mackerel landings, while North Carolina and Alabama landed 15.3% and 14.7%, respectively. Connecticut, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Virginia also reported some capture (<1%). Spanish mackerel in the U.S. Atlantic are landed primarily via cast net (39.6%), handlines (28.5%), and gillnet gears (27.3%). In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, the majority of Spanish mackerel landings are attributable to gillnet (82.9%) and handline gears (28.5%) (NMFS 2013) (Figure 6). Gillnet operators often do not disclose the particular type of gillnet array being fished, but it is generally accepted that the majority of these gillnet gears are runaround nets (SEDAR 2012) (SEDAR 2013b). 13

Figure 5. Worldwide Spanish mackerel catch, 1960–2009 (FAO 2011).

Figure 6. Spanish mackerel landings by gear type for the U.S. Atlantic (a) and Gulf of Mexico (b) EEZs. For the Atlantic, “other” gears include seine nets, otter trawls, weirs, pound nets, dredge, diving outfits, combined, and unspecified gears. For the Gulf, “other” gears include seine nets, cast nets, and combination gears.

Historically, both Spanish and king mackerel have been incidentally captured in high numbers and discarded dead in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic shrimp trawl fisheries (SEDAR 2008) (SEDAR 2009a). There is some evidence to suggest that recent mitigation measures have been successful (SEDAR 2013b); however, there is still much uncertainty regarding the magnitude of finfish bycatch by shrimp 14

trawlers. King mackerel discards, particularly from the Gulf shrimp fishery, have varied over time, and appear to have decreased sharply in the last several years (SEDAR 2009a). Similarly, the most recent Spanish Mackerel stock assessments concluded that Spanish mackerel bycatch in both the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl fisheries has decreased significantly in recent years (SEDAR 2012) (SEDAR 2013b). During shrimp trawl bycatch reduction studies in the 1990s, Spanish mackerel occurred in less than 10% of the trawl samples, unless sampling was in very shallow water, where occurrence increased to approximately 50% of the trawl samples (Branstetter 1997). Even when Spanish mackerel occurred in the nets, the abundance was low, with usually less than five fish per hour being documented (Nance 1998).

Importance to the U.S./North American market

In recent years the U.S. has imported and exported fresh, frozen, and preserved mackerel. Categories for imported and exported fishery products are set forth in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, as maintained by the U.S. International Trade Commission. Though this body does recognize trade in mackerels, specifically jack and horse mackerel (Trachurus spp.) and Atka mackerel (Pleurogrammus monopterygius), as well as blue, chub, and Atlantic mackerels (Scomber scombrus, S. australasicus, and S. japonicas; collectively grouped as “mackerel”), there is no specific designation for either king or Spanish mackerel. Accordingly, these species are included in an “other marine” fish category, so it is difficult to state with any certainty whether these species are imported to or exported from the U.S. (pers. comm., M. Liddel 2015).

Common and market names

King mackerel is also known as king, kingfish, cavalla, smoker, sierra, and cero (NMFS 2013a,b). Spanish mackerel is also known as Spaniard, spotted mackerel, bay mackerel, and spotted cybium (NMFS 2013b).

Primary product forms

Both species are commonly available fresh, frozen, and smoked.

Assessment This section assesses the sustainability of the fishery(s) relative to the Seafood Watch Criteria for Fisheries, available 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. The Criterion 1 rating is determined as follows:

• Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern • Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern • Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern Rating is Critical if Factor 1.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical.

Criterion 1 Summary

KING MACKEREL: GULF OF MEXICO Region / Method Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality United States Gulf of Mexico 1.00:High 5.00:Very Low 3.67:Low Green (4.284) Gillnet, Midwater Concern Concern United States Gulf of Mexico 1.00:High 5.00:Very Low 3.67:Low Green (4.284) Handline Concern Concern

KING MACKEREL: SOUTHERN ATLANTIC COAST Region / Method Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality United States Atlantic 1.00:High 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Handline Concern Concern United States Atlantic 1.00:High 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Troll/Pole Concern Concern

SPANISH MACKEREL: GULF OF MEXICO Region / Method Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality United States Gulf of Mexico 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Gillnet, Midwater Concern Concern United States Gulf of Mexico 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Handline Concern Concern 16

SPANISH MACKEREL: SOUTHERN ATLANTIC COAST Region / Method Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality United States Atlantic 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Cast Net Concern Concern United States Atlantic 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Gillnet, Midwater Concern Concern United States Atlantic 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very Low 5.00:Very Low Green (5.000) Handline Concern Concern

Criterion 1 Assessment

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Scoring Guidelines

• Low—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 0-35, OR species exhibits life history characteristics that make it resilient to fishing, (e.g., early maturing ( • Medium—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 36-55, OR species exhibits life history characteristics that make it neither particularly vulnerable nor 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—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 56-100, OR species exhibits 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, aggregating for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or reproduction) and geographic range.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

Scoring Guidelines

• 5 (Very Low Concern)—Strong evidence exists that the 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 17

• 3 (Moderate Concern) —Abundance level is unknown and the 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 the species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing. • 1 (Very High Concern)—Population is listed as threatened or endangered.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

Scoring Guidelines

• 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 exists, 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.

KING MACKEREL: GULF OF MEXICO

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

High

King mackerel is long-lived, and males mature relatively late (females: <1 yr; males: 4 years) (DeVries and Grimes 1987). This species has a FishBase score of 69 of 100 and is determined to be of 18

“high” inherent vulnerability (Froese and Pauly 2011). FishBase scores are based on a number of intrinsic parameters including length, age at maturity, von Bertalanffy growth function, natural mortality rate (M), maximum age, geographic range, fecundity, and spatial behavior (see (Cheung et al. 2005)) that influence fish species’ vulnerability to extinction.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Very Low Concern

The Gulf of Mexico king mackerel stock was most recently assessed in 2014 (SEDAR 2014a). This assessment found the spawning stock biomass (SSB) to exceed the benchmark value with SSB2012/SSBMSY = 2.1, hence this stock is not currently in an overfished state. The Gulf of Mexico king mackerel stock is determined to be of “very low” concern because biomass is above the target at maximum sustainable yield.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Low Concern

In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, hook and line gears and runaround gillnets account for 78% and 20% of king mackerel landings, respectively. Fishing mortality for king mackerel in the Gulf of Mexico was most recently assessed in 2014 (SEDAR 2014a). But this assessment does not include fishing mortality attributable to Mexican fishing fleets targeting this population of king mackerel; accordingly, there is some uncertainty to the actual level of fishery exploitation in the Gulf. Mortality estimates are not differentiated according to gear type, but overall, the Gulf fishery mortality (F) is below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY); F2012/FMSY = 0.507 (SEDAR 2014a). Due to the uncertainty of the impacts of the Mexican fishery, this stock is scored as “low” concern rather than very low concern.

KING MACKEREL: SOUTHERN ATLANTIC COAST

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability 19

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

High

King mackerel is long-lived, and males mature relatively late (females: <1 yr; males: 4 years) (DeVries and Grimes 1987). This species has a FishBase score of 69 of 100 and is determined to be of “high” inherent vulnerability (Froese and Pauly 2011). FishBase scores are based on a number of intrinsic parameters including length, age at maturity, von Bertalanffy growth function, natural mortality rate (M), maximum age, geographic range, fecundity, and spatial behavior (see (Cheung et al. 2005)) that influence fish species’ vulnerability to extinction.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Very Low Concern

(SEDAR 2014b) assessed the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico king mackerel stocks in 2014. This assessment found the biomass for the Atlantic stock to exceed spawning stock biomass (SSB) at maximum sustainable yield (MSY). It was estimated that SSB2012/SSBMSY = 1.24, hence this stock is not currently in an overfished state (SEDAR 2014b). Atlantic king mackerel stocks are determined to be of “very low” concern.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Very Low Concern

In the U.S. Atlantic, handline and other hook and line gears (troll) are responsible for over 98% of king mackerel landings. Fishing mortality for Atlantic king mackerel was most recently assessed in 2014 (SEDAR 2014b). Mortality estimates are not differentiated according to gear type, but overall, the South Atlantic mackerel stocks are exploited at a level far below the fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield (FMSY): (F2012/FMSY = 0.37) (SEDAR 2014b). This stock is deemed to be of “very low” concern.

SPANISH MACKEREL: GULF OF MEXICO

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Medium

Spanish mackerel lives only 6–11 years, with females maturing in their second year (Schmidt et al. 1993). Accordingly, this species has a FishBase score of 39 of 100 and is determined to be of “medium” inherent vulnerability (Froese and Pauly 2011). FishBase scores are based on a number of intrinsic parameters including length, age at maturity, von Bertalanffy growth function, natural mortality rate (M), maximum age, geographic range, fecundity, and spatial behavior (see (Cheung et al. 2005)) that influence fish species’ vulnerability to extinction.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Very Low Concern

Gulf of Mexico Spanish mackerel was recently assessed by SEDAR (SEDAR 2013b). This report concluded that SSB2011/SSBMSY = 1.83. This stock is not in an overfished state (Figure 7). But there was some disagreement among the independent reviewers as to the appropriateness of the assessment model; accordingly, there were no population or fishing mortality estimates endorsed in the final SEDAR assessment report. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council assembled a Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) Review Panel to address the independent reviewer critiques in August 2013. The panel concluded that the data used in the assessment were sound and robust, and affirmed that biomass exceeds management targets. The Gulf Spanish mackerel stock is above management targets, not in an overfished state, and is considered a “very low” concern.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Very Low Concern 21

In the Gulf of Mexico, the majority of Spanish mackerel landings are attributable to gillnet (82.9%) and handline gears (28.5%) (NMFS 2013). Trip tickets often do not specify which type of gillnets gear was used; however, runaround gillnets are considered the primary gear used to land Spanish mackerel in the Gulf (GMFMC et al. 2004). The Gulf of Mexico Spanish mackerel stock was assessed in 2012 (SEDAR

2013b). This assessment concluded that F2009-2011/MFMT (Maximum Fishing Mortality Threshold) = 0.40, thus this stock is not undergoing overfishing (Figure 8). But there was some disagreement among the independent reviewers as to the appropriateness of the assessment model; accordingly, there were no population or fishing mortality estimates endorsed in the final SEDAR assessment report. The GMFMC assembled an SSC Review Panel to address the independent reviewer critiques in August 2013. The panel concluded that the data used in the assessment were sound and robust, and affirmed that fishery mortality for this stock is below MFMT. The SSC panel produced a fishing mortality estimate that was slightly lower (Fcurrent/MFMT = 0.38) than that in the SEDAR report, although it remains in line with the overall conclusions (GMFMC 2013c). The Gulf Spanish mackerel stock is not undergoing overfishing and is therefore considered a “very low” concern.

Rationale: Historically, there has been some concern over Spanish mackerel bycatch in the Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl fishery (SEDAR 2013b). But (Branstetter 1997) and (Nance 1998) found that Spanish mackerel were rarely captured in sampled trawls. On those occasions where Spanish mackerel were caught in trawls (typically only in shallow water), the CPUE was very low (Nance 1998).

SPANISH MACKEREL: SOUTHERN ATLANTIC COAST

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

Medium

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

Very Low Concern

A stock assessment was conducted in 2012 (SEDAR 2012) and concluded that SSB2011/SSBMSY = 1.49, with biomass exceeding both MSST (Minimum Stock Size Threshold) and BMSY (Figure 9). The South Atlantic Spanish mackerel stock is not currently in an overfished state and is considered a “very low” concern.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

Very Low Concern

Spanish mackerel in the U.S. Atlantic is landed mostly via cast net (39.6%), handlines (28.5%) and gillnet gears (27.3%). In the most recent stock assessment report, fishing mortality was determined to be

F2011/FMSY = 0.521, so overfishing is not occurring (SEDAR 2012). Mortality estimates are not differentiated according to gear type, but overall this fishery is determined to be of “very low” concern.

Criterion 2: Impacts on Other Species All main retained and 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 to species 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. The Criterion 2 rating is determined as follows:

• Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern • Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern • Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern Rating is Critical if Factor 2.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical.

Criterion 2 Summary

King mackerel: Gulf of Mexico: United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

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

Species Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality KING MACKEREL: GULF OF MEXICO High 5.00: Very 3.67: Low 4.284 Low Concern Concern SPANISH MACKEREL: GULF OF Medium 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 MEXICO Low Concern Low Concern

King mackerel: Gulf of Mexico: United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Subscore:: 1.414 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.414

Species Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality GREATER AMBERJACK Medium 2.00: High 1.00: High 1.414 Concern Concern KING MACKEREL: GULF OF MEXICO High 5.00: Very 3.67: Low 4.284 Low Concern Concern SPANISH MACKEREL: GULF OF Medium 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 MEXICO Low Concern Low Concern

King mackerel: Southern Atlantic Coast: United States Atlantic, Handline

Subscore:: 2.644 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 2.644

Species Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality BLUE RUNNER Low 3.00: 2.33: 2.644 Moderate Moderate Concern Concern CREVALLE JACK Medium 3.00: 2.33: 2.644 Moderate Moderate Concern Concern SPOTTED TUNNY Medium 3.00: 2.33: 2.644 Moderate Moderate Concern Concern BLUEFISH: ATLANTIC COAST High 4.00: Low 5.00: Very 4.472 Concern Low Concern KING MACKEREL: SOUTHERN High 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern SPANISH MACKEREL: SOUTHERN Medium 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern

King mackerel: Southern Atlantic Coast: United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Subscore:: 2.644 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 2.644

Species Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality BLUE RUNNER Low 3.00: 2.33: 2.644 Moderate Moderate Concern Concern SPOTTED TUNNY Medium 3.00: 2.33: 2.644 Moderate Moderate Concern Concern KING MACKEREL: SOUTHERN High 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern

Spanish mackerel: Gulf of Mexico: United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

Subscore:: 4.284 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 4.284

Spanish mackerel: Gulf of Mexico: United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Subscore:: 1.414 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 1.414

Spanish mackerel: Southern Atlantic Coast: United States Atlantic, Cast Net

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

Species Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality SPANISH MACKEREL: SOUTHERN Medium 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern

Spanish mackerel: Southern Atlantic Coast: United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

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

Species Inherent Abundance Fishing Subscore Vulnerability Mortality SPANISH MACKEREL: SOUTHERN Medium 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern

Spanish mackerel: Southern Atlantic Coast: United States Atlantic, Handline

Subscore:: 2.644 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 2.644

KING MACKEREL: SOUTHERN High 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern SPANISH MACKEREL: SOUTHERN Medium 5.00: Very 5.00: Very 5.000 ATLANTIC COAST Low Concern Low Concern

In general, fisheries targeting Spanish and king mackerel capture few incidental species. Both mackerel species examined here are typically found in schools, and many of the predominant gears used to catch these species are designed to circle and entrap the whole school. Accordingly, it is those fisheries that use hook-and-line gears that are responsible for the majority of incidental landings. Data on landings of non-target species were collected from a number of sources. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission furnished landings summaries for trips using hook-and-line gear targeting Spanish or king mackerels from 2008–2012 (pers. comm., S. Brown 2015). Additional sources included a NOAA report on catch and bycatch in U.S. gillnet fisheries (Passerotti et al. 2009) and a report on commercial fishery discards from the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic regions (Poffenberger 2004). The species assessed here are mostly retained in the fishery of interest, with minimal levels of discarding.

Criterion 2 Assessment

BLUE RUNNER

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.1 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Low

Blue runner is a schooling, predatory fish that grows quickly and has a protracted spawning period, from January to August, in the Atlantic (Froese and Pauly 2011). Accordingly, blue runner has a FishBase score of 34 of 100 and is determined to be of “low” inherent vulnerability (Froese and Pauly 2011).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.2 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Moderate Concern 27

There is no information available on the current stock status of blue runner in the western central Atlantic region. Due to low vulnerability to fishing pressure and this lack of information on local abundance, blue runner is determined to be of “moderate” concern.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.3 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Moderate Concern

There are no estimates available for blue runner fishing mortality. However, the majority of blue runner landed in the Atlantic EEZ in 2011 was landed using handline and rod and reel gears (NMFS 2013b), so the contribution of the handline fishery to overall blue runner mortality is potentially significant. Accordingly, this fishery is determined to be of “moderate” concern.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

United States Atlantic, Handline

< 20%

There are no fishery-specific discard data available for handline fisheries targeting Spanish and king mackerel. However, handline gear has low rates of bycatch. (Kelleher 2005) found that, in general, handline fisheries have a discard rate ranging from 0%–7%.

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

< 20%

There are no fishery-specific discard data available for troll fisheries targeting king mackerel. However, troll gear has exceedingly low rates of bycatch. (Kelleher 2005) found that, in general, troll fisheries have a discard rate ranging from 0%–7%.

BLUEFISH: ATLANTIC COAST

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.1 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

High

Bluefish is moderately long-lived (≈14 years) and reaches maturity by age 2. This species is an aggressive predator and is considered to occupy a high trophic level. Bluefish has a FishBase score of 58 of 100 and is determined to be of “high” inherent vulnerability (Froese and Pauly 2011).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.2 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

Low Concern

The Atlantic bluefish stock has recently rebuilt after decades of overharvest (NOAA 2012, SAW 2005).

The most recent stock assessment (Wood 2013) estimated B2011 to be 132,890 mt of fish, or 90% of

BMSY (Wood 2013); this stock is not in an overfished state. Although the current biomass is above the limit reference point (1/2 BMSY), it remains below the target reference point (BMSY) and is therefore determined to be of “low” conservation concern (Wood 2013).

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.3 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

Very Low Concern

A stock assessment for Atlantic bluefish was most recently conducted by (Wood 2013). The fishery mortality rate was estimated as F2011 = 0.114, with F2011/FMSY = 0.6. The Atlantic bluefish stock is not undergoing overfishing (Wood 2013).

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

United States Atlantic, Handline

< 20%

CREVALLE JACK

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.1 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

Medium

This species has a FishBase score of 58 of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2011), which typically results in a scoring of high inherent vulnerability. But this conclusion has been disputed, and a productivity- susceptibility analysis of the life-history characteristics (Table 2) suggests that a score of medium inherent vulnerability would be more appropriate. A score of “medium” vulnerability was corroborated by expert opinion (Smith-Vaniz 2015) and has been applied here.

Rationale:

Table 2: Productivity-susceptibility analysis for crevalle jack, Caranx hippos, based on life-history characteristics. Data from FishBase life-history tool (Froese and Pauly 2011).

Resilience Attribute Value Score Average age at maturity 3.5 years 3 Average maximum age 17 years 2 Average maximum size 124 cm 2 Average size at maturity 64.8 cm 2 Reproductive strategy Broadcast Spawner 3 Trophic level 3.6 1 Average score 2.167

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.2 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline 30

Moderate Concern

There is no stock assessment for crevalle jack in the South Atlantic region. Landings in Florida have decreased moderately over the last several years (Figure 10 (FWC 2010)), although there is no biomass estimate available. Due to this uncertainty and this species’ medium vulnerability to fishing pressure, this stock is determined to be of “moderate” concern.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.3 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

Moderate Concern

There are no estimates available for crevalle jack fishing mortality. Accordingly, this fishery is determined to be of “moderate” concern.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

United States Atlantic, Handline

< 20%

GREATER AMBERJACK

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.1 above)

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Medium

Greater amberjack has a FishBase score of 54/100 and is therefore determined to be of “moderate” inherent vulnerability (Froese and Pauly 2011).

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.2 above)

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

High Concern

The most recent assessment of the Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack biomass was conducted in 2011

(SEDAR 2011) and the stock was determined to be depleted, with B2009/BMSY = 0.31. This stock is considered overfished (GMFMC 2012c).

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.3 above)

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

High Concern

Fishing mortality of greater amberjack in the Gulf of Mexico is currently exceeding threshold values, with F2009/FMSY = 1.830; overfishing is occurring (NMFS 2012b) (SEDAR 2011). There are no data available for handline-specific fishery mortality, although handlines account for the bulk of greater amberjack landings (NMFS 2013). Therefore, this gear type is likely a significant contributor to overall fishery mortality.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

< 20%

There are no fishery-specific discard data available for handline fisheries targeting Spanish and king mackerel. However, handline gear has exceedingly low rates of bycatch. (Kelleher 2005) found that, in general, handline fisheries have a discard rate ranging from 0%–7%.

SPOTTED TUNNY

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.1 above) 32

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Medium

Spotted tunny has a FishBase score of 57 of 100 (Froese and Pauly 2011) and would typically be scored as having high inherent vulnerability. But this conclusion has been questioned, and a productivity- susceptibility analysis of the life-history characteristics (Table 3) suggests that a score of “medium” inherent vulnerability would be more appropriate. This was corroborated by expert opinion (Ahrabi- Nejad 2015) and is therefore the score assigned here.

Rationale:

Table 3: Productivity-susceptibility analysis of Spotted tunny, Euthynnus alletteratus, based on life-history characteristics. Data from the FishBase Life-History Tool (Froese and Pauly 2011).

Resilience Attribute Value Score Average age at maturity 3.2 years 3 Average maximum age 15.2 years 2 Average maximum size 122 cm 2 Average size at maturity 59.2 cm 2 Reproductive strategy Broadcast Spawner 3 Trophic level 4.5 1 Average score 2.167

Factor 2.2 - Abundance

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.2 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Moderate Concern

There are no data available on spotted tunny biomass in the Western Atlantic (ICCAT 2013). Due to this uncertainty and this species’ medium inherent vulnerability, stock status is considered to be of “moderate” concern.

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality

Scoring Guidelines (same as Factor 1.3 above)

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole 33

Moderate Concern

There are no estimates available for spotted tunny fishing mortality (ICCAT 2013). Accordingly, this fishery is determined to be of “moderate” concern.

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

United States Atlantic, Handline

< 20%

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

< 20%

Criterion 3: Management effectiveness Management is separated into management of retained species (harvest strategy) and management of non-retained species (bycatch strategy).

The final score for this criterion is the geometric mean of the two scores. The Criterion 3 rating is determined as follows:

• Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern • Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern • Score <=2.2 or either the Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern = Red or High Concern Rating is Critical if either or both of Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) and Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) ratings are Critical.

Criterion 3 Summary

Region / Method Management Management Overall of of Recommendation Retained Non-Retained Species Species United States Atlantic 5.000 All Species Green(4.000) Cast Net Retained United States Atlantic 5.000 All Species Green(4.000) Gillnet, Midwater Retained United States Atlantic 5.000 All Species Green(5.000) Handline Retained United States Atlantic 5.000 All Species Green(5.000) Troll/Pole Retained United States Gulf of Mexico 5.000 All Species Green(4.000) Gillnet, Midwater Retained United States Gulf of Mexico 3.000 All Species Yellow(3.000) Handline Retained

Factor 3.1: Harvest Strategy

Scoring Guidelines

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. 35

• 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 there is a clear need for management (i.e., fishery catches threatened, endangered, or high concern species), OR there is a high level of Illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing occurring.

Factor 3.1 Summary

Factor 3.1: Management of fishing impacts on retained species Region / Method Strategy Recovery Research Advice Enforce Track Inclusion United States Atlantic Highly N/A Highly Highly Highly Highly Highly Cast Net Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Atlantic Highly N/A Highly Highly Highly Highly Highly Gillnet, Midwater Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Atlantic Highly N/A Highly Highly Highly Highly Highly Handline Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Atlantic Highly N/A Highly Highly Highly Highly Highly Troll/Pole Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Gulf of Mexico Highly N/A Highly Highly Highly Highly Highly Gillnet, Midwater Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Gulf of Mexico Highly Moderately Highly Highly Highly Highly Highly Handline Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective

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.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline 36

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

King and Spanish mackerel in the Atlantic are managed by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC); in the Gulf of Mexico, both species are managed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC). The SAFMC/GMFMC management boundary is Highway 1 through the Florida Keys, with SAFMC managing king and Spanish mackerel off the east coast of the U.S. south to Highway 1, and GMFMC managing these species north of Highway 1 to the US-Mexico border (Figure 10, Figure 11 (SEDAR 2009a)).

Spanish mackerel in the southeast Atlantic/Gulf of Mexico region is managed as two separate fish stocks, according to management council boundaries (Figure 11 (SEDAR 2012)). However, there is some disagreement as to whether there are multiple distinct stocks (SEDAR 2012). There appear to be no genetic differences between Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico stocks, although morphometric differences exist (SEDAR 2008). It is unclear whether Atlantic and Gulf Spanish mackerel mix directly, or if the homogeneity between these populations is instead a result of genetic exchange during spawning (SEDAR 2008). The Atlantic stock (SAFMC) includes all fish caught south of U.S. Highway 1, through the Florida Keys, and northward along the east coast of Florida to Maine. Spanish mackerel caught north of U.S. Highway 1 along the west coast of Florida to Texas, are considered to belong to the Gulf of Mexico stock (GMFMC). All Spanish mackerel landed in Monroe County (the Florida Keys) are considered to be part of the Gulf of Mexico stock.

Spanish mackerel landed in federal waters must be at least 12” (30.5 cm) FL and must be landed with heads and fins intact (SAFMC 2013c). It should be noted that (Schmidt et al. 1993) found L50 = 36 cm for females, so a significant portion of females caught in adherence with the federal size guideline may not yet have reached reproductive age. In the Atlantic, Spanish mackerel can be caught from March until the end of February, or until the quota (3.87 million pounds; 1,755 mt) is reached, with a 3,500 lb (1.6 mt) trip limit applying from March 1 to December 1. After December 1 there are no trip limits. Purse seine and drift gillnet gear are prohibited.

King mackerel in the Atlantic and Gulf are currently considered to be a single stock, comprised of two separate migratory units (Atlantic Migratory Group and Gulf Migratory Group (SEDAR 2009a)), although there is evidence of two separate migratory groups in the Gulf of Mexico (DeVries and Grimes 1997) (SEDAR 2009). The king mackerel Atlantic Migratory Group ranges from New York south to Florida, and the Gulf Migratory Group ranges from Florida to Texas. The boundary of these two groups sifts seasonally with king mackerel migratory patterns (Figure 11 (SEDAR 2009a)). Regulatory boundaries are not influenced by the ranges of stocks or migratory groups.

For king mackerel, total allowable catch (TAC) limits have been designated for each migratory group, for 37

each commercial and recreational operator, regardless of management jurisdiction. For both migratory groups, the minimum king mackerel size is 24” (61 cm) FL, with no more than 5% total catch, by weight, undersized. When landed, fins and heads must be attached (SAFMC 2013a). The Atlantic Migratory Group fishery is open from April 1st until the end of February, or until the quota of 3.88 million pounds (1,760 mt) is reached (NMFS 2012a). The Gulf Migratory Group king mackerel season varies for each of the five Gulf of Mexico management zones (see (GMFCM 2012) (NMFS 2012a)). Quotas also vary by management zone (NMFS 2012a). Bag limits and allowable gear vary by region. Notably, drift gillnets are forbidden in the Atlantic, although they are permitted to capture king mackerel during an abbreviated season in the south Florida West Coast subzone (GMFCM 2012).

The U.S. king and Spanish mackerel stocks are each assessed regularly by the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process. SEDAR is a joint effort by the Caribbean, SAFMC, GMFMC, NOAA, and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fishery Commissions. These species are included in the Coastal Migratory Pelagic Fishery Management Plan (1983), which is amended regularly to adjust for changes in stock parameters, fishing effort, and management goals. The goals for king and Spanish mackerel management set forth in the FMP are appropriate to the species, and ongoing monitoring suggests that these management guidelines are being implemented successfully (Figure 9) (SEDAR 2012). Therefore, the management of each fishery listed here is considered to be highly effective.

Rationale:

Figure 9. Estimated total biomass of southern Atlantic Spanish mackerel; the dashed line indicates BMSY (SEDAR 2012). 38

Figure 10. Fishery management council boundaries in the southeast U.S. (SEDAR 2009).

Figure 11. King mackerel migratory group seasonal boundaries (http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sf/MakingSenseofMakerel.htm [sic.]).

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 39 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.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

N/A

No sensitive or threatened species are targeted or retained in this fishery.

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Moderately Effective

The Gulf of Mexico handline fishery targeting king and Spanish mackerel incidentally captures greater amberjack. The majority of greater amberjack incidental catch in the Gulf of Mexico occurs with handlines or other small hook-and-line gear (NMFS 2013). Thus, the impact of this fishery is potentially significant. The greater amberjack rebuilding plan began in 2003, but so far has failed to appreciably increase stock biomass or reduce fishery mortality; this stock continues to be both overfished and experiencing overfishing (SEDAR 2014a). The recovery of stocks of concern for the Gulf handline fisheries is therefore determined to be only “moderately effective.”

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 achieve a Highly Effective rating, population assessments must be conducted regularly and they must be robust enough to reliably determine the population status.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater 40

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Highly Effective

South Atlantic king and Spanish mackerel are managed by SAFMC and are assessed by SEDAR. The most recent stock assessments (king mackerel: (SEDAR 2014); Spanish mackerel: (SEDAR 2012)) reflect contemporary stock information and scientific analysis of the South Atlantic king and Spanish mackerel populations. The data collection phase of the SEDAR process includes: 1) characterizing, defining, and mapping stocks; 2) a review and discussion of life-history information; 3) providing measures of population abundance, including fishery-dependent and -independent information; 4) assessing commercial and recreational catch data; 5) determining the most efficacious methods of assessing stock status and management benchmarks; and 6) making recommendations for future research directions. These data provide the underpinning for the stock assessment reports. Additionally, the final reports are subjected to review by three independent experts, who assess whether the management recommendations are appropriate to the available data and current stock parameters. Future SEDAR assessments of Atlantic king and Spanish mackerel are not currently scheduled.

The current South Atlantic king (SEDAR 2014) and Spanish mackerel assessment (SEDAR 2012) model is based on fisher-independent data from the Southeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program: South Atlantic (SEAMAP-SA) trawl. SEAMAP-SA provides long-term data on abundance and biomass of those marine organisms collected by high-rise trawl sampling in the South Atlantic Bight, between Cape Hatteras, NC and Cape Canaveral, FL.

For king mackerel (SEDAR 2014), fishery-dependent data were ascertained from the NMFS Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS), the NMFS recreational headboat survey, logbook records, and the North Carolina Trip Index. The MRFSS collects catch data from public fishing access points, and collects species identification, morphometric data, and angler fishing behavior. The recreational headboat survey includes region-specific data on catch composition, size, weight, age, and sex. Federal logbook data are collected from commercial fishers and include data on total catch (by weight), fishing area, and gear type. The North Carolina Trip Index contains data on inshore and offshore commercial fisheries including total catch composition, weight, fishing area, and gear.

For Spanish mackerel (SEDAR 2012), fishery-dependent data were also collected from the MRFSS, as well as the Florida Trip Ticket program (for troll/handline fisheries). The Florida Trip Ticket Program includes catch data for South Atlantic gillnet, cast net, and hook-and-line fisheries.

In addition to the SEDAR assessment process, each of the eight U.S. Fishery Management Councils has a separate Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), which acts to review the biological, social, and economic basis for council management plans. This committee makes recommendations for management actions in accordance with plan objectives and national fishery management guidelines. There is currently no observer program in place to monitor South Atlantic coastal cast net, handline, 41

runaround gillnet, or troll/pole fisheries.

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

Gulf of Mexico king and Spanish mackerel are managed by GMFMC and are assessed by SEDAR. The most recent stock assessments (king mackerel: (SEDAR 2014); Spanish mackerel: (SEDAR 2013b)) reflect contemporary stock information and scientific analysis of the Gulf of Mexico king and Spanish mackerel populations. The data collection phase of the SEDAR process includes: 1) characterizing, defining, and mapping stocks; 2) a review and discussion of life-history information; 3) providing measures of population abundance, including fishery-dependent and -independent information; 4) assessing commercial and recreational catch data; 5) determining the most efficacious methods of assessing stock status and management benchmarks; and 6) making recommendations for future research directions. These data provide the underpinning for the stock assessment reports. Additionally, the final reports are subjected to review by three independent experts, who assess whether the management recommendations are appropriate to the available data and current stock parameters. Future SEDAR assessments of Gulf king and Spanish mackerel are not currently scheduled. The current Gulf of Mexico king (SEDAR 2014) and Spanish mackerel assessment (SEDAR 2013b) models are based on fishery- independent data from the SEAMAP Groundfish Trawl Survey-Gulf of Mexico, and the SEAMAP Fall Plankton Survey (king mackerel). SEAMAP surveys provide long-term data on abundance and biomass of those marine organisms collected by trawl sampling in the Gulf of Mexico.

For king mackerel (SEDAR 2014), fishery-dependent data were ascertained from MRFSS, the NMFS recreational headboat survey, and logbook records. The MRFSS collects catch data from public fishing access points, and collects species identification, morphometric data, and angler fishing behavior. The recreational headboat survey includes region-specific data on catch composition, size, weight, age, and sex. Federal logbook data are collected from commercial fishers and include data on total catch (by weight), fishing area, and gear type. For Gulf Spanish mackerel (SEDAR 2013b), fishery-dependent data were collected from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Sports-boat Angling Survey. These data include CPUE for coastal sport fishers in coastal Texas waters. In addition to the SEDAR assessment process, each of the eight U.S. Fishery Management Councils has a separate Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), which acts to review the biological, social, and economic basis for council management plans. This committee makes recommendations for management actions in accordance with plan objectives and national fishery management guidelines.

The Southeast gillnet observer program includes all anchored, runaround, and drift gillnet fisheries along the eastern seaboard, from North Carolina to Florida and the Gulf of Mexico (Passerotti et al. 2010). In 2012, a total of six runaround gillnet sets were observed in the Southeast U.S. region. These 42

observations took place on five gillnet vessels. In all cases, the target species was king mackerel and the catch was almost entirely of this species (99.8%) (Mathers et al. 2012).

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.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Highly Effective

Amendment 18 to the Coastal Pelagic FMP set the king mackerel allowable catch limit (ACL) (equivalent to allowable biological catch (ABC)) for the Atlantic Migratory Group at 10.46 million pounds (mp) beginning in the 2011/2012 fishing year, pending a review of the recent SEDAR assessment (SEDAR 2014). Commercial fishers are allocated 37% of the total ACL (3.88 mp) (Federal Register 2011). During the past 10 years, commercial catch levels have remained below the ACL, averaging 2.62 mp per year. This stock is not experiencing overfishing and current exploitation levels are far below MFMT. Amendment 18 set the ACL for Spanish mackerel at 5.69 mp, pending review of the most recent stock assessment report (GMFMC 2011a) (SEDAR 2013). The annual catch limit for Spanish mackerel has subsequently increased to 6.063 mp, with 3.330 mp (55%) allocated to the commercial sector and 2.727 mp (45%) allocated to the recreational sector. Since 2009, commercial landings of Spanish mackerel have exceeded annual quota limits by as much as 39%; however, the stock biomass continues to be robust and likely able to support increased harvest. In both cases, the decision to increase ACL for these stocks was a result of the most recent stock assessments. These stocks are harvested at levels significantly below MFMT. Accordingly, management adherence to scientific advice is determined to be “highly effective.”

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

Amendment 18 to the Coastal Pelagics Fishery Management Plan revised allowable biological catch and 43

annual catch limits for Spanish and king mackerels. This amendment took effect in January of 2012 (GMFMC 2011a). For the 2011/2012 fishing year, GMFMC set the king mackerel acceptable biological catch (ABC) range from 5.3 to 9.3 million pounds, although the annual catch limit (ACL/TAC) was 10.8 million pounds (SEDAR 2014). The Gulf king mackerel catch is allocated at 68% to the recreational fishery and 32% to the commercial fishery. Amendment 18 set the ACL for commercial operators at 3.808 mp for the 2012/2013 fishing year and 3.456 mp for subsequent years (GMFMC 2011a). Total catch (recreational and commercial) has averaged 6.476 mp since the 2004/2005 fishing year. Although the ACL is currently outside the recommended ABC range, fishery exploitation remains well below MFMT.

Amendment 18 made the annual catch limit (ACL/TAC) for Gulf Spanish mackerel equal to the ABC limit at 5.2 million pounds, pending a further review of population data after the 2013 SEDAR assessment report (GMFMC 2011a) (SEDAR 2013). In 2014, the ACL for Gulf Spanish mackerel was increased to 12.7 mp for the 2014/2015 fishing season, with planned decreases for 2015/2016 (11.8 mp) and subsequent years (11.3 mp) (Federal Register 2014). Since the 2007/2008 fishing year, total commercial catch has averaged only 1.36 mp and the commercial fishery has not closed early since the 1987/1988 fishing year.

Despite the high ACL relative to ABC for king mackerel and the recent two-fold increase in ACL for Spanish mackerel, management adherence to scientific advice is determined to be “highly effective.”

Subfactor 3.1.5 – Enforcement of Management Regulations

Considerations: Do fishermen comply with regulations, and how is this monitored? To achieve a Highly Effective rating, there must be regular enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Highly Effective

The SAFMC has no law-enforcement authority, so to ensure that fishers comply with fisheries regulations, the SAFMC works closely with a number of state and federal agencies, including state departments of wildlife and/or fisheries resources, the U.S. Coast Guard, and NOAA. Additionally, SAFMC has a Law Enforcement Advisory Panel that makes recommendations on enforcement strategies (SAFMC 2012). SAFMC also makes available quarterly reports, produced by the NOAA Office of Law 44

Enforcement, on law enforcement activities conducted in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions (NOAA 2013a).

In recent years, some questions have been raised about the efficacy of the U.S. Coast Guard’s at-sea fisheries enforcement strategy and the resulting compliance estimates for U.S. fisheries (e.g., (King et al. 2009)). There are no data available that address the U.S. Atlantic king or Spanish mackerel fisheries specifically, but based on the findings of (King et al. 2009), there is potentially some illegal, unreported, or unregulated (IUU) fishing on these stocks. However, in addition to at-sea inspections, commercial fishers in the Atlantic are subject to dockside inspections and must submit logbook reports, when requested. Overall, enforcement is determined to be “highly effective.”

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

The GMFMC has no law enforcement authority and thus works closely with a number of state and federal agencies to ensure that fishers comply with fisheries regulations. GMFMC periodically convenes its Law Enforcement Advisory Panel to make recommendations on enforcement strategies. This panel includes members of the law enforcement community from each of the five Gulf states as well as representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Coast Guard, and NOAA (GMFMC 2012a). Additionally, quarterly reports on law enforcement activities conducted in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions are produced by the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement (NOAA 2013a). With recent changes in fishery quota allocations, there has been a reduction in enforcement actions in recent years (Porter et al. 2013), although it is unclear whether the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement data accurately reflect overall fisher compliance with management guidelines (Porter et al. 2013). Some questions have also been raised about the efficacy of the U.S. Coast Guard’s at-sea fisheries enforcement strategy and the resulting compliance estimates for U.S. fisheries (e.g., (King et al. 2009)). There are no data available that address the Gulf of Mexico king or Spanish mackerel fisheries specifically, but there is potentially some IUU fishing on these stocks (King et al. 2009). However, in addition to at-sea inspections, commercial fishers in the Gulf are subject to dockside inspections and must submit logbook reports, when requested. Overall, enforcement is determined to be “highly effective.”

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 45

Effective rating is given if measures enacted by management have been shown to result in the long-term maintenance of species overtime.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

Unregulated recreational fishing and industrial-scale commercial harvest of king and Spanish mackerel in the 1970s and 1980s led to population crashes in both the U.S. South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. In 1983 these species were included in the coastal migratory pelagics FMP (GMFMC/SAFMC 1983). Subsequently, a number of management actions were put in place to attempt to recover king and Spanish mackerel stocks. Since the separate Atlantic and Gulf migratory groups were identified (king: 1985; Spanish: 1987), the stocks have been managed independently, by SAFMC and GMFMC. TAC, bag limits, and trip limits have been set for each stock, and in 1990, drift gillnet gear was banned for both species in the SAFMC and GMFMC council areas. As a result of careful monitoring and adjustments of catch limits, king and Spanish mackerel stocks have rebuilt and are no longer considered to be in an overfished state (Figure 12, Figure 13).

Rationale:

Figure 12. Commercial quotas and landings for Atlantic Spanish mackerel, data from (GMFMC et al. 2011).

Figure 13. Commercial quotas and landings for Atlantic king mackerel, data from (GMFMC et al. 2011).

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 rating is given if the management process is transparent and includes stakeholder input.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

The SEDAR assessment process includes participants from state and federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, management council members, and fishery industry representatives at all workshop activities. According to SEDAR (2013): “SEDAR emphasizes constituent and stakeholder participation in assessment development, transparency in the assessment process and a rigorous and independent 47

scientific review of completed stock assessments.”

Bycatch Strategy

Factor 3.2: Management of fishing impacts on bycatch species Region / Method All Kept Critical Strategy Research Advice Enforce United States Atlantic Yes Cast Net United States Atlantic Yes No Gillnet, Midwater United States Atlantic Yes No Moderately Moderately Moderately Highly Handline Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Atlantic Yes No Moderately Moderately Moderately Highly Troll/Pole Effective Effective Effective Effective United States Gulf of Mexico Yes No Gillnet, Midwater United States Gulf of Mexico Yes No Moderately Moderately Moderately Highly Handline Effective Effective Effective Effective

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.).

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Moderately Effective

The predominant bycatch species in Atlantic handline and troll/poll fisheries targeting Spanish and king mackerel include crevalle jack, spotted tunny, bluefish, and blue runner (pers. comm., S. Brown 2014). There is very little population information available for crevalle jack in the Western Atlantic. Crevalle jack has historically been managed by SAFMC as a component of the Snapper Grouper FMP, although this species was removed from the fishery management unit in 2011 because the Council concluded that this species was not in need of a federal conservation and management strategy (Wildlife and Fisheries 2011). Spotted tunny is managed by the SAFMC, although there are currently no management guidelines in place to protect or monitor the state of the stocks.

Atlantic blue runner is included in the Snapper Grouper FMP and is managed through an annual quota. In 2013, commercial fisheries exceed the ACL for blue runner by over 6%, or 11,231 lbs (NMFS 2012b). As of 2013, SAFMC proposed the removal for blue runner from the FMP management unit species (SAFMC 2013b) so that management of this species in federal waters can be transferred to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). The bulk of both commercial and recreational blue runner landings take place in state waters, and this species is most frequently caught in the Spanish mackerel fishery, rather than the Snapper Grouper fishery. Thus, many mackerel fishers were unable to legally sell incidentally captured blue runner due to insufficient permitting or gear limitations (FWC 2013). At present, there are no Florida state regulations for the commercial harvest of blue runner on which to base a broader federal management plan, although newly proposed rules would require commercial fishers (harvesting >100 fish per day) to obtain a Saltwater Products License to operate in federal waters. The Atlantic bluefish stocks range widely and are managed jointly by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council. The federal quota for bluefish in 2012 was 10,317,444 lbs, of which 42% was ultimately landed in that year (NOAA 2013c). Due to the lack of management of crevalle jack and spotted tunny, and uncertainty surrounding the proposed changes to blue runner stock management, the overall management strategy and implementation for the chief bycatch species in the Atlantic handline and troll/pole fisheries is rated as “moderately effective.”

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Moderately Effective

Red snapper is the primary species of concern discarded in the Gulf of Mexico handline fishery. The majority of red snapper catch in the Gulf of Mexico EEZ occurs with handlines or other small hook-and- line gear (NMFS 2013); the impacts of this fishery are potentially significant for red snapper stocks. Although alternative population models yield differing results (see (SEDAR 2014a)), red snapper stocks generally have improved somewhat in the western Gulf, while stocks continue to be depleted or may be declining in the eastern Gulf (SEDAR 2014a). Quotas for the commercial fishery have been in place since 1990 and have been met or exceeded in nearly every year since (Figure 14). Management of this fishery—specifically, the ability of the stock to withstand increased fishing pressure—has been the subject of much discussion and significant controversy (Cowan et al. 2010). There is a rebuilding plan in place with a projected end date of 2032, although it remains to be seen whether benchmark objectives set for these efforts are adequate to rebuild the stocks and whether future management actions are able to address the uncertainty in stock parameters.

Rationale: 49

Figure 14. Quota values (dashed line) and commercial landings (solid line), in millions of pounds, for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico (SEDAR 2013a).

Subfactor 3.2.2 – Scientific Research and Monitoring

Considerations: Is bycatch in the fishery recorded/documented and is there adequate 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.

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Moderately Effective

Each of the eight U.S. Fishery Management Councils has a separate Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), which acts to review the biological, social, and economic basis for council management plans. This committee makes recommendations for management actions in accordance with plan objectives and national fishery management guidelines. There is currently no observer program in place to monitor South Atlantic handline or toll/pole fisheries targeting species in the Coastal Pelagic FMP; however, as with all federal fisheries, commercial handline and troll/pole operators must comply with NMFS requests for logbook accounts of catch composition and effort. Additionally, landing weighout reports 50

collected from seafood dealers, biological samples, and onboard or dockside interviews are conducted by both state and federal agencies to ascertain catch data pertaining to landings with handline and troll/pole gear.

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Moderately Effective

Though the SEDAR process provides a framework for fishery data collection and assessment, there is currently no observer program in place to monitor Gulf of Mexico handline fisheries targeting species managed under the Coastal Pelagic FMP. As with all federal fisheries, commercial handline operators must comply with NMFS requests for logbook accounts of catch composition and effort. Additionally, landing weighout reports collected from seafood dealers, biological samples, and onboard or dockside interviews are conducted by both state and federal agencies to ascertain catch data pertaining to landings with handline gear. Due to the importance of handline gear in the overall Gulf of Mexico red snapper captures and the overfished condition of the stock, additional observer oversight is prudent. Research and monitoring effort is determined to be “moderately effective.”

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.

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Moderately Effective

There are no federal guidelines in place to monitor the catch of crevalle jack or spotted tunny (SAFMC 2013b) and commercial bluefish landings are generally well below quota values (NOAA 2013c). The Atlantic blue runner ACL was exceeded in 2012 (NOAA 2013b) and was decreased for the 2013 fishing year (SAFMC 2012). This lower ACL was also exceeded in 2013 (NOAA 2013b). SAFMC is currently proposing that blue runner be removed from the Snapper Grouper management unit and that management of these stocks be turned over to FWC. But FWC is proposing to remove all catch limits for commercially landed blue runner (FWC 2013). Due to these inconsistencies in management strategy, the adherence to scientific advice for the Atlantic handline and troll/pole fisheries is deemed “moderately effective.”

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Moderately Effective

Commercial fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico EEZ are assessed via SEDAR. The data collection phase of the SEDAR process includes: 1) characterizing, defining, and mapping stocks; 2) review and discussion of life- history information; 3) provide measures of population abundance, including fishery-dependent and - independent information; 4) assessing commercial and recreational catch data; 5) determine the most efficacious methods of assessing stock status and management benchmarks; and 6) make recommendations for future research directions. These data provide the underpinning for the stock assessment report. Additionally, the final report is subjected to review by three independent experts, who assess whether the management recommendations are appropriate to the available data and current stock parameters.

Each of the eight U.S. Fishery Management Councils also has a separate Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), which acts to review the biological, social, and economic basis for council management plans. This committee makes recommendations for management actions in accordance with plan objectives and national fishery management guidelines. The Gulf of Mexico handline fishery targeting king and Spanish mackerel incidentally captures gag grouper, greater amberjack, and red snapper, all of which are either in an overfished state and/or are currently experiencing overfishing. The majority of greater amberjack and red snapper catch in the Gulf of Mexico EEZ occurs with handlines or other small hook-and-line gear (NMFS 2013), whereas gag grouper is landed primarily with vertical line gear (FishWatch 2013). Thus, the impacts of this fishery are potentially significant for greater amberjack and red snapper stocks and less so for gag grouper. All three species have rebuilding plans in place with projected end dates of 2013 (greater amberjack), 2032 (red snapper), and 2015 (gag grouper) (GMFMC 2013a). In most cases, quota values for commercial fisheries are based on an assessment of both fishery-dependent and -independent sources, and SEDAR reviews take place at regular intervals to allow for adjustments of management guidelines. However, some concerns have been raised about the appropriateness of management of the Gulf red snapper stocks (Cowan et al. 2010); specifically, whether a more proactive and timely reduction of catch limits would have reduced the extent to which these stocks were overfished.

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 consistent enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.

United States Atlantic, Handline 52

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Highly Effective

See subfactor 3.1.5. in the Harvest Strategy section for detailed explanation.

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 Ecosystem Based Fishery Management score. The Criterion 2 rating is determined as follows:

• Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern • Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern • Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern Rating cannot be Critical for Criterion 4.

Criterion 4 Summary

Region / Method Gear Type and Mitigation of EBFM Overall Recomm. Substrate Gear Impacts United States Atlantic 5.00:None 0.00:Not 3.00:Moderate Green (3.873) Cast Net Applicable Concern United States Atlantic 5.00:None 0.00:Not 3.00:Moderate Green (3.873) Gillnet, Midwater Applicable Concern United States Atlantic 5.00:None 0.00:Not 3.00:Moderate Green (3.873) Handline Applicable Concern United States Atlantic 5.00:None 0.00:Not 3.00:Moderate Green (3.873) Troll/Pole Applicable Concern United States Gulf of Mexico 5.00:None 0.00:Not 3.00:Moderate Green (3.873) Gillnet, Midwater Applicable Concern United States Gulf of Mexico 5.00:None 0.00:Not 3.00:Moderate Green (3.873) Handline Applicable Concern

Justification of Ranking

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

Scoring Guidelines

• 5 (None)—Fishing gear does not contact the bottom • 4 (Very Low)—Vertical line gear 54

• 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 ( • 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.

United States Atlantic, Cast Net

None

Cast net gears do not contact the sea floor.

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

None

Runaround gillnets do not contact the sea floor.

United States Atlantic, Handline

None

Handline gears generally do not make prolonged contact with the sea floor. But in some areas, weighted handline gear targeting deep-water species (although not typically used in these fisheries) can negatively impact rocky bottom and reef habitats.

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

None

Trolling gears do not contact the sea floor. 55

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

None

Runaround gillnets do not contact the sea floor.

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

None

Factor 4.2 – Mitigation of Gear Impacts

Scoring Guidelines

• +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 are in place (e.g., vulnerable habitats protected but other habitats not protected); there are 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. United States Atlantic, Cast Net

Not Applicable

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

Not Applicable

United States Atlantic, Handline

Not Applicable

Damage to marine environments caused by handline gear is minimal. Accordingly, there are few areas closed to handline gears. In the U.S. South Atlantic region, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are closed to still fishing but handline gear targeting mackerel, mahi mahi, tuna, and billfish can be trolled within the MPAs (SAFMC 2014). Though most marine sanctuaries in the Gulf of Mexico are closed to all fishing activity, there are some protected areas that do allow conventional hook-and-line gears (e.g., Garden Flower Banks National Marine Sanctuary) or trolled lines targeting non-reef fish species (e.g., Madison- Swanson Reserve, Steamboat Lumps Reserve, May 1–Oct 31) (GMFMC 2013d).

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

Not Applicable

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

Not Applicable

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Not Applicable

Factor 4.3 – Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management

Scoring Guidelines

• 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 57

proportion of fishery area is protected with marine reserves, and 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. Measures are in place to minimize potentially negative ecological effect if hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs) are used. • 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. • 2 (High Concern)—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)—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. United States Atlantic, Cast Net

United States Atlantic, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Atlantic, Handline

United States Atlantic, Troll/Pole

United States Gulf of Mexico, Gillnet, Midwater

United States Gulf of Mexico, Handline

Moderate Concern

King and Spanish mackerel are mid-level predators. Though there are no implicit considerations made for ecosystem health in the FMP, neither of these species, nor any of the incidentally captured species assessed here, is considered to be of exceptional ecosystem importance. Handline, troll/poll, cast net, and runaround gillnet gears have negligible impact on the marine environment.

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 thank Tj Tate (National Aquarium, formerly with Gulf Wild) and three anonymous reviewers for graciously reviewing this report for scientific accuracy. 59

References Ahrabi-Nejad, S. 2015. NOVA Southeastern University and International Game Fish Association. Personal Communication.

ASMFC. 2010. Stock Assessement Report No. 10-02--Atlantic Menhaden Stock Assessment and Review Panel Reports. 325 pp.

Branstetter S. 1997. Bycatch and its Reduction in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Shrimp Fisheries. Final Report, NOAA Award NA57FF0285. Gulf and South Atlantic Fisheries Development Foundation, Inc., Tampa, FL, 33609.

Cowan J.H., Grimes C.B., Patterson III W.F., Walters C.J., Jones A.C., Lindberg W.J., Sheehy J., Pine III W.E., Powers J.E., Campbell M.D., Lindeman K.C., Diamond S.L., Hilborn R., Gibson H.T. and K.A. Rose. 2010. Red snapper management in the Gulf of Mexico: science- or faith-based. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries. 21: 187-204.

DeVries, D. A., and C. B. Grimes. 1997. Spatial and temporal variation in age and growth of king mackerel, Scomberomorus cavalla, 1977-1992. Fishery Bulletin 95:694-708.

DeVries, D. A., C. B. Grimes, and M. H. Prager. 2002. Using otolith shape analysis to distinguish eastern Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean stocks of king mackerel. Fisheries Research 57:51-62.

Fable, W.A., Jr., A.G. Johnson and L.E. Barger. 1987. Age and growth of Spanish mackerel Scomberomorus maculatus, from Florida and the Gulf of Mexico. Fishery Bulletin 85: 777-783.

FAO. 2011. FishStatJ. Release 1.0.1

Federal Register. 2014. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region; Framework Amendment 1. 50 CFR Part 622. 79 (224):69058-69060.

Federal Register. 2011. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region; Amendment 18. 50 CFR Part 622. 76 (260): 82058-82069.

Finucane, J.H. and L,.A. Collins. 1986. Reproduction of Spanish mackerel, Scomeromorus maculatus from the southeastern United States. Northeast Gulf Science 8: 97-106.

Finucane, J. H., L. A. Collins, H. A. Brusher, and C. H. Saloman. 1986. Reproductive biology of king mackerel, Scombermorus cavalla, from the southeastern United States. Fishery Bulletin 84:841-850.

FishWatch. 2013. Gag Grouper. Accessed: 7 June 2013.

Froese R., and D. Pauly (editors). 2011. Fishbase. http://www.fishbase.org 60

FWC. 2013. Blue Runner Draft Rule. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 10pp.

FWC. 2010. Crevalle jack, Caranx hippos (Linnaeus, 1766). Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. FWRI 104-107.

GMFCM. 2013c. Standing and Special Mackerel SSC Meeting Summary. GMFMC. 6pp.

GMFMC. 2013a. Basic Recreational Fishing Regulations. Accessed 5 June 2013.

GMFMC. 2013b. Commercial Quotas/Catch Allowances (all years). Updated July 17, 2013. Available at: http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/ifq/documents/pdfs/commercialquotascatchallowance table.pdf

GMFMC. 2013d. Commercial Fishing Regulations for Gulf of Mexico Federal Waters For Species Managed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 34pp.

GMFMC. 2012a. Commercial Fishing Regulations for Gulf of Mexico Federal WatersFor Species Managed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 11pp.

GMFMC. 2012b. Meeting notice: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management to Convene its Law Enforcement Advisory Panel. Accessed: May 17, 2013.

GMFMC. 2012c. Reef Fish Amendment 35 Greater Amberjack Rebuilding Plan. 16pp

GMFMC 2011b. Final regulatory amendment to set 2011-2015 total allowable catch and adjust bag limit for red grouper : including environmental assessment, regulatory impact review, and regulatory flexibility act analysis. Available at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sf/pdfs/2011_Final_Regulatory_Amendment_Red%20_Grouper.pdf

GMFMC. 2011a. Final Amendment 18 to the fishery management plan for the coastal migratory pelagic resources in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region. Including environmental assessment, regulatory impact review and regulatory flexibility act analysis. Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 373pp.

GMFMC. 2008. Final Reef Fish Amendment 30b: Gag – End Overfishing And Set Management Thresholds and Targets; Red Grouper – Set Optimum Yield Tac and Management Measures, Time/Area Closures; and Federal Regulatory Compliance. October 2008. Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 462 pp. Available at http://www.gulfcouncil.org/Beta/GMFMCWeb/downloads/Final%20Amendment%2030B%2010_10_08. pdf

GMFMC, SAFMC, MAFMC. 2004. Final Ammendment 15 to the Fishery Management Plan for Costal Migratory Pelagic Resources in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico including environmental assessment, regulator impact review and regulatory flexibility act analysis. 132pp. 61

GMFMC/SAFMC. 1983. Fishery Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement; Regulatory Impact Review; Final Regulations for the Coastal Migratory Pelagics (Mackerels). 311pp.

Godcharles, M.F. and M.D. Murphy. 1986. Species Profiles: Life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (South Florida) King mackerel and Spanish mackerel. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Reports. 82(11.58). U.S Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82-4. 18 pp.

ICCAT. 2013. 812 SMT--Small Tunas. Executive summary. International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. 15pp.

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

Lasso, J and L. Zapata, 1999. Fisheries and biology of Coryphaena hippurus (Pisces: Coryphaenidae) in the Pacific coast of Colombia and Panama. Marine Sciences 63:387-399.

Mathers A.N., Passerotti M.S., and J.K. Carlson. 2012. Catch and Bycatch in the U.S. Southeast Gillnet Fisheries, 2012. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFCS-648. 30pp.

Nance. 1998. Report to Congress: Southeastern United States Shrimp Trawl Bycatch Program. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Springs, MD. 69pp.

NEFSC. 2010. 49th Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop(49th SAW)Assessment Summary Report. 49pp.

Northeast Fisheries Science Center. 2005. 41st Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop: 41st SAW Assessment Report. Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document 05-14.

NMFS. 2013. Annual Commercial Landings by Gear Type. Accessed: April 11, 2013.

NMFS. 2012a. Reminder of Boundary Shifts and Commercial Quotas and Trip Limits for King Mackerel. Southeast Fishery Bulletin. FB12-018. March 22, 2012.

NMFS. 2012b. Status of US Fisheries. 8p.

NMFS. 2011. U.S. National Bycatch Report.W.A. Karp, L.L. Desfosse and S.G. Brooke (Eds.) U.S. Department of Commerce. NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFS-F/SPO-117E. 508 pp.

NMFS. 2009. Our living oceans. Report on the status of U.S. living marine resources, 6th edition. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-80, 369 p

NOAA. 2013a. Office of Law Enforcement 1st Quarter FY 2013 Report: South Atlantic and Caribbean. NOAA Fisheries Service. 28pp.

NOAA. 2013b. 2013 South Atlantic Commercial Landings. http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/acl_monitoring/commercial_sa/index.html 62

NOAA. 2013c. Weekly Quota Management Report. Atlantic Bluefish Coastwide Weekly Landings Report.

NOAA. 2012. Status of US Fisheries 2012. Accessed: 22 May 2013.

Passerotti M.S., J.K. Carlson, S.J.B Gulak. 2010. Catch and bycatch in the U.S. Southeast gillnet fisheries, 2009. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-600. 20pp.

A Report on the Discard Data from the Southeast Fisheries Science Center’s Coastal Fisheries Logbook Program. NMFS Technical Memorandum SFD-2004-03. 16pp.

Porter, R.D., Z. Jylkka, G. Swanson. Enforcement and compliance trends under IFQ management in the Gulf of Mexico commercial reef fish fishery. Marine Policy 38:45-53.

Powell, D. 1975. Age, growth and reproduction in Florida stocks of Spanish mackerel, Scomberomorous maculatus. Florida Marine Reseach Publications 5. Florida Department of Natural Resources. 21 pp.

Read AJ, Drinker P and S Northridge. 2006. Bycatch of marine mammals in U.S. and global fisheries. Conservation Biology 20:163–169.

SAFMC. 2014. Marine Protected Areas. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council.

SAFMC. 2013a. King Mackerel. http://www.safmc.net/FishIDandRegs/FishGallery/KingMackerel/tabid/297/Default.aspx

SAFMC. 2013b. SEDAR Stock Assessment Productivity and Long-term South Atlantic Assessment Planning. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. 9pp.

SAFMC. 2013c. Spanish Mackerel. http://safmc.net/FishIDandRegs/FishGallery/SpanishMackerel

SAFMC. 2012. Regulatory Amendment 13 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region. Revision of Acceptable Biological Catches, Annual Catch Limits (ACLs, including Sector ACLs), and Annual Catch Targets. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. 115pp.

Schmidt, D.J., M.R. Collins and D.M. Wyanski. 1993. Age, growth, maturity and spawning of Spanish mackerel, Scomberomorous maculatus (Mitchill), from the Atlantic Coast of the southeast United States. Fishery Bulletin 91: 526-533.

SEDAR. 2014a. SEDAR 33 Stock Assessment Report--Gulf of Mexico Greater Amberjack. SEDAR, North Charleston SC. 499 pp

SEDAR. 2014b. SEDAR 38 Stock Assessment Report--Gulf of Mexico King Mackerel. SEDAR, North Charleston, SC. 465pp.

SEDAR. 2014c. SEDAR 38 Stock Assessment Report--South Atlantic King Mackerel. SEDAR, North Charleston, SC. 502pp. 63

SEDAR. 2013b. SEDAR 28 – Gulf of Mexico Spanish Mackerel Stock Assessment Report. SEDAR, North Charleston SC. 712 pp.

SEDAR. 2012. SEDAR 28 – South Atlantic Spanish mackerel Stock Assessment Report. SEDAR, North Charleston SC. 438pp

SEDAR. 2011. SEDAR 9 Stock Assessment Update Report--Gulf of Mexico Greater Amberjack. 190pp.

SEDAR. 2009a. SEDAR 16 Stock assessment report: South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico King Mackerel. 21pp.

SEDAR. 2009b. Stock Assessment of Red Grouper in the Gulf of Mexico-SEDAR Update Assessment. 143pp.

SEDAR. 2008. SEDAR 17 Stock assessment report: South Atlantic Spanish mackerel. 95pp.

Smith-Vaniz, B. 2015. Research Associate at Florida Museum of Natural History and US Geological Survey (ret.). Personal Communication.

Steve C., Gearbart J., Borggaard D., Sabo L., and A.A. Hobn. Characterization of North Carolina commercial fisheries with occasional interactions with marine mammals. NOAA. Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-4S8.

Wildlife and Fisheries. 2013. The United States Federal Register--Title 50.

Wildlife and Fisheries. 2011. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Comprehensive Annual Catch Limit Amendment for the South Atlantic. Notice of availability; request for comment. 50 CFR Part 622. Federal Register 76(203):65153-65155. October 20, 2011.

Wood A. 2013. Bluefish 2012 Stock Assessment Update. US Dept Commer, Northeast Fishery Science Center Reference Document 13-07; 32pp.

Zollet E.A., A.J. Read. 2006. Depredation of catch by bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Florida king mackerel(Scomberomorus cavalla) troll ?shery. Fishery Bulletin 104:343-349.

Zollett EA. 2009. Bycatch of protected species and other species of concern in US east coast commercial fisheries. Endangered Species Research 9:49-59.