Atlantic Mackerel Scomber Scombrus

Seafood Watch Seafood Report

Atlantic Mackerel Scomber scombrus

Illustration © Scandinavian Fishing Yearbook

United States Mid-water trawl

March 17, 2011

Jennifer Dunn Consulting Researcher

Samantha Port-Minner Consulting Researcher

MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

About Seafood Watch® and the Seafood Reports

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.

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.

Seafood Watch® and Seafood Reports are made possible through a grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

2 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Executive Summary

Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) is a pelagic schooling species found along the east and west coasts of the North Atlantic. In the Northwest Atlantic, mackerel occur from North Carolina to Labrador, and in the Northeast Atlantic from Norway to Spain, including the Mediterranean and Black Seas. Atlantic mackerel is a very oily, dark fish that is usually served grilled or fried. Mackerel is also used as sushi (known as “saba”), but is more often consumed after being frozen because it spoils quickly on account of its high fat content.

Atlantic mackerel have a high intrinsic rate of increase, reach maturity quickly by year two or three (nearly 100% are mature at age four), have a high von Bertalanffy growth coefficient, and have high fecundity, making them inherently resilient to fishing pressure according to Seafood Watch®. Atlantic mackerel from North Carolina to Labrador, Canada are assessed as a single stock. The Transboundary Resource Assessment Committee status report published in 2010 stated that the stock status of the transboundary stock of Atlantic mackerel is unknown due to substantial uncertainties in the stock assessment results. Therefore, it is unknown whether the stock is overfished or if overfishing is occurring. This makes the Atlantic mackerel stock status a moderate conservation concern according to Seafood Watch®.

The primary gear type used in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery is the mid-water trawl, with paired and single mid-water trawls comprising the largest portion of landings after 2002. Observer coverage of the mackerel fleet is very low and bycatch data must be interpreted with caution. According to data from 2001–2006, the percent of bycatch relative to Atlantic mackerel landings is 2.5%. However, bycatch regularly includes species of special concern. For example, river herring, which include alewife (Alosa aestivalis) and blueback herring (Alosa pseudoharengus), are regularly taken as bycatch. Both species have been identified as species of special concern, and the bycatch estimates for these species in recent years have approached or exceeded total landings in the directed river herring fishery. Bycatch of marine mammals has previously been problematic in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery, but the estimated takes for the fishery are declining, and a research plan to further reduce serious injury and mortality among marine mammals in the US Atlantic trawl fishery is currently being developed. Overall, the nature of bycatch is a moderate conservation concern according to Seafood Watch®.

The US Atlantic mackerel fishery is of moderate spatial scale and occurs over moderately resilient habitat. Mid-water trawls are generally thought to cause minimal damage to the seafloor; however, recent reports have indicated that during mid-water herring trawls the footrope, the belly of the net, and/or the weights can occasionally come in contact with the seafloor. Because mackerel is an important forage fish in the Western Atlantic, large removals from the ecosystem have the potential to impact dependent species. These effects on the habitat and ecosystem are a moderate conservation concern according to Seafood Watch®.

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC) manages the Atlantic mackerel fishery in US waters. The MAFMC sets catch quotas each year and the current stock assessment is complete and robust. Stock assessments, however, have been completed rather infrequently: the most recent assessments were conducted in 2000 and 2005. Fishery-dependent and independent data are collected. The MAFMC currently does not have a bycatch management

3 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

plan in place, but the MAMFC is developing a research plan to reduce marine mammal bycatch. There are no general gear restrictions; however, the FMP has placed restrictions on bottom trawling in a couple of essential habitat areas. Management has not exceeded catch quotas and has effectively recovered the stock from its previously overfished condition. Overall, management is considered highly effective in this fishery according to Seafood Watch®.

Seafood Watch® deems the US Atlantic Mackerel fishery to be a Good Alternative due to the moderate status of the stock, bycatch, and habitat impacts, combined with high inherent resilience to fishing and highly effective management.

Table of Sustainability Ranks

Conservation Concern Sustainability Criteria Low Moderate High Critical Inherent Vulnerability √ Status of Stocks √ Nature of Bycatch √ Habitat & Ecosystem Effects √ Management Effectiveness √

About the Overall Seafood Recommendation: • A seafood product is ranked Best Choice if three or more criteria are of Low Conservation Concern (green) and the remaining criteria are not of High or Critical Conservation Concern. • A seafood product is ranked Good Alternative if the five criteria “average” to yellow (Moderate Conservation Concern) OR if the “Status of Stocks” and “Management Effectiveness” criteria are both of Moderate Conservation Concern. • A seafood product is ranked Avoid if two or more criteria are of High Conservation Concern (red) OR if one or more criteria are of Critical Conservation Concern (black) in the table above.

Overall Seafood Recommendation:

Best Choice Good Alternative Avoid

4 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Introduction

Atlantic mackerel, Scomber scombrus, are found along the coasts of the North Atlantic Ocean. In the northwest Atlantic, the species is most abundant from North Carolina (US) to Labrador and from Norway to Spain, including Ireland, the United Kingdom (UK), and the western Mediterranean Sea (Collette & Nauen 1983).

Mackerel available in the US market are primarily landed domestically; imports represented 13% of all mackerel in the market in 2006 (Figure 1a) (NMFS 2008a; NMFS 2008b). A small number of US states use the Atlantic mackerel fishery, including New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, Massachusetts, and a handful of others (Figure 1b). Atlantic mackerel is the most common mackerel species landed in US waters, composing 82% of total domestic catch (Figure 2) (NMFS 2008a). It is not possible to compare US landings of Atlantic mackerel to foreign imports because the NMFS Foreign Trade database does not differentiate mackerel imports by species. A number of European mackerel fisheries have recently been certified as sustainable to the standard of the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC; see www.msc.org), a development that may affect the composition of Atlantic mackerel in the US market.

Landings of mackerel in the US have been relatively low and variable over the last 15 years (Figure 3), surpassing 56,000 metric tons (mt) in 2006 (NMFS 2008a) then falling to 25,530 mt and 16,176 mt in 2007 and 2008, respectively. This volume is relatively low compared to the recently estimated BMSY of 644,000 mt (NEFSC 2006), although current reference points are highly uncertain. While Atlantic mackerel catches have been low in recent years, in the 1960s and 1970s, foreign fleets dominated the Atlantic mackerel fishery, with annual catches upwards of 400,000 mt (Figure 4) (DFO 2008). Foreign fleets were eliminated from the US Atlantic mackerel market in the early 1990s, thereby allowing only the US and Canada to take part in this fishery since 1992. In 2007, approximately 58% of the Atlantic mackerel landed domestically were caught with single mid-water trawls, 32% were caught with paired mid-water trawls, and 8% were caught with bottom otter trawls (MAFMC 2009).

5 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Norway Canada 1% 1% China Thailand 1% 2% Chile 3% Other 3%

United States 89%

Figure 1a. US landings compared to imports of all mackerel species, 2006 (Data from NMFS 2008a; NMFS 2008b).

Massachussets Other (Connecticut, North 3% Carolina, Maine, New New York Hampshire) 5% 1%

New Jersey Rhode Island 51% 40%

Figure 1b. US landings of Atlantic mackerel by state, 2006 (Data from NMFS 2008a).

6 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

King and Jack Cero 2% Spanish 3% 4%

Chub 9%

Atlantic 82%

Figure 2. Species composition of US landings of mackerel, 2006 (NMFS 2008a).

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000 Annual Landings (Metric Tons) Annual Landings

10,000

0 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year

Figure 3. US landings of Atlantic mackerel from 1980–2008 (Data from NMFS 2008a).

7 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

500000 Foreign

450000 United States

400000 Canada

350000

300000

250000

LANDINGS (t) LANDINGS 200000

150000

100000

50000

0 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 YEAR

Figure 4. Annual landings of Atlantic mackerel in the northwest Atlantic, 1960–2007 (Figure from DFO 2008).

Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendation: This analysis encompasses Atlantic mackerel caught in the US in the North Atlantic Ocean with mid-water trawls, as only a small percentage (~8%) of US Atlantic mackerel are caught with bottom trawls (MAFMC 2009).

Analysis of Seafood Watch® Sustainability Criteria for Wild-caught Species

Criterion 1: Inherent Vulnerability to Fishing Pressure

Guiding Principle: Sustainable wild-caught species have a low vulnerability to fishing pressure, and hence a low probability of being overfished, because of their inherent life history characteristics.

Atlantic mackerel have a wide range, being found in the coastal regions of the North Atlantic Ocean basin as well as in the Mediterranean and Black Seas. They reach maturity quickly at two or three years of age and have a maximum reported age of 17 years. Atlantic mackerel’s intrinsic rate of increase is uncertain, but they have a high von Bertalanffy growth coefficient (0.23–0.27) (Fishbase 2009). Fecundity is also high at 200,000 eggs per season (Fishbase 2009). Atlantic mackerel are a schooling species, which can increase their susceptibility to fishing. They are found primarily in open sea pelagic habitats, but the eggs, larvae and juveniles also use bay and estuarine habitats (Studholme et al. 1999). Estuarine habitats in the northwest Atlantic have been altered by human activities, including degradation through pollution and coastal

8 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011 development (Vickery et al. 2009). Overall, Atlantic mackerel have a low inherent vulnerability to fishing pressure according to Seafood Watch®.

Table 1. Life history characteristics for Atlantic mackerel.

Atlantic Mackerel Factors Evaluated SFW Conservation Concern Life History Characteristics Intrinsic rate of increase (‘r’) UNKNOWN Age at 1st maturity 2–3 years LOW (< 5 years) von Bertalanffy growth coefficient (‘k’) 0.23–0.27 LOW (> 0.16) Maximum age 17 years MODERATE (11–30 years) Fecundity High: 200,000 LOW (> 100 inds./years) Species range Broad LOW Special behaviors or requirements Schooling MODERATE (1–2 behaviors) Quality of habitat Habitat is moderately altered MODERATE

Evaluation Guidelines

1) Primary Factors a) If ‘r’ is known, use it as the basis for the rank of the Primary Factors. b) If ‘r’ is unknown, then the rank from the remaining Primary Factors (in order of importance, as listed) is the basis for the rank.

2) Secondary Factors a) If a majority (2 out of 3) of the Secondary Factors rank as Red, reclassify the species into the next lower rank (i.e. Green becomes Yellow, Yellow becomes Red). No other combination of Secondary Factors can modify the rank from the Primary Factors. b) No combination of primary and secondary factors can result in a Critical Conservation Concern for this criterion.

Conservation Concern: Inherent Vulnerability

¾ Low (Inherently Resilient)

Criterion 2: Status of Wild Stocks

Guiding Principle: Sustainable wild-caught species have stock structure and abundance sufficient to maintain or enhance long-term fishery productivity.

The most recent analytical assessment for US Atlantic mackerel was conducted by the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) in 2005 and published in 2006. However, because the Atlantic mackerel stock is a transboundary stock, the Transboundary Resource Assessment Committee (TRAC) conducted the first joint US/Canadian stock report in 2010. Due to substantial uncertainties in the stock assessment results, the TRAC “agreed that short-term projections and characterization of stock status relative to estimated reference points would not be an appropriate basis for management advice at this time” (TRAC 2010). The TRAC considers

9 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

the status of Atlantic mackerel in the northwest to be unknown (TRAC 2010). Similarly, because the TRAC does not consider the reference points estimated for the Atlantic mackerel fishery to be valid, B/BMSY and F/FMSY are unknown; whether the stock is overfished or if overfishing is occurring are also unknown. Because of the inability to assess the status of the stock relative to reference points, uncertainty in the stock status is high.

Trends in population abundance are also unknown. According to the 2005 stock assessment, total biomass and spawning stock biomass have exhibited increasing trends over the last 42 years (Figures 5 and 6a), while fishing mortality has remained stable at a relatively low level since the 1980s (Figure 7a). However, the TRAC assessment, using a Virtual Population Analysis (VPA) model found starkly different trends, with sharp declines in spawning stock biomass (Figure 6b) and increases in fishing mortality (Figure 7b) in recent years. Until these discrepancies and uncertainties in the model can be resolved, trends are considered unknown. The current age, size, and sex distributions of the stock relative to natural conditions are unknown (NEFSC 2006). Because the results of the most recent (2005) full stock assessment are disputed by the TRAC assessment findings and most factors are therefore unknown, stock uncertainty is considered high.

In the last several years, the US has continuously landed much less Atlantic mackerel than allowed by the quotas. However, in a 2008 Report to Congress based on 2004 data, NMFS reported that the US Atlantic mackerel fishery was one of the 20 most severe cases of excess capacity (capacity in excess of actual harvests), with 12–38% excess capacity (low and high excess capacity estimates)(NMFS 2008c). This excess capacity in the fleet (relative to landings) and low landings (relative to the quota) have raised concerns that the resource has shifted away from US waters. Canadian landings have increased steadily from approximately 13,000 mt in 2000, reaching 50,578 mt in 2007 (MAFMC 2008b). As a pre-emptive measure to decrease the “likelihood of a race to fish in the future, along with all the socioeconomic and conservations problems that accompany racing to fish,” the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC) is seeking to limit access to the Atlantic mackerel fishery in Amendment 11 to the fishery management plan (MAFMC 2009). Additionally, they have left open the option to move to a Limited Access Privilege Program (LAPP; i.e., catch shares), to further reduce the impetus towards a race to fish. There has recently been a lack of older fish in the NEFSC spring survey as well as in commercial catches from the US and Canada, but it remains unknown whether the cause is fishing pressure or whether older fish are capable of avoiding the trawls (TRAC 2010).

The US Atlantic mackerel stock is considered a moderate conservation concern according to Seafood Watch® because most factors are unknown.

10 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report Marrch 17, 2011

Figure 5. Total biomass for Atlantic mackerel from 1962–2004 (Figure modified from NEFSC 2006).

11 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report Marrch 17, 2011

Figure 6. Spawning stock biomass for Atlantic mackerel from 1962–2004 a. Spawning stock biomass trends according to the 2005 stock assessments (Figure modified from NEFSC 2006). b. Spawning stock biomass trends according to the TRAC assessment (Figure from TRAC 2010).

12 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report Marrch 17, 2011

Atlantic Mackerel Fishing Mortality a.

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

Fishing Mortality (F) Mortality Fishing 0.1

0 5 8 7 0 3 6 2 5 4 6 6 71 8 8 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 998 0 1962 1 1 1 1974 197 1 1 198 1989 1 1 1 2001 2 Year

Figure 7. Fishing mortality for Atlantic mackerel during 1962–20004. a. Fishing mmortality rate trends according to the 2005 stock assessment (Figure modified from Overholtz 2006).. b. Fishing mortality rate trends according to the TRAC assessment (Figure from TRAC 2010).

13 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Table 2. Stock status of Atlantic mackerel.

Atlantic Mackerel Factors Evaluated SFW Conservation Concern Stock Status Characteristics Management classification status Unknown MODERATE Current population abundance relative to BMSY Unknown MODERATE Occurrence of overfishing Unknown MODERATE Overall degree of uncertainty in stock status High HIGH Long and short-term trends in population Unknown MODERATE abundance Current age, size or sex distribution of the stock Unknown MODERATE relative to natural condition

Evaluation Guidelines

A “Moderate” Stock: 1) Has a biomass at 50-100% of BMSY AND overfishing is not occurring 2) Is recovering from overfishing AND short-term trend in abundance is up AND overfishing is not occurring 3) Has an Unknown status because the majority of primary factors are unknown.

Conservation Concern: Status of Stocks

¾ Moderate

Criterion 3: Nature and Extent of Bycatch

Guiding Principle: A sustainable wild-caught species is captured using techniques that minimize the catch of unwanted and/or unmarketable species.

In 2007, approximately 58% of the Atlantic mackerel landed domestically were caught with single mid-water trawls, 32% were caught with paired mid-water trawls, and 8% were caught with bottom otter trawls (MAFMC 2009). This represents a drastic shift from the 1996–2000 catch methods, which were dominated by bottom otter trawls at approximately 87% of domestic Atlantic mackerel landings (MAFMC 2008a). While no complete bycatch reports are available for the Atlantic mackerel fishery, limited bycatch data are available from the NMFS observer database.

From 1983–1991, observer coverage was high in the Atlantic mackerel fishery due to the large number of foreign vessels in the fishery. From 1987–1991, there was 100% observer coverage on the foreign vessels. Unfortunately, when foreign fishing operations for mackerel ended in 1991, observer coverage in the fishery dropped substantially to less than 1% in some years (NEFSC 2003). As a result of this very low observer coverage, caution should be used when extrapolating the limited available bycatch data to the entire directed Atlantic mackerel fishery. From 1997–2000, when the fishery was dominated by bottom otter trawling, there were ten observed trips that showed a percent bycatch relative to landings rate of 6% (Table 3) (MAFMC 2008a). From 2001–2006, with the shift to predominately mid-water trawling, there were 33

14 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011 observed trips, showing a decline in the bycatch rate to approximately 2.5% (Table 4) (MAFMC 2008a). Overall, the quantity of non-landed bycatch in the Atlantic mackerel fishery appears to be low, but because of poor observer coverage and the high volume nature of the fishery, bycatch estimates and inferences regarding trends in bycatch rates should be viewed with caution.

While the percentage of discards compared to total landings is low, some of the species that are incidentally caught and discarded in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery are of conservation concern, and bycatch may be a substantial source of mortality for these populations. These species include river herring and spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) (Table 4) (MAFMC 2008a). Due to temporal and spatial overlap between the Atlantic mackerel and herring fisheries, herring make up a large portion of trawls directed at Atlantic mackerel (46%) (Harrington et al. 2005). River herring, which include blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) and alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), have been declared Species of Special Concern because of drastic declines in stocks (Haas-Castro 2006). The reasons for this decline are not fully understood. NMFS states that a lack of understanding of bycatch of river herring in ocean fisheries, among other factors, is inhibiting clear understanding of the reasons for this species’ decline (NMFS 2007a). However, herring is landed, weighed, and counted against the herring quota (Harrington et al. 2005). The MAFMC is now addressing the issue of river herring bycatch in the mackerel and Loligo squid fisheries through Amendment 14 of the FMP, which seeks to evaluate the impact of river herring bycatch in the mackerel and Loligo fisheries and develop strategies to reduce river herring bycatch (MAFMC 2010). Spiny dogfish are inherently vulnerable to overfishing due to their late age of maturity, long gestation period, and low fecundity (Roberts 2007). Overfishing of dogfish is not currently occurring and the stock is now considered rebuilt (NMFS 2010).

15 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report Marrch 17, 2011

Table 3. Discards in the directed Atlantic mackerel fishery, 1997––2000 from unpublished NMFS observer data. Note: managed resources appear in gray shading (Figure from MAFMC 2008a).

Notes: *Discarded = Observed pounds caught and discarded on observed directed Atlantic mackerel trips *Kept = Observed pounds caught and kept on observed directed Atlantic mackerel trips *Total Catch = Total observed pounds caught onn observed directed Atlantic mackerel trips *Percent of Mackerel Discards = The species inn the row (left-right) accounted for X% of observed directed Atlantic mackerel trips' overall discards. *Percent of Species Discarded = How much of thhe species in the row was discarded = (Discarded) divided by (Total Catch). *D:K Ratio = (Discarded) divided by (Kept)

16 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report Marrch 17, 2011

Table 4. Discards in the directed Atlantic mackerel fishery, 2001––2006 from unpublished NMFS observer data. Note: managed resources are included and appear in gray shading (Figure from MAFMC 2008a); Correction: Total Discarded = 198,341.

Marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The US Atlantic mackerel fishery has a history of marine mammmal mortalities; 110 common dolphins (Delphinus delphis (short-beaked) and Delphinus capensis (long-beaked)), 44 Atlantic white- sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus acutus) and 391 pilot whales (Globicephala melaena (long- finned) and Globicephala macrorhynchus (short-finned)) were killed from 1977 to 1991 as a result of mackerel fishing operations. Most of the mortaalities during this time period, however, can be attributed to foreign mackerel fleets (NMFS 2007b). Atlantic mackerel is now part of the Northeast Mid-water Trawl Fishery (Including Pair Trawl) and Mid-Atlantic Mid-water Trawl Fishery (Including Pair Trawl) groups used in the marine mammal assessment. Fishing mortality is estimated based on observed takes by gear type, not the specific species targeted. For the Atlantic white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus), the average annual estimated fishery- related mortality from 2001 to 2005 was 19 dolphins in the Northeast Mid-water Trawl Fishery and 84 dolphins in the Mid-Atlantic Mid-water Trawl Fisshery. There was one observed take of a pilot whale in the Northeast Mid-water Trawl Fishery leading to an estimated average fishery mortality of one for 2001–2005. No pilot whale takes were observed in the Mid-Atlantic Miid- water Trawl Fishery (MAFMC 2008b).

Currently, the US Atlantic mackerel fishery is considered a Category II fishery by the MMPA (MAFMC 2008a, 72 FR 227). A Category II fishery is “one that, collectively with other fisheries, is responsible for the annual removal of more than 10 percent of any marine mammal stock’s potential biological removal (PBR) level and that is by itself responsible for the annual removal of between 1 and 50 percent, exclusive, of any stock’s potential biological removal level” (72 FR 227). The MMPA defines PBR as the maximum number of animals that can be removed from that particular marine mammal stock that will still allow it to maintain or reach its optimum sustainable population. This is an improvement from the fifishery’s previous status in 1997 as a Category I fishery (a fishery that by itself is ressponsible for the annual removal of 50

17 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

percent or more of any stock’s PBR) and shows an estimated reduction in documented interactions with marine mammals (72 FR 227). However, this trend may not be accounting for changes in fishing effort, gear usage, and observer coverage. A research plan is under development to further reduce serious injury and mortality of marine mammals in the Atlantic trawl fishery (MAFMC 2008b).

River herring populations have been declining; however, herring are landed, weighed, and counted against the herring quota (Harrington et al. 2005). The contribution of the mackerel fishery to river herring declines is unknown but is currently under evaluation through Amendment 14 to the mackerel FMP. Spiny dogfish are not overfished or undergoing overfishing. In addition, common dolphins and pilot whales are “non-depleted/non-candidate cetaceans” under the MMPA, while Atlantic white-sided dolphins are classified as “Low Risk- Least Concern” under the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List (IUCN 2009). Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the bycatch of these species in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery is not driving them towards extinction or impeding their recovery.

There are no studies on the ecosystem impacts of bycatch in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery, and as such, this factor is unknown.

Bycatch regularly includes species of concern, but bycatch has been decreasing and is not a contributing factor in driving any of the species towards extinction. As such, bycatch in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery is a moderate conservation concern according to Seafood Watch®.

Table 5. Bycatch characteristics of the Atlantic mackerel fishery.

Factors Evaluated Atlantic Mackerel SFW Conservation Concern Bycatch Characteristics Quantity of bycatch is low (< 10% of Quantity of bycatch, including any targeted landings on a per number basis) species of “special concern” (i.e., but regularly includes threatened, those identified as “endangered”, SEVERE endangered or protected species (river “threatened” or “protected” under herring). Occasional bycatch of protected state, federal or international law). mammals. Not a contributing factor in driving one or more bycatch species towards extinction or Population consequences of bycatch LOW limiting the recovery of a species of concern Trend in bycatch interaction rates (adjusting for changes in abundance of bycatch species) as a result of Trend is down LOW management measures (including fishing seasons, protected areas and gear innovations). Evidence that the ecosystem has been or likely will be substantially altered (relative to natural variability) Ecosystem impacts from bycatch unknown MODERATE in response to the continued discard of the bycatch species

18 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Evaluation Guidelines

Bycatch is “Moderate” if:

1) Quantity of bycatch is 10 - 100% of targeted landings 2) Bycatch regularly includes species of “special concern” AND bycatch has little or no impact on the bycatch population levels AND the trend in bycatch interaction rates is not up. 3) Bycatch is unknown.

Conservation Concern: Nature and Extent of Discarded Bycatch

¾ Moderate (Bycatch Moderate)

Criterion 4: Effect of Fishing Practices on Habitats and Ecosystems

Guiding Principle: Capture of a sustainable wild-caught species maintains natural functional relationships among species in the ecosystem, conserves the diversity and productivity of the surrounding ecosystem, and does not result in irreversible ecosystem state changes.

Most Atlantic mackerel in US waters is currently landed by mid-water trawls (92%; MAFMC 2008a). This gear is not expected to adversely impact essential fish habitat since it is not in contact with the seabed (Chuenpagdee et al. 2003). However, recent reports have indicated that in mid-water herring trawls the footrope, the belly of the net, and/or the weights can occasionally come in contact with the seafloor (NMFS 2005 in NEFMC 2006c). There is substantial overlap between the mid-water trawl fleet for mackerel and herring to the extent that the permitting process for the Atlantic mackerel fishery has been altered to address the large amount of herring bycatch. When mid-water trawls contact the bottom, effects on the benthic habitat are much more severe than when they are truly mid-water (Chuenpagdee et al. 2003). It is unknown how frequently mid-water trawls in the mackerel fishery contact the seafloor, but it is likely that bottom contact occurs based on the fishery’s similarity to the herring fishery, which is a mid- water trawl fishery that is known to contact the bottom. The habitat impacts of the mid-water trawls used in the mackerel fishery are considered moderate.

The US Atlantic mackerel commercial fisheries take place primarily between January and May in southern New England and Mid-Atlantic coastal waters, and between May and December in the Gulf of Maine (NEFSC 2007). Atlantic mackerel are abundant in cold and temperate shelf areas and school near the surface. They overwinter in deeper waters but move to shallow inshore areas in spring (Fishbase 2009). The Atlantic mackerel fishery occurs in open water over sandy and muddy bottoms, substrates that are highly to moderately resilient to fishing impacts. The fishery occurs over a moderate spatial scale along the eastern seaboard.

19 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Since Atlantic mackerel is a forage species, it is important to consider its predators when evaluating ecological impacts of the fishery. Atlantic mackerel is consumed by many species including protected sharks, rays, mammals, seabirds and commercially and recreationally important fish species such as tuna, billfish and striped bass. Their major predators are spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias), Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus), swordfish (Xiphias gladius), silver hake (Merluccius bilinearis), harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) (Collette and Nauen 1983; Fogarty and Murawski 1998). In addition to being important prey, Atlantic mackerel are important predators of post- larval and juvenile fish including sand lance (Ammodytes dubius) and other zooplankton (Fogarty and Murawski 1998). However, studies also show that when Atlantic mackerel populations are low, their predators’ diets shift towards Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) and/or sand lance (Ammodytes spp.) as long as these alternative species are abundant (Overholtz et al. 2000).

While Atlantic mackerel is preferred over Atlantic herring by pilot whales (Globicephala sp.) (Overholtz and Link 2007), previous diet studies have shown that Atlantic mackerel is not preferred by some predators when Atlantic herring abundance is high. Overholtz et al. (2000) assessed the consumption patterns of twelve piscivorous fish on multiple prey species including Atlantic mackerel. They found that predators fed interchangeably on Atlantic mackerel, sand lance, and Atlantic herring, depending on the species’ relative abundances. After the Atlantic mackerel and herring stocks collapsed in the mid-1970s, sand lance abundance increased and became a larger portion of the studied predators’ diets.

When the mackerel and herring stocks rebounded in the late 1990s, mackerel seemed to be a less important component of some picivorous fish diets than herring. Overholtz et al. (2000) found that consumption of mackerel by the twelve species declined in conjunction with major increases in herring biomass. They hypothesized that this preference might be attributed to the mackerel’s high growth rate, shifting them out of preferred predator-prey size ratios after the first few years of their lives (Overholtz et al. 2000). Size composition is known to be an important factor with piscivores, as they generally consume smaller individuals (ICES 1993 cited in Overholtz et al. 2000).

Overholtz (2000) also determined that there is not a great deal of overlap in the size of Atlantic mackerel targeted by spiny dogfish, Atlantic cod, silver hake, and the fishery. These three predators tend to focus on smaller sizes of Atlantic mackerel (between 130 and 310 mm) where the fishery tends to focus on larger size classes (between 210 and 430 mm). There is less than a 20% overlap between the sizes targeted by these predators and the fishery (Figure 6) (Overholtz et al. 2000). However, the study was not a comprehensive study of all major mackerel predators and excluded pelagic sharks, billfish and tuna as well as marine mammals and seabirds.

20 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report Marrch 17, 2011

Figure 6. Size compositions of Atlantic mackerel in the stomachs of spiny dogfish, Atlantic cod, and silver hake (light bars) during 1992–1997 and in the commercial fishery (dark bars) off the northeastern US during 1994–1997 (Figure from Overholtz et al. 2000).

Because they are so critical to the marine ecosystem, removing forage species can impact marine mammals and seabirds (Baraff & Loughlin 2000, Tasker et al. 2000, Furness 2003, Becker & Beissinger 2006). Kaschner and colleagues (2006) spatiaally modeled interactions between forage fisheries and marine mammal and seabird predators with data from the 1990s (Kaschner et al. 2006). The modeling showed a much higher consumption of forage species by fisheries than by marine mammals (Figure 7), and that these fisheries concentrated their catch and effort in small areas with fishing rates occasionally higher than 1,000 tons per square kilometer (t·km2/year, Figure 8) (Kaschner et al. 2006). Due to the intensive pressure they place on forrage species, fisheries targeting forage species may threaten populations of seabirds, marine mammals, and other predators by reducing their availablle prey. Scientists suggest that increased pressure on forage species results in depletion of the base of the marine foodweb, resulting in declines in seabird and marine mammal populations (Alder & Pauly 2006, Watson et al. 2006).

Figure 7. Mean estimated annual consumption of small pelagics by marine mammals in commpparison to fishery catches in the 1990s (Figure from Kaschner et al. 2006).

21 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Figure 8. Distribution of fishery catches of small pelagics for an average year in the 1990s. Note open-ended scale of legend, which indicates that fisheries catch rates can reach up to 150,000 t·km2/year in some areas (Figure from Kaschner et al. 2006).

Fisheries targeting forage species can also reduce the productivity of other commercial and recreational fish that consume those species as prey (Walters et al. 2005, Alder et al. 2008). Harvesting large amounts of small pelagic species is likely to lead to increases in competitor populations and declines in predator populations (Dayton et al. 2002). For example, Uphoff (2003) found that declines in the body condition of predatory striped bass (Morone saxatilis) were correlated with declines in heavily exploited stocks of menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) in Chesapeake Bay (Uphoff 2003). Fishermen in that area are concerned that the declines in menhaden caused by industrial fishing will affect stocks of striped bass and other predators (Pauly 2007, Alder et al. 2008).

Given forage species’ importance as prey, oceanographic impacts on their populations substantially impact marine mammal and seabird populations. For example, in South America’s El Niño years, substantial seabird and marine mammal mortalities have been observed (Hays 1986, Alder et al. 2008). On the Pacific coast of the United States, high mortality of seabirds was observed during the El Niño years of 1997/1998 and 2005 (MBNMS 2006). Worldwide human consumption patterns of forage species were also impacted by El Niño events in 1972/1973, 1983, and in the 1990s (Alder & Pauly 2006).

The Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan does not recognize or protect the ecological role of mackerel as a forage species, nor are catch levels determined to protect this ecological role. The absence of these protections in the management plan, the lack of information on the dietary preferences of major herring predators groups, and the evidence that at least some predators shift their diets to other prey when mackerel are not available, leads to the conclusion that the ecosystem effects of removal of this species are of moderate conservation concern according to Seafood Watch®. It is unknown whether this fishery or its fishing methods lead to ecosystem state changes, which is therefore also a moderate conservation concern.

22 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Overall, the Atlantic mackerel fishery’s impact on the habitat and ecosystem is considered moderate due to the gear’s limited impact on the resilient to moderately resilient soft-bottom habitats and the unknown food web and ecosystem impacts.

Table 6. Habitat and ecosystem effects of the Atlantic mackerel fishery.

Factors Evaluated Atlantic Mackerel SFW Conservation Concern Fishing Practices Characteristics Known (or inferred from other Moderate damage (mid-water trawls with studies) effect of fishing gear on MODERATE some bottom contact) physical and biogenic habitats For specific fishery being evaluated, resilience of physical and biogenic Open water, shallow to deep sandy and MODERATE habitats to disturbance by fishing muddy bottoms method If gear impacts are moderate or Modern fishery but of limited geographic MODERATE great, spatial scale of the impact scope Evidence that the removal of the targeted species or the removal/deployment of baitfish has Unknown MODERATE or will likely substantially disrupt the food web Evidence that the fishing method has caused or is likely to cause substantial ecosystem state Unknown MODERATE changes, including alternate stable states

Evaluation Guidelines

The effect of fishing practices is “Moderate” if: 1) Gear effects are moderate AND resilience to disturbance is moderate or high AND neither Ecosystem Factor is red.

Conservation Concern: Effect of Fishing Practices on Habitats and Ecosystems

¾ Moderate (Fishing Effects Moderate)

Criterion 5: Effectiveness of the Management Regime

Guiding Principle: The management regime of a sustainable wild-caught species implements and enforces all local, national and international laws and utilizes a precautionary approach to ensure the long-term productivity of the resource and integrity of the ecosystem.

The 1996 Magnuson-Stevens Act governs the management of American fisheries within the 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (Magnuson-Stevens Act 1996). The management of the Atlantic mackerel fishery is covered under this act. The most important sections of the act are sections 301, 302, 304, and 311. Section 301 states that national standards for fisheries

23 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

conservation and management shall be set by regional management councils. Section 302 establishes these councils; the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC) manages the Atlantic mackerel fishery. Section 304 requires the councils to create management plans complete with annual reports on the status of their governed fisheries, and official determinations of stock status based on scientific evidence. Finally, Section 311 gives officials the authority to enforce the act upon those in violation (Magnuson-Stevens Act 1996).

The Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan was amended in 2010 (Amendments 11, Mackerel Limited Access, and Amendment 12, Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology). Amendment 13 (to specify mechanisms for setting annual acceptable biological catch limits and accountability measures) and Amendment 14 (to evaluate and reduce river herring bycatch) are currently in development. For 2008, the Atlantic mackerel acceptable biological catch (ABC) was set at 156,000 mt. In addition to these amendments, the MAFMC sets commercial and recreational (chartered boats) catch quotas. The 2008 quota is 115,000 mt, which includes a 15,000 mt recreational fishery quota (NMFS 2008d). Additionally, when 90% of the domestic annual harvest (DAH) is reached, the directed mackerel fishery may be closed. Since Atlantic mackerel is often incidentally caught in the other local fisheries, this incidental catch is allowed until that year’s DAH is reached, as long as less than 20,000 pounds are landed per trip, and mackerel can only be landed once per calendar day (73 FR 127). Management of the Atlantic mackerel fishery complies with scientific recommendations when setting the ABC and catch quotas.

Further, in Amendment 11 of the FMP, the MAFMC seeks to limit access to the Atlantic mackerel fishery. In spite of the mackerel fishery not catching its quota, the Council attempts to head off further overcapitalization and perverse incentives to race to fish. Additionally, they have left open the option to move to a Limited Access Privilege Program (LAPP; i.e., catch shares) to further reduce the impetus toward a race to fish. It remains unclear why the Atlantic mackerel fleet has not met the harvest quota. Due to the dynamic nature of the fishery, its limited availability during recent seasons, and the desire to maintain the fleets’ ability to harvest optimum yield, the MAFMC has no plans to reduce the current capacity of the fishery, but rather intends to cap capacity at current levels (MAFMC 2009).

The MAFMC completed an environmental assessment in 2008 as part of Amendment 10 to the Fishery Management Plan. The most recent stock assessment for the US fishery was completed by the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) in 2005 and published in 2006 using fishery- dependent and independent data (NEFSC 2006). The previous assessment was completed in 2000. In 2010, the first transboundary US/Canadian assessment was published by the Transboundary Resources Assessment Committee (TRAC), which supports management activities for shared resources across the United States/Canada boundary in the Gulf of Maine- Georges Bank region. The substantial increase in Canadian mackerel landings over the last decade underscores the importance of this collaborative effort, and the findings of the TRAC highlight the current uncertainty in the status of the transboundary Atlantic mackerel stock.

Yearly bottom-trawl surveys have been conducted by NOAA Fisheries in the Gulf of Maine and surrounding waters since the 1960s, resulting in one of the “best marine biodiversity database[s] available anywhere” (NOAA 2002). The bottom-trawl surveys provide four different types of

24 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

information: data on the distribution and abundance of fish populations; the food habitat of fishes in the Gulf of Maine; predator-prey relationships; and fish growth and age-at-maturity trends (NOAA 2002). Federal law requires that all vessels permitted in the US Atlantic mackerel fishery complete vessel trip reports (VTRs). While independent data collection has been extensive and VTR data are collected, observer coverage on directed Atlantic mackerel trips is very low and cannot be used to extrapolate trends in bycatch levels over the years.

The current FMP does not include a bycatch management plan. However, a research plan is under development by the MAFMC to further reduce serious injury and mortality of marine mammals in the Atlantic trawl fishery (MAFMC 2008b). While the current management plan does not set specific gear restrictions, in an effort to reduce damage to essential fish habitat (EFH), Amendment 9 of the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) seeks to prohibit bottom trawling in Lydonia and Oceanographer Canyons to prevent expansion of bottom trawling into this area (73 FR 127, MAFMC 2007). The effectiveness of these closures has yet to be determined.

The MAFMC has fully recovered the US Atlantic mackerel stock from an overfished condition. In the 1970s, Atlantic mackerel were being overfished by foreign fleets. The MAFMC eventually closed the mackerel fishery to foreign fleets and US landings remained extremely low. While US landings are much higher now, they are still well below the allowable catch limit. However, as stated in “Criterion 4: Effect of Fishing Practices on Habitats and Ecosystems”, the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan does not consider Atlantic mackerel to be a forage species. Without accounting for Atlantic mackerel as a forage species, no provision is being made to ensure sustainable prey sources for predator groups. This could lead to declines in predator stocks or unforeseen and potentially undesirable shifts in the dietary habits of predators.

25 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Table 7. Management effectiveness of the Atlantic mackerel fishery.

Atlantic Mackerel Factors Evaluated SFW Conservation Concern Management Characteristics Last US stock assessment Stock Status: Management process completed in 2005, first utilizes an independent scientific stock transboundary assessment in MODERATE assessment that seeks knowledge related 2010, model and results are to the status of the stock highly uncertain Scientific Monitoring: Management Dependent and independent process involves regular collection and data collection occurs on a LOW analysis of data with respect to the short regular basis. Recent stock and long-term abundance of the stock assessments were 5 years apart. Scientific Advice: Management has a well-known track record of consistently setting catch quotas beyond those No LOW recommended by its scientific advisors and other external scientists A research plan is under development to further reduce serious injury and mortality of Bycatch: Management implements an marine mammals; management MODERATE effective bycatch reduction plan is addressing bycatch of river herring through Amendment 14, but effectiveness as yet unknown Fishing practices: Management Not applicable because effects addresses the effect of the fishing N/A are moderate method(s) on habitats and ecosystems Regulations regularly enforced by independent bodies, Enforcement: Management and including logbook reports, appropriate government bodies enforce LOW dockside monitoring and fishery regulations similar measures. Note: observer coverage very low Management Track Record: Conservation measures enacted by Management has fully management have resulted in the long- recovered the stock from an LOW term maintenance of stock abundance and overfished condition ecosystem integrity

Evaluation Guidelines

Management is deemed to be “Highly Effective” if the majority of management factors are green AND the remaining factors are not red.

Conservation Concern: Effectiveness of Management

¾ Low (Management Highly Effective)

26 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Overall Evaluation and Seafood Recommendation Atlantic mackerel are inherently resilient to fishing pressure according to Seafood Watch® due to their high intrinsic rate of increase, low age at first maturity, and high growth coefficient. The US Atlantic mackerel stock is considered a moderate conservation concern as biomass is unknown, the occurrence of overfishing is unknown, and the stock assessment uncertainty is high. Although bycatch relative to landings is reportedly low (2.5% according to 2006 data), it regularly includes species of concern such as river herring. The impact on river herring populations is not known, but management is assessing and attempting to mitigate the effect of river herring bycatch in the mackerel fishery. Observer coverage is low and variable from year to year, and as such, the observer data cannot provide a statistically accurate extrapolation. While bycatch of marine mammals has been an issue in the Atlantic mackerel fishery in the past, incidents with marine mammals have more recently been estimated as less frequent. Overall, bycatch is considered a moderate conservation concern because there is regular bycatch of depleted river herring, even though their catch is landed and accounted for, and therefore the fishery is not known to be causing declines or preventing the recovery of river herring. The US Atlantic mackerel fishery is of moderate spatial scale and primarily uses mid-water trawls, which are generally thought to cause minimal damage to the seafloor; however, recent reports have indicated that in mid-water herring trawls the footrope, belly of the net, and/or the weights can occasionally come in contact with the seafloor. Because mackerel is an important forage fish in the Western Atlantic, large removals from the ecosystem have the potential to impact dependent species. Habitat and ecosystem impacts are a moderate conservation concern due to the occasional contact of mid-water trawls with the seafloor and the ecosystem impacts of harvesting a forage species. Management effectiveness is of low concern with complete (though infrequent and uncertain) stock assessments, the successful recovery of the Atlantic mackerel stock from an overfished condition, and current regulations to prevent future overfishing. However, low observer coverage, current uncertainty in the stock status, and lack of status as a forage fish all remain concerns. Overall, the uncertain stock status, moderate bycatch, and moderate habitat and ecosystem effects, combined with low inherent vulnerability and highly effective management, result in Seafood Watch recommending US Atlantic mackerel as a Good Alternative.

Table of Sustainability Ranks

27 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Overall Seafood Recommendation:

Best Choice Good Alternative Avoid

Acknowledgements

Seafood Watch thanks François Grégoire from the Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Pam Lyons Groman from the National Coaliation for Marine Conservation for graciously reviewing this report for scientific accuracy.

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.

28 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

References

72 Federal Register 227 (50 CFR Part 229) November 27, 2007. “List of Fisheries for 2008.” pp 66048-66080.

73 Federal Register 127 (50 CFR Part 648). July 1, 2008. “Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Amendment 9.” pp. 37382- 37388.

Alder, J., and Pauly, D. 2006. On the Multiple Uses of Forage Fish: From Ecosystems to Markets. In: Alder, J., Pauly, D., (eds). On the multiple uses of forage fish: from ecosystems to markets. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 14(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia:viii-ix.

Alder, J., Campbell, B., Karpouzi, V., Kaschner, K., and Pauly, D. 2008. Forage Fish: From Ecosystems to Markets. Annual review of environment and resources 33:153-166.

ASMFC 2008. Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Spiny Dogfish. Accessed August 8, 2008. .

Baraff, L. S., and Loughlin, T.R. 2000. Trends and potential interactions between pinnipeds and fisheries of New England and the U.S. West Coast. Marine Fisheries Review 62:1-39.

Becker, B. H., and Beissinger, S. R. 2006. Centennial decline in the trophic level of an endangered seabird after fisheries decline. Conservation Biology 20:470-479.

Chuenpagdee, R., Morgan, L.E., Maxwell, S.M., Norse, E.A., and Pauly, D. 2003. Shifting gears: assessing collateral impacts of fishing methods in US waters. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 1(10): 517–524.

Collette, B.B. and Nauen C.E. 1983. FAO species catalogue. Vol. 2. Scombrids of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of tunas, mackerels, bonitos and related species known to date. FAO Fish. Synop. 125(2). 137 p.

Dayton, P., Thrush, S., and Coleman, F. 2002. Ecological Effects of Fishing in Marine Ecosystems of the United States. Pew Oceans Commission, Arlington, VA.

DFO 2008. Assessment of the Atlantic Mackerel stock for the Northwest Atlantic (Subareas 3 and 4) in 2007. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2008/041.

Fishbase. 2009. “Scomber scombrus. Linnaeus, 1758. Atlantic Mackerel.” http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.php?id=118

Fogarty, M. J. and Murawski, S.A. 1998. “Large-Scale Disturbance and the Structure of Marine Systems: Fishery Impacts on Georges Bank.” Ecological Applications: 8(1): S6-S22.

29 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Furness, R. W. 2003. Impacts of fisheries on seabird communities. Scientia Marina 67:33-45.

Haas-Castro, R. 2006. Status of fisheries resources off the northeastern US. Available at: http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/sos/spsyn/af/herring/

Harrington, J.M., Myers, R.A., Rosenberg, A.A. 2005. Wasted Resources: Bycatch and Discards in U.S. Fisheries. MRAG Americas Inc.

Hays, C. 1986. Effects of the 1982-83 El Nino on Humboldt penguin colonies in Peru. Biological Conservation 36:169-180.

IUNC. 2009. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. http://www.nefmc.org/herring/planamen/final_a1/ha1_fseis_may06_sec04.pdf

Kaschner, K., Karpouzi, V., Watson, R., and Pauly, D. . 2006. Forage fish consumption by marine mammals and seabirds, . In: Alder, J., Pauly, D., (eds). On the multiple uses of forage fish: from ecosystems to markets. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 14(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia:33-46.

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 1996. Available at:

MAFMC 2007. Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council. “Amendment 9 to The Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan Including Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.” February 12, 2008. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in cooperation with NMFS.

MAFMC 2008a. Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council. “Amendment 10 to The Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan Including Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.” March 5, 2008. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in cooperation with NMFS.

MAFMC 2008b. Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council. “DRAFT 2009 Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish Specifications Environmental Assessment Regulatory Impact Review Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.” August 2, 2008. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in cooperation with NMFS.

MAFMC 2009. Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council. “Amendment 11 to The Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan.” May 29, 2009. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in cooperation with NMFS.

MAFMC 2010. Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council. “MSB FMP Amendment 14 Goals.” http://www.mafmc.org/fmp/msb_files/Am14/Am14_Goals_Current.pdf

30 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

MBNMS. 2006. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Ecosystem Observations: Bird Populations. Beach Combers Update, May 19. http://montereybay.noaa.gov/reports/2005/eco/birdpop.html.

NEFMC 2006. New England Fishery Management Council. Final Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan including a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA). May 3, 2006. http://www.nefmc.org/herring/index.html. Section 7.0 Affected Environment: http://www.nefmc.org/herring/planamen/final_a1/ha1_fseis_may06_sec04.pdf

NEFSC. 2003. Northeast Fisheries Science Center. “U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments – 2003: Common Dolpin.” http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/tm/tm182/73.pdf

NEFSC 2006. Northeast Fisheries Science Center. “42nd Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (42nd SAW) stock assessment report, part A: silver hake, Atlantic mackerel, and northern shortfin squid (CRD 06-09a).” U.S. Dep. Commer., Northeast Fish. Sci. Cent. Ref. Doc. 06-09a; 284 p. Available from: National Marine Fisheries Service, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026.

NEFSC 2007. Northeast Fisheries Science Center. “Status of Fishery Resources off the Northeastern US: Atlantic Mackerel.” http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/sos/spsyn/pp/mackerel/

NMFS 2007a. National Marine Fisheries Service. “NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Species of Concern. River Herring (Alewife and Blueback herring).” Accessed on August 5, 2008. .

NMFS 2007b. National Marine Fisheries Service. “U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments - 2006.” . Accessed July 24, 2008

NMFS 2008a. National Marine Fisheries Service. “NMFS Commercial Fishery Landings Database.” Accessed July 24, 2008. .

NMFS 2008b. National Marine Fisheries Service. “Cumulative Trade Data by Product Database.” Accessed July 24, 2008. .

NMFS 2008c. Excess Harvesting Capacity in U.S. Fisheries: A Report to Congress. April 28, 2008. National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

NMFS 2008d. National Marine Fisheries Service. “Small Entity Compliance Guide for the 2008 Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Specifications and Management Measures.” April 21, 2008. National Marine Fisheries Service – Northeast Region.

31 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

NMFS 2010. National Marine Fisheries Service. “Summary of Stock Status for FSSI Stocks.” 4th Quarter 2010. Available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/2010/fourth/Q4%202010%20FSSInonFS SIStockStatus.pdf

NOAA 2002. News Release 2002-085. Classic Marine Fish Guide Revised: Third Edition Expands on 75 Years of NOAA Fisheries Science. NOAA News Releases 2002. 6/27/02 http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2002/june02/noaa02085.html

Overholtz W. 2006. “Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus).” Status of Fishery Resources off the Northeastern US NEFSC - Resource Evaluation and Assessment Division. Accessed July 21, 2008. .

Overholtz, W. J., Link, J. S., Suslowicz L. E. 2000. Consumption of important pelagic fish and squid by predatory fish in the northeastern USA shelf ecosystem with some fishery comparisons. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 57: 1147-1159

Overholtz W. J., and Link J.S. 2007. Consumption impacts by marine mammals, fish, and seabirds on the Gulf of Maine–Georges Bank Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) complex during the years 1977–2002. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 64: 83–96.

Pauly, D. 2007. Tales of a small, but crucial, fish. Science 318 750–751.

Roberts S. 2007. “Seafood Watch Report: Sharks and Dogfish with a focus on Black Tip Shark, Sandbar Shark, Common Thresher Shark, Shortfin Mako Shark, Spiny Dogfish, and Dusky Smoothhound (Smooth dogfish).” Accessed August 5, 2008. < http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/cr_seafoodwatch/content/media/MBA_Seafood Watch_SharksReport.pdf>.

Studholme, A. L., D. B. Packer, P. L. Berrien, D. L. Johnson, C. A. Zetlin, and W. W. Morse. 1999. Essential fish habitat source document: Atlantic mackerel, Scomber scombrus, life history and habitat characteristics. NOAA Technical Memo NMFS NE 141. 35 p.

Tasker, M. L., Camphuysen, C.J., Cooper, J., Garthe, S., Montevecchi, W.A., and Blaber, S. J. M. 2000. The impacts of fishing on marine birds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57:531-547.

Transboundary Resource Assessment Committee (TRAC). 2010. Atlantic Mackerel in the Northwest Atlantic. TRAC Status Report, 2010/01. Available at: http://www.mafmc.org/meeting_materials/2010/June/Tab05_Presentation_Mackerel_TR AC_Assessment.pdf

Uphoff, J. H., Jr. 2003. Predator-prey analysis of striped bass and Atlantic menhaden in Upper Chesapeake Bay. Fisheries Management and Ecology 10:313-322.

32 MBA Seafood Watch® Atlantic Mackerel Report March 17, 2011

Vickery, Barbara, Marci Bortman, Carl Lobue, Ray Konisky, Jay Odell, and Arlene Olivero. 2009. Chapter 2: Coastal Ecosystems. In Northwest Atlantic Marine Ecoregional Assessment: species, habitats, and ecosystems. Phase 1 Report. The Nature Conservancy. Available at: http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/easternusmarine/maps/

Walters, C. J., Christensen, V., Martell, S. J., and Kitchell, J. F. 2005. Possible ecosystem impacts of applying MSY policies from single-species assessment. ICES Journal of Marine Science 62:558-568.

Watson, R., Alder, J., Pauly, D. 2006. Fisheries for forage fish, 1950 to the present. In: Alder, J., Pauly, D. (eds.) On the multiple uses forage fish: from ecosystems to markets. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 14(3). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia.:1-20.