PICES Press, Vol. 8, No. 1, January 2000

The state of PICES science - 1999 The status of the Bering Sea: January - July, 1999 The state of the western North Pacific in the second half of 1998 The state of the eastern North Pacific since February 1999 MEQ/WG 8 Practical Workshop Michael M. Mullin - A biography Highlights of Eighth Annual Meeting Mechanism causing the variability of the Japanese sardine population: Achievements of the Bio-Cosmos Project in Japan Climate change, global warming, and the PICES mandate – The need for improved monitoring The new age of China-GLOBEC study GLOBEC activities in Korean waters Aspects of the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS)

Chief Kerry's moose : a guidebook to land use and occupancy mapping, research design, and data collection

Aboriginal peoples in Canada have been mapping aspects of their cultures for more than a generation. Indians, Inuit, Métis, non-status Indians and others have called their maps by different names at various times and places: land use and occupancy; land occupancy and use; traditional use; traditional land use and occupancy; current use; cultural sensitive areas; and so on. I use “land use and occupancy mapping” in a generic sense to include all the above. The term refers to the collection of interview data about traditional use of resources and occupancy of lands by First Nation persons, and the presentation of those data in map form. Think of it as the geography of oral tradition, or as the mapping of cultural and resource geography. (PDF contains 81 pages.)

Alexander Agassiz, 1835-1910

Biography with photograph

PICES Press, Vol. 17, No. 1, January 2009

Major Outcomes from the 2008 PICES Annual Meeting: A Note from the Chairman (pdf, 0.1 Mb) PICES Science – 2008 (pdf, 0.1 Mb) 2008 PICES Awards (pdf, 0.3 Mb) Charles B. Miller – A Selective Biography (pdf, 0.4 Mb) Latest and Upcoming PICES Publications (pdf, 0.1 Mb) 2008 OECOS Workshop in Dalian (pdf, 0.2 Mb) PICES Calendar (pdf, 0.1 Mb) 2008 PICES Workshop on “Climate Scenarios for Ecosystem Modeling (II)” (pdf, 0.1 Mb) PICES/ESSAS Workshop on “Marine Ecosystem Model Inter-Comparisons” (pdf, 0.2 Mb) Highlights of the PICES Seventeenth Annual Meeting (pdf, 0.5 Mb) 2008 PICES Summer School on “Ecosystem-Based Management” (pdf, 0.3 Mb) 4th PICES Workshop on “The Okhotsk Sea and Adjacent Areas” (pdf, 0.2 Mb) PICES WG 21 Rapid Assessment Surveys (pdf, 0.4 Mb) PICES Interns (pdf, 0.3 Mb) PICES @ Oceans in a High CO2 World (pdf, 0.1 Mb) Coping with Global Change in Marine Social–Ecological Systems: An International Symposium (pdf, 0.1 Mb) The State of the Western North Pacific in the First Half of 2008 (pdf, 1.3 Mb) State of the Northeast Pacific through 2008 (pdf, 0.3 Mb) The Bering Sea: Current Status and Recent Events (pdf, 0.2 Mb) An Opinion Born of Years of Observing Timeseries Observations (pdf, 0.1 Mb) New Chairman for the PICES Fishery Science Committee (pdf, 0.1 Mb)

Drawn to the Sea: Charles Bradford Hudson (1865-1939), Artist, Author, Army Officer, with Special Notice of His Work for the United States Fish Commission and Bureau of Fisheries

The biography of Charles Bradford Hudson that follows this preface had its seeds about 1965 when I (VGS) was casually examining the extensive files of original illustrations of fishes stored in the Division of Fishes, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. I happened upon the unpublished illustration of a rainbow trout by Hudson and was greatly impressed with its quality. The thought occurred to me then that the artist must have gone on to do more than just illustrate fishes. During the next 20 years I occasionally pawed through those files, which contained the work of numerous artists, who had worked from 1838 to the present. In 1985, I happened to discuss the files with my supervisor, who urged me to produce a museum exhibit of original fish illustrations. This I did, selecting 200 of the illustrations representing 21 artists, including, of course, Hudson. As part of the text for the exhibit, Drawn from the Sea, Art in the Service of Ichthyology, I prepared short biographies of each of the artists. The exhibit, with an available poster, was shown in the Museum for six months, and a reduced version was exhibited in U.S. and Canadian museums during the next 3 years.

Quahogs in Eastern North America: Part II, History by Province and State

The northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenaria, ranges along the Atlantic Coast of North America from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, while the southern quahog, M. campechiensis, ranges mostly from Florida to southern Mexico. The northern quahog was fished by native North Americans during prehistoric periods. They used the meats as food and the shells as scrapers and as utensils. The European colonists copied the Indians treading method, and they also used short rakes for harvesting quahogs. The Indians of southern New England and Long Island, N.Y., made wampum from quahog shells, used it for ornaments and sold it to the colonists, who, in turn, traded it to other Indians for furs. During the late 1600’s, 1700’s, and 1800’s, wampum was made in small factories for eventual trading with Indians farther west for furs. The quahoging industry has provided people in many coastal communities with a means of earning a livelihood and has given consumers a tasty, wholesome food whether eaten raw, steamed, cooked in chowders, or as stuffed quahogs. More than a dozen methods and types of gear have been used in the last two centuries for harvesting quahogs. They include treading and using various types of rakes and dredges, both of which have undergone continuous improvements in design. Modern dredges are equipped with hydraulic jets and one type has an escalator to bring the quahogs continuously to the boats. In the early 1900’s, most provinces and states established regulations to conserve and maximize yields of their quahog stocks. They include a minimum size, now almost universally a 38-mm shell width, and can include gear limitations and daily quotas. The United States produces far more quahogs than either Canada or Mexico. The leading producer in Canada is Prince Edward Island. In the United States, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island lead in quahog production in the north, while Virginia and North Carolina lead in the south. Connecticut and Florida were large producers in the 1990’s. The State of Tabasco leads in Mexican production. In the northeastern United States, the bays with large openings, and thus large exchanges of bay waters with ocean waters, have much larger stocks of quahogs and fisheries than bays with small openings and water exchanges. Quahog stocks in certified beds have been enhanced by transplanting stocks to them from stocks in uncertified waters and by planting seed grown in hatcheries, which grew in number from Massachusetts to Florida in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Quahogs in Eastern North America: Part I, Biology, Ecology, and Historical Uses

The northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenaria, ranges along the Atlantic Coast of North America from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, while the southern quahog, M. campechiensis, ranges mostly from Florida to southern Mexico. The northern quahog was fished by native North Americans during prehistoric periods. They used the meats as food and the shells as scrapers and as utensils. The European colonists copied the Indians treading method, and they also used short rakes for harvesting quahogs. The Indians of southern New England made wampum from quahog shells, used it for ornaments and sold it to the colonists, who, in turn, traded it to other Indians for furs. During the late 1600’s, 1700’s, and 1800’s, wampum was made in small factories for eventual trading with Indians farther west for furs. The quahoging industry has provided people in many coastal communities with a means of earning a livelihood and has provided consumers with a tasty, wholesome food whether eaten raw, steamed, cooked in chowders, or as stuffed quahogs. More than a dozen methods and types of gear have been used in the last two centuries for harvesting quahogs. They include treading and using various types of rakes and dredges, both of which have undergone continuous improvements in design. Modern dredges are equipped with hydraulic jets and one type has an escalator to bring the quahogs continuously to the boats. In the early 1900’s, most provinces and states established regulations to conserve and maximize yields of their quahog stocks. They include a minimum size, now almost universally a 38-mm shell width, and can include gear limitations and daily quotas. The United States produces far more quahogs than either Canada or Mexico. The leading producer in Canada is Prince Edward Island. In the United States, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island lead in quahog production in the north, while Virginia and North Carolina lead in the south. Connecticut and Florida were large producers in the 1990’s. The State of Campeche leads in Mexican production. In the northeastern United States, the bays with large openings, and thus large exchanges of bay waters with ocean waters, have much larger stocks of quahogs and fisheries than bays with small openings and water exchanges. Quahog stocks in certifi ed beds have been enhanced by transplanting stocks to them from stocks in uncertified waters and by planting seed grown in hatcheries, which grew in number from Massachusetts to Florida in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Harvest History of Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska

Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska, represent a unique and isolated marine mammal population that has been hunted for a variety of purposes since prehistoric times. Archeological studies have shown that both Alutiiq Eskimos and Dena'ina Atabaskan Indians have long utilized many marine resources in Cook Inlet, including belugas. Over the past century, commercial whaling and sport hunting also occurred periodically in Cook Inlet prior to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA). During the 1990's, the hunting mortality by Alaska Natives apparently increased to 40-70 whales per year, which led to the decling of this stock and its subsequent designation in 2000 as depleted under the MMPA. Concerns about the decline of the Cook Inlet stock resulted in a voluntary suspension of the subsistenc hunt by Alaska Natives in 1999. The difficulty in obtaining accurate estimates for the harvest of these whales is due to the inability to identify all of the hunters and, in turn, the size of the harvest. Attempts to reconstruct harvest records based on hunters' recollections and interviews from only a few households have been subject to a wide degree of speculation. To adequately monitor the beluga harvest, the National Marine Fisheries Service established marking and reporting regulations in October 1999. These rules require that Alaska Natives who hunt belugas in Cook Inlet must collect the lowere left jaw from harvested whales and complete a report that includes date and time of the harvest, coloration of the whale, harvest location, and method of harvest. The MMPA was amended in 2000 to require a cooperative agreement between the National Marine Fisheries Service and Alaska Native organizations before hunting could be resumed.