Workshop on turtle bycatch mitigation for longline fisheries: experimental design and data analysis, 7-8 November 2007, San Ram��n de Alajuela, Costa Rica

Large numbers of fishing vessels operating from ports in Latin America participate in surface longline fisheries in the eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO), and several species of sea turtles inhabit the grounds where these fleets operate. The endangered status of several sea turtle species, and the success of circle hooks (���treatment��� hooks) in reducing turtle hookings in other ocean areas, as compared to J-hooks and Japanese-style tuna hooks (���control��� hooks), prompted the initiation of a hook exchange program on the west coast of Latin America, the Eastern Pacific Regional Sea Turtle Program (EPRSTP)1. One of the goals of the EPRSTP is to determine if circle hooks would be effective at reducing turtle bycatch in artisanal fisheries of the EPO without significantly reducing the catch of marketable fish species. Participating fishers were provided with circle hooks at no cost and asked to replace the J/Japanese-style tuna hooks on their longlines with circle hooks in an alternating manner. Data collected by the EPRSTP show differences in longline gear and operational characteristics within and among countries. These aspects of the data, in addition to difficulties encountered with implementation of the alternating-hook design, pose challenges for analysis of these data.

A Low-level Geographic Information System for coastal zone management, with applications to Brunei Darussalam: Part I: The concept and its design elements

This contribution is the first part of a four-part series documenting the development of B:RUN, a software program which reads data for common spreadsheets and presents them as low-resolution maps of slates and processes. The program emerged from a need which arose during a project in Brunei Darussalam for a 'low level' approach for researchers to communicate findings as efficiently and expeditiously as possible. Part I provides a overview of the concept and design elements of B:RUN. Part II will highlight results of the economics components of the program evaluating different fishing regimes, sailing distances from ports and fleet operating costs. Environmental aspects will be presented in Part III in the form of overlay maps. Part IV will summarize the implications of B:RUN results to coastal and fishery resources management in Brunei Darussalam and show how this approach can be adapted to other coastlines and used as a teaching and training tool. The following three parts will be published in future editions of Naga, the ICLARM Quarterly. The program is available through ICLARM.

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.

Trawling Operations and South African (Cape) Fur Seals, Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus

South African (Cape) fur seals, Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus, interact with the South African trawl fisheries-offshore demersal, inshore demersal, and midwater fisheries. These interactions take thef ollowing forms: Seals take or damage netted fish, on particular vessels they become caught in the propeller, seals drown in the nets, live seals come aboard and may be killed. Except in specific cases of seals damaging particular trawler propellers, interactions result in little cost to the offshore and midwater trawl fisheries. For the inshore fishery, seals damage fish in the net at an estimated cost in excess of R69, 728 (US$18,827) per year, but this is negligible (0.3%) in terms ofthe value of the fishery. Seal mortality is mainly caused by drowning in trawl nets and ranges from 2,524 to 3,636 seals of both sexes per year. Between 312 and 567 seals are deliberately killed annually, but this most likely takes place only when caught and they enter the area below deck, where they are difficult to remove, and pose a potential threat to crew safety. Overall, seal mortality during trawling operations is negligible (0.4-0.6%) in terms of the feeding population of seals in South Africa.

Co-occurrence of bycatch and target species in the groundfish demersal trawl fishery of the U.S. west coast; with special consideration of rebuilding stocks

Bycatch and resultant discard mortality are issues of global concern. The groundfish demersal trawl fishery on the west coast of the United States is a multispecies fishery with significant catch of target and nontarget species. These catches are of particular concern in regard to species that have previously been declared overfished and are currently rebuilding biomass back to target levels. To understand these interactions better, we used data from the West Coast Groundfish Observer Program in a series of cluster analyses to evaluate 3 questions: 1) Are there identifiable associations between species caught in the bottom trawl fishery; 2) Do species that are undergoing population rebuilding toward target biomass levels (���rebuilding species���) cluster with targeted species in a consistent way; 3) Are the relationships between rebuilding bycatch species and target species more resolved at particular spatial scales or are relationships spatially consistent across the whole data set? Two strong species clusters emerged���a deepwater slope cluster and a shelf cluster���neither of which included rebuilding species. The likelihood of encountering rebuilding rockfish species is relatively low. To evaluate whether weak clustering of rebuilding rockfish was attributable to their low rate of occurrence, we specified null models of species occurrence. Results indicated that the ability to predict occurrence of rebuilding rockfish when target species were caught was low. Cluster analyses performed at a variety of spatial scales indicated that the most reliable clustering of rebuilding species was at the spatial scale of individual fishing ports. This finding underscores the value of spatially resolved data for fishery management.