Deepwater and Other Sharks of the U.S. Atlantic Ocean Exclusive Economic Zone SARI J. KIRALY, JON A. MOORE, and PAULA H. JASINSKI Introduction Fishery Conservation and Management on what is known regarding their life Act. Thirty-three of these species were history characteristics, deep-sea sharks This paper reviews species descrip- listed by NOAA's National Marine are likely to be highly vulnerable to tions, including primary distribution Fisheries Service (NMFS) as part of the over exploitation, especially given the (where known), of 51 deepwater and management unit in the Final Fishery rapid boom and bust tendencies of many other sharks (Table 1) of the U.S. At- Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, deep-sea fisheries (Moore, 1999). Also, lantic Ocean Exclusive Economic Zone Swordfish, and Sharks (HMS FMP) over exploitation of shallow-water fishery (EEZ) which currently are not included (USDOC, 1999) only in so far as to resources has driven some fishermen in any Federal fishery management plan prohibit finning, as these sharks are into deeper fishing grounds, and this can prepared under the Magnuson-Stevens sonfetimes taken incidentally in directed result in an increase in bycatch rates of shark, tuna, and swordfish fisheries. certain deep-sea sharks in U.S. waters. Subsequently, in Amendment 1 to the For example, the monkfish, Lophius HMS FMP (USDOC, 2003) these spe- americanus, fishery off the northeastern Sari J. Kiraly is with the Highly Migratory Spe- cies Management Division, Office of Sustainable cies were removed from the management United States has ventured to depths of Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, unit because a national ban on finning 700 m or more and can frequently capture NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1315 was instituted under the Shark Finning black dogfish, Centroscyllilum fabricii, East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 1 (e-mail: [email protected]), Jon A. Moore Prohibition Act. However, NMFS con- and various lantemsharks, Etinopterus is with the Florida Atlantic University, Wilkes tinues to collect available fishing data on spp., as bycatch (co-author J. A. Moore, Honors College. 5353 Parkside Drive, Jupiter, FL 33458, and Paula H. Jasinski is with the Chesa- these species. personal observ.). Ecosystem manage- peake Bay Office, Office of Habitat Conserva- For many of the sharks described ment of such deepwater fishing grounds tion. National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, here, little is known of either their biol- will require better knowledge of these P.O. Box 1346, Gloucester Point, VA 23062. ogy or distribution. Also, at present little deep-sea sharks. Obviously, for those information is known on the stock size or species where little to no information is reproductive characteristics of many of available on reproduction and stock size, ABSTRACT-Fifty-one deepwater and these species. For species where at least ecosystem management becomes an even other shark species of the U.S. Exclusive some reproductive information is known, more difficult task. Economic Zone in the Atlantic Ocean and life-history characteristics include slower The other, non deepwater sharks Gulf of Mexico, which currently are not growth rates and lower reproductive rates, covered in this paper are included be- includedin any Federalfisherymanagement plan, are described, with a focus on pri- even when compared to shallow-water cause they play an important role in mary distribution. Many of these shark spe- sharks. When combined with the more their respective ecosystems as middle-to cies are not well known, while others which limited productivity of cold, deep-sea top-level predators. Their inclusion un- are more common may be of particular environments, many of these deepwater derscores the importance of considering interest. Owing to concerns regardingpos- them in addressing marine ecosystem sible increases infishing effort for some of sharks are at risk of serious decline before these species, as well as possible increases any fishery management scheme can be management. in bycatch rates as other fisheries move put into place. Since publication of the HMS FMP farther offshore, it is important that these The potential for an increased interest (USDOC, 1999) some of the species sharks be considered in marine ecosystem in fishing for these species warrants a listed in that document have been sys- management efforts. This will necessitate a better understanding of their biology and better understanding of them, and it is tematically reclassified based on new distribution. Primary distribution maps are important that they be included in any information. In some cases, there has included, based on geographic information ecosystem-based analysis pertaining to been confusion when referring to a spe- system (GIS) analyses of both published marine fisheries management. Based cies by common name. For example, and unpublished data, and a review of the more than one common name may be literature. The most recent systematic clas- sification and nomenclature for these spe- IH.R. 5461. P.L. 106-557, Shark Finning Prohi- used for the same species, or two sepa- cies is used. bition Act, 21 Dec. 2000, 114 Stat. 2772,4 p. rate species may share a nearly identical 65(4) I common name. No single standardized areas, and presence/absence data, and primary distribution maps: published reference for common names yet exists, represent the best available information literature, unpublished data and pho- especially for those species found below for these species. To visually illustrate tographs from the NMFS Northeast the 200 m depth zone (which serves as species primary distribution, the data Fisheries Science Center's groundfish the cut-off point for one published list of were analyzed using a geographic infor- surveys, unpublished data from the fishes) (Robins et al., 1991). In those in- mation system (GIS), and shaded areas Northeast Fisheries Science Center's stances, the most frequently used and/or marking those boundaries are depicted fishery observer program, and catalogued the United Nations Food and Agriculture on the maps (Table 2). Biological and museum specimens from the following Organization (FAO) names are used in fishing-related information is taken in institutions: Academy of Natural Science this report. part from Castro (1983) and Compagno in Philadelphia (ANSP), CaliforniaAcad- (1 984), and updated with supplemental emy of Sciences (CAS), Field Museum of Species Accounts information from more recent literature, Natural History (FMNH), Florida State Primary distribution descriptions for personal observations, and personal Biological Collections (FSBC), Museum the shark species included here are based communications. of Comparative Zoology at Harvard on life history information, expert opin- The following data sources were used University (MCZ), Scripps Institution of ion regarding the importance of certain to construct the GIS and associated Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif. (SIO), Table 1.-Fifty-one deepwater and other sharks of the U.S. Atlantic Ocean Exclusive Economic Zone which currently are not included in any Federal fishery management plan prepared under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Nomenclature note: Apristuruslaurussoniis the incorrect name for the species commonly found off the U.S. What is in U.S. waters Is an undescribed species similar in appearance to A. laurussoni(Nakaya').The proper designation is Apristurussp.As of yet, there is no common name to apply to this species. ECHiNORHINIDAE (Bramble Sharks) Squaliolus laticaudus Smith and Radcliffe, 1912 Apnisturusprofundorum (Goode and Bean, 1896) Echinorhinus brucus (Bonnaterre, 1788) Spined pygmy shark, Pygmy shark Deepwater catshark Bramble shark CENTROPHORIDAE (Gulper Sharks) Apr/sturus riven' Bigelow and Schroeder, 1944 ETMOPTERIDAE (Lanternsharks) Centrophorus cf. acus Garman, 1906 Broadgill catshark Centroscyllium fabricii (Reinhardt, 1825) Undescribed gulper shark #1 Apristurus sp. (laurussonimlike) Black dogfish An undescribed species similar to the Needle dogfish Undescribed carshark #1 Etmopterus bigelowi Shirai andTachikawa, 1993 C. acus from the Pacific (McEachman and Fechhelm, An undescribed species similar in appearance to Blurred lanternshark 1998). A. Iaurussoni (Nakayal). Often confused with the similar E pusillus, which does Centrophorus granulosus (Bloch and Schneider, 1801) Galeus antillensis Springer, 1979 not occur in the western Atlantic Gulper shark Antillean roughtail catshark Etmopterus bullisi Bigelow and Schroeder, 1957 Centrophorus cf. harrissoni McCulloch, 1915 Ga/eus aae (Nichols, 1927) Lined lanternshark Undescribed gulper shark #2 Marbled catshark, Roughtall catshark Etmopterus gracilispinis Krefft, 1968 Usually identified as C. uyato, but that species name 2 Galeus springeri Konstantinou and Cozzt, 1998 Broadbanded lanternshark, Broadband dogfish is now considered invalid (Compagno ). Striped sawtail catshark Etmopterus hillanus (Poey, 1861) Centrophorus niaukangTeng, 1959 Scyl/orhinus boa Goode and Bean, 1896 Caribbean lantemshark, Blackbelly dogfish Taiwan gulper shark Boa catshark Etmopterus princeps Collett, 1904 Centrophorus cf. tessellatus Garman, 1905 Scyl/orhinus meadi Springer, 1966 Great lanternshark, Rough sagre Undescribed gulper shark #3 Blotched catshark Etmopterus robinsi Schofield and Burgess, 1997 An undescribed species similar to the Tesellated Scyliorlinus retifer (Garman, 1881) West Indian lantemshark gulper shark C. tessellatus from the Pacific according