UBC Community, Partners, and Alumni Publications

Sea Around Us project newsletter, issue 55, September/October 2009 Bailey, Megan; Sea Around Us Project Sep 30, 2009

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52387-SAUP55.pdf [ 530.21kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52387-1.0107330.json
JSON-LD: 52387-1.0107330-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52387-1.0107330-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52387-1.0107330-rdf.json
Turtle: 52387-1.0107330-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52387-1.0107330-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52387-1.0107330-source.json
Full Text
52387-1.0107330-fulltext.txt
Citation
52387-1.0107330.ris

Full Text

Sea Around UsThe Sea Around Us Project NewsletterIssue 55 – September/October 2009Continued on page 2 - Climateet al. 2009) and feedbackloops, this mainly meansthat the systems biologistsstudy are at the receivingend of climate change. Inother words, we must studyhow ecosystems and thespecies therein are going torespond to physical forcing.Terrestrial ecologists havetaken a lead on this, notleast because they couldbuild on spatial informationon natural (forests, savannas,etc.) and agriculturalsystems, for whichnumerous globaldatabases exist.This is differentfor marinebiologists andfisheriesscientists, twodisciplineswhosepractitioners areaccustomed toworking at alocal level onone, or a few,species at atime, and totesting narrowhypotheses(Peter 1991).Thus, their mainresponse to theglobal warmingchallenge so farThere are various waysthat scientists ofdiverse disciplines cancontribute to the debate onglobal warming.  The first,obviously, was to establishthe reality of thegreenhouse effect, and thiswas achieved well over ahundred years ago, throughthe work of SvanteArrhenius (1896). However,it is only in the last threedecades that the work ofCharles Keeling, JamesGlobal warming:effects on sea-food securityby Daniel Pauly and William W.L. CheungHansen and others,systematized in successiveIPCC assessments,established empirically thathumans not only couldchange the climate, butwere indeed engaged indoing so, with potentiallycatastrophic outcomes.The mechanisms at workare mainly physical andchemical, andnotwithstanding numerousexceptions (see e.g., WilsonFigure 1. Example of a distribution range map for yellow croaker Larimichthys polyactisand (as insert), the resulting temperature preference profiles. Similar maps, pertainingto well over 1000 species and higher taxa may be found at www.seaaroundus.org.Page 2Sea Around Us – September/October 2009The Sea Around Us project newsletter ispublished by the  Fisheries Centre at theUniversity of BritishColumbia. Included withthe Fisheries Centre’snewsletter FishBytes, sixissues of this newsletterare published annually.Subscriptions are free ofcharge, and will beavailable only electronically fromthe January/February 2010 issue onwards.Our mailing address is: UBC FisheriesCentre, Aquatic Ecosystems ResearchLaboratory, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver,British Columbia, Canada, V6T 1Z4. Our faxnumber is (604) 822-8934, and our emailaddress is SeaNotes@fisheries.ubc.ca. Allqueries (including reprint requests),subscription requests, and address changesshould be addressed to Megan Bailey, SeaAround Us Newsletter Editor.The Sea Around Us website may be foundat www.seaaroundus.org and contains up-to-date information on the project.The Sea Around Us project is a scientific collaborationbetween the University of British Columbia and the PewEnvironmental Group. The Group supports nonprofitactivities in the areas of culture, education, the environment,health and human services, public policy and religion. Basedin Philadelphia, Pew makes strategic investments to helporganizations and citizens develop practical solutions todifficult problems. In 2000, with approximately $4.8 billion inassets, the Group committed over $235 million to 302nonprofit organizations. ISSN 1713-5214   Sea Around Us (ONLINE)Climate - Continued from page 1Continued on page 3 - Climatehas been local studies,highlighting, e.g., the polewardmovement of selected species(see Perry et al. 2005), fromwhich global inferences are thendrawn. This approach is fraughtwith problems, especiallyconsidering therepresentativeness of thespecies and locales studied.The Sea Around Us Project has aglobal mandate, however. This isthe reason why we havemapped the growth and declineof global catches since 1950(Pauly 2007; Watson et al. 2004),and the data and insightsgathered in the course of thiswork enable us to tackle globalclimate change issues. Thefollowing account brieflydiscusses steps that we used toproduce a number of papers onthe impact of global warming onmarine biodiversity and fisherieson the world’s marineecosystems, and to lay a strongfoundation for futurecontributions. We proceeded infour steps.Step 1 was the elaboration of amodel for shifting the speciesdistributions (generallypoleward, and into deeperwater) as temperature increased,building on the over onethousand range maps weconstructed, in the course of theSea Around Us Project, formapping fisheries catches. (Wehave a map for all ‘commercialspecies’, these being defined asfish or invertebrate species forwhich at least one membercountry submits catch data tothe FAO; Figure 1).  From each ofthese maps, a temperaturepreference profile was derived(Figure 1, insert), defined by thewater preferentially inhabited bythat species. (Note that weavoided circularity, because wenever used temperature todefine species range maps; seeClose et al. 2006).  Then, for each(half degree lat./long.) cell of aspecies distribution range map, apopulation dynamics model wasset up, featuring the (bi)annualbroadcasting of reproductivepropagules whose survival isdetermined largely by the watertemperatures they encounter.Given increasing temperatures,this generates amoeboidpoleward movement of thespecies in question, lasting aslong as the initial temperaturepreference profile is not re-established (see contributions inCheung et al. 2008a).  Theprojected temperature data weused for this originates fromoutputs of the Ocean-Atmosphere coupled generalcirculation model (GCM) CM 2.1of NOAA’s Geophysical FluidDynamics Laboratory andprovided by our partners atPrinceton University, led byJorge Sarmiento. These outputaccount not only fortemperature changes, but alsofor changes in currents. Weexamined the effects of changesin ocean conditions under threegreenhouse gas emissionscenarios: 720 ppm, 550 ppm,370 ppm CO2 concentration by2100, but we limited ourprojections to 2050.Step 2 consisted of establishinga strong predictive relationshipbetween the area of distributionof a species and its productivity,as required to reflect thechanged distributions generatedin Step 1.  Such a strongrelationship is documented inCheung et al.  (2008b) and hasthe formlogCp = - 2.881 + 0.826·logPP –0.505·logA – 0.152·logTL+1.887·logCT + 0.111·logHCT +e where Cp is the potential catch(in t·year-1, estimated as themean of several years with thehighest catch); PP is the annual... insightsgathered inthe course ofthis workenable us totackle globalclimatechange issues.Page 3 Sea Around Us – September/October 2009primary production in the area ofdistribution (g·C); A is the area ofdistribution (km2); TL is thetrophic level; CT is number ofyears used from thecomputation of Cp; HCT is thecatch reported in thecorresponding genus or family(to account for reporting in taxaother than species) and e is theerror term of the model, whichexplains 70% of the variability ina data set comprising 1066species, covering animals asdiverse as Antarctic krillEuphausia superba and yellowfintuna Thunnus albacares.Step 3 then consisted ofapplying the shift model in Step1to over 1,000 species asdefined above (857 species offinfish and 229 species ofinvertebrates). This led to globalmaps showing areas dominatedby species extirpations (near thepoles, and in the inter-tropicalbelt), areas dominated byinvasions (Arctic and SouthernOcean), and areas with highturnover (extirpation +invasions).  They represent thefirst global maps of threats tomarine biodiversity (see Cheunget al. 2009a). Moreover, becausethey were based on a largesample size and on species witha large biomass, we believe thatthe pattern they identify isrepresentative and thus canguide future work about theimpact of global warming onmarine biodiversity.Step 4, by combining the catchpotential in Step 2 with thespecies shifts in Step 3,generated maps of change incatch potential for the worldoceans (Figure 2). When thesewere overlaid with the outlinesof countries’ Exclusive EconomicZones, the main result was that afew high-latitude countries (e.g.,Norway, Iceland) may benefitfrom the large scaleredistribution of fish species, i.e.,see increases of their catchpotential of up to 40%, whilelow-latitude, tropical countriesmay suffer declines of 10-30% intheir catch potential (Cheung etal. 2009b).  In countries coveringa large latitudinal range, such asthe USA and Australia, thepositive changes in high latitudeareas would offset negativechanges in low latitude areas, asrevealed by soon-to-besubmitted national-scale studiesfor the US and Australia. Hereagain, we anticipate that ourresult will inspire internationalresearch on this topic becauseour inferences are based onhuge datasets and do notrepresent solely local conditions.This work also allowedidentification of limitations inour coverage of the world’sbiodiversity, as there arenumerous countries which, intheir reports to FAO, omit thecatch of  artisanal fisheries (i.e.,coastal species), important asthey usually are (seecontribution in Zeller and Pauly2007).  In the future, we willremedy this by ensuring thatevery EEZ in the world isrepresented by at least severalFigure 2.  Predicted change in the potential of fisheries, given the distribution range shifts induced by global  warming. Somehigh-latitude countries (e.g., Norway, Iceland) are predicted to see increases (20-40 %) in their catch potential, while tropicalcountries are predicted to see decreases (10-30 %) from such changes (Cheung et al. 2009b). However, these predictions donot account for change in oxygen distribution in, and acidification, of the oceans, and hence represent an optimistic scenario(see text).Climate - Continued from page 2Continued on page 4 - Climate...a few highlatitudecountries(e.g., Norway,Iceland)might benefitfrom the largescaleredistributionof fish species... while lowlatitude,tropicalcountrieswould sufferdeclines of10-30 % intheir catchpotential.Page 4Sea Around Us – September/October 2009Publications Mail Agreement No: 41104508coastal species. However, themajor limitation of our studyprobably is the non-consideration of four importantfactors, which we assess will becritical to future research.One factor so far neglected isdissolved oxygen, whichgenerally will be reduced infuture oceans because strongertemperature gradients withregards to depth will reducemixing.  We will account for thispotentially strong effect on fishproductivity by explicitly takingaccount of the impact ofoxygen on fish growth (Pauly1981).The second neglected factor isacidification. Lower pH isgenerally perceived asaffecting only organisms withcalcium carbonate shells, but inreality it is likely to affect allwater-breathing organisms, byreducing the gradient whichallows them to get rid ofcarbon dioxide as they exhale.Empirical evidence exists that areduction of this gradient willimpact performance of water-breathers, and hence theproductivity of fish (e.g.,Munday et al. 2009).The third factor we mustconsider is that, while primaryproduction is generallypredicted to remain similar inthe next decades, it mayactually consist of smaller cells(picoplankton; variousflagellates) and less of thelarger phytoplankton(especially diatoms), which fuelproductive marine food webs.We plan to account for this byinserting a trophic levelbetween the smallphytoplankton and thezooplankton, which willaccount for the microbial foodweb (where much of the smallphytoplankton ends up), andreduce the primary productionsupporting fisheries yields.Finally, the current version ofcoupled GCM does notrepresent well the dynamicsalong the coast and on thecontinental shelf, where manyexploited species are found,which adds considerableuncertainty to our finer-scaleprojection in some regions.Thus, we are undertakingregional case studies (e.g, inWestern Australia) in whichhigher-resolution physicaloutputs from regionaloceanographic models are usedto drive our biological models.The results so far suggest thatthe general patterns of rangeshift that we showed in theglobal analysis remain robust atthe regional scale.Nevertheless, we will, in thefuture, use outputs from GCMswith finer resolution and bettercoastal representation.A paper outlining these foursteps is in progress and weexpect that it will generateestimates of potential catchdevoid of ‘winners’: the worldfisheries will lose out, and theeffect will be strongest in thetropics.Overall, this global modellingexercise will gradually includemuch of what we know aboutimportant physiological andtrophic mechanisms.  Also, itwill be enriched when the workof Villy Christensen, workingwith Ecopath with Ecosim andthe Sea Around Us databases,adds a food web perspective tothis (see Christensen et al.2009).  Overall, with this work,the Sea Around Us Project ispositioning itself to be a majorplayer in the scientific study ofthe effect of global warming onocean biodiversity and fisheries.This will often make us thebearer of bad news, as it appearsthat the more we build into ourmodel the worse the predictionsbecome.On the other hand, our work –already now - indicates that thefaster the root cause of globalwarming is addressed, the betterit will be for the millions ofpeople who depend directly orindirectly on seafood for theirsubsistence or their enjoyment.ReferencesArrhenius, S. 1896. On theinfluence of carbonicacid in the air upon thetemperature of theground. PhilosophicalMagazine and Journal ofScience (fifth series), 41:237–275.Christensen, V., Walters, C.J.,Ahrens, R., Alder, J.,Buszowski, J.,Christensen, L.B., Cheung,W.W.L., Dunne, J., Froese,R., Karpouzi, V., Kaschner,K., Kearney, K., Lai, S., Lam,V., Palomares, M.L.D.,Peters-Mason, A., Piroddi,C., Sarmiento, J.L.,Steenbeek, J., Sumaila, R.,Watson, R., Zeller, D. andD. Pauly. 2009. Database-driven models of theworld’s Large MarineEcosystems. EcologicalModelling, 220: 1984-1996.Cheung, W.W.L., V.W.Y. Lam, J.L.Sarmiento, K. Kearney R.Watson and D. Pauly.2009a. Projecting globalmarine biodiversityimpacts under climatechange scenarios. Fishand Fisheries DOI:10.1111/j.1467-2979.00315xCheung, W.W.L., V.W.Y. Lam, J.L.Sarmiento, K. Kearney, R.Watson, D. Zeller and D.Pauly 2009b. Large-scaleContinued on page 5 - ClimateClimate - Continued from page 3The SeaAround UsProject ispositioningitself to be amajor playeron thescientific studyof the effect ofglobalwarming onoceanbiodiversityand fisheries.Page 5 Sea Around Us – September/October 2009Climate - Continued from page 4Continued on page 6 - MastersHigh times, high seas, high bloodpressure: completing an MSc at theFisheries Centre has it allby Sarika Cullis-SuzukiThis fall 2009, I closed thedoor on part of my life: Ifinished my three-year MScat the Fisheries Centre at UBC.Unfortunately, what was not putto an end: all the ocean’sproblems.Certainly one of the mostoverwhelming things I dealt withearly in my studies was becomingaware of the global crisis offisheries, and the resultant feelingof being so small as to becompletely ineffectual in the faceof it. I definitely remember myearly days at the Fisheries Centre,rushing over to my supervisor’soffice, plunking myself into a chairand asking: how do the oceanseven stand a chance? And how doyou maintain your composure?? Isuppose Dr Daniel Pauly haswitnessed (or been the victim of )such a reaction before. He calmlyexplained to me how you dowhat you can: you put the partsback, tiny piece by tiny piece1.And so that’s what I tried. As weall do, as members of the SeaAround Us Project.Initially for my research, I beganworking on global MarineProtected Areas (MPAs),continuing on with the work ofDr Louisa Wood, who graduatedfrom UBC in 2006. While this didlead to some interesting results(see Alder et al. 2009; Cullis-Suzuki and Pauly in press), after ayear it was time to move on tosomething new.redistribution ofmaximum fisheries catchpotential in the globalocean under climatechange. Global ChangeBiology.  [in press;http://dx.doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01995.x]Cheung, W.W.L., V. Lam and D.Pauly. 2008a. Modellingpresent and climate-shifteddistribution ofmarine fishes andinvertebrates. FisheriesCentre Research Reports16(3) 726 pp.Cheung, W.W.L., C. Close, V. Lam,R. Watson and D. Pauly.2008b. Application ofmacroecological theoryto predict effects ofclimate change on globalfisheries potential. MarineEcology Progress Series,365: 187-197.Munday, P.L., N.E. Crawley andG.E. Nilsson. 2009.Interacting effects ofelevated temperatureand ocean acidificationon the aerobicperformance of coral reeffishes. Marine EcologyProgress Series, 388:235-242.Pauly, D. 1981. The relationshipsbetween gill surface areaand growth performancein fish: a generalization ofvon Bertalanffy’s theoryof growth. Berichte derDeutschenWissenschaftlichenKommission fürMeeresforschung 28(4):251-282.Pauly, D. 2007. The Sea AroundUs Project: Documentingand communicatingglobal fisheries impactson marine ecosystems.AMBIO: a Journal of theHuman Environment ,34(4): 290-295.Perry, A.L., P.J. Low, J.R. Ellis,J.D. Reynolds. 2005.Climate change anddistribution shifts inmarine fishes. Science,308: 1912-1915.Peter, R.H. 1991. A Critique forEcology. CambridgeUniversity Press,Cambridge.Watson, R., A. Kitchingman, A.Gelchu and D. Pauly.2004. Mapping globalfisheries: sharpening ourfocus. Fish and Fisheries,5: 168-177.Wilson, R.W., F.J. Millero, J.R.Taylor, P.J. Walsh, V.Christensen,S.Jenningsand M. Grosell. 2009.Contribution of fish to themarine inorganic carboncycle. Science, 323:359-362.Zeller, D. and D. Pauly (Eds).2007. Reconstruction ofMarine Fisheries Catchesfor Key Countries andRegions (1950-2005).Fisheries Centre ResearchReports, 15(2) 163 p.Page 6Sea Around Us – September/October 2009Masters - Continued from page 5Continued on page 7 - MastersWhile taking a course in marineresource law, I became veryintrigued with the concept of anocean ‘commons’, and the ideathat there could still be areas ofthe sea essentially unowned bypeople. What happens to theresources in these areas? Who isresponsible for them?Comprising about 60% of theocean’s surface, the high seasare often left out of the globalfisheries discussion.This is what led me to my thesistopic: the effectiveness of globalregional fisheries managementorganizations on the high seas.Regional fisheries managementorganizations, RFMOs, arecurrently the only fishery bodiesmandated to manage andconserve the fish resources inthe high seas (United Nations1995). Currently, RFMOs coverthe majority of the global oceans(Figure 1). Through increasedmanagement, RFMOs are toutedas being part of the solution tooverfishing; thus calls to increasetheir numbers have been made,and as a result, more are slatedto come into existence soon2.Yet while we continue toblanket the seas with RFMOs, thequestion of whether or notthese management bodies areeven effective remainsunanswered.I conducted a two-part study. Thefirst part examined the state ofRFMOs in theory, i.e., how wellthey did when compared toguidelines (see Lodge et al.,2007). The second partexamined the effectiveness ofRFMOs in practice, i.e., how wellthey scored in relation to thestatus of the stocks which theymanage.The average score across RFMOsin the first part of the study was57%: the majority of RFMOs failto meet the best-practicesrequirements. Scores wereparticularly low regardingschemes to promotecompliance. The results of thesecond part of the study wereeven more shocking: two-thirdsof the stocks examined underRFMO management were eitherdepleted or overexploited,which matches with FAO’scurrent estimate (FAO 2009).These results show that highseas stocks are worse off thanthose within EEZs, and with amuch shorter fishing history,too3. The RFMOs scoredpredictably worse in this half ofthe study, averaging 49%.There appeared to be nocorrelation between how RFMOsscored in the first assessment,and how they scored in thesecond; in other words, what anRFMO says it’s doing does notnecessarily reflect what isactually happening in the sea.My study concluded that RFMOsface many organizationalproblems which can account inpart for their low scores, butgenerally, the most pressingconcern is our failure to acceptThe global distribution of RFMOs. The IWC covers the entire ocean.Yet while wecontinue toblanket theseas withRFMOs, thequestion ofwhether ornot thesemanagementbodies areeveneffectiveremainsunanswered.Page 7 Sea Around Us – September/October 2009Masters - Continued from page 6that the ‘Freedom of the Seas’exists no longer.  “First, theprinciple of freedom of fishingcould be retired from thepantheon of fundamentalprinciples. Indeed, thecontinued articulation of theprinciple is both inaccurate andmisleading, if not downrightdisingenuous” (Rayfuse 2007).And because we don’t acceptthis, we continue to treat thehigh seas like a globalcommons. Flags ofconvenience, IUU, and highrates of bycatch are all rampanton the high seas, illegal actsaided easily by their immensityand unmonitored state.Until we succeed in givingRFMOs both full responsibilityand accountability formanaging and conserving fishin the high seas, their state- andthat of the fish- can only beexpected to get worse.These findings will soon besubmitted to a journal. Yetwhile valuable, they areoverwhelmingly depressing. It’sa strange feeling: parttriumphant at finishing one’sdegree, part despair uponrealizing just how bad it is forthe oceans.Ah, the ups and downs; theydefinitely get one’s bloodflowing.Thankfully, there were other,more uplifting parts of my timeat the Fisheries Centre. Likewhat it’s like to be at theepicentre of cutting-edgeglobal fisheries research, or toexchange ideas with anincredibly diverse andcompetent international groupof people. Or to haveconversations with the leadingminds in fisheries science…and sometimes, even todisagree with them. Or to shrinkin one’s seat in a classroom,surrounded by professors, post-docs, and students, all people ofimposing analytical capacity. Orto collect an eminent scientist atthe airport because she isscheduled to give a lecture atyour institution- a scientist whowill soon go on to work for theObama Administration,becoming the first female inhistory to head NOAA4. Or tohave your hero write to youbecause he read an article youwrote in FishBytes. Or, to havethe freedom to do science whileacting on the responsibility wehave as scientists and as citizens.My time at the Fisheries Centrehas been replete withopportunities and intellectualstimulation (and exhaustion).These things have all made mythree years here matchless inscope, and very, very full. For allthis, I am grateful and proud.Thanks to all who have been partof it.ReferencesAlder, J., S. Cullis-Suzuki, V.Karpouzi, K. Kaschner, S.Mondoux, W. Swartz, P.Trujillo, R. Watson, andD. Pauly. 2009. Aggregateperformance in managingmarine ecosystems of 53maritime countries. MarinePolicy, doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2009.10.001Cullis-Suzuki, S. and D. Pauly.Protected Area Costs as‘Beneficial’ FisheriesSubsidies: A GlobalEvaluation. CoastalManagement Journal. [Inreview].FAO Fisheries and AquacultureDepartment. 2009. The stateof the world fisheries andaquaculture 2008. Food andAgriculture Organization ofthe United Nations, Rome.Lodge, M. W., D. Anderson, T.Lobach, G. Munro, K.Sainsbury and A. Willock.2007. Report of anindependent panel todevelop a model forimproved governance byRegional FisheriesManagementOrganizations.Recommended bestpractices for regionalfisheries managementorganizations. 1-141 pp.Chatham House: London.Rayfuse, R. G. 2007. Regionalallocation issues or zen andthe art of pie cutting.University of New SouthWales Law Research Paper,10.United Nations, 1995.Provisions of the UnitedNations Convention on theLaw of the Sea of 10December 1982 relating tothe conservation andmanagement of straddlingfish stocks and highlymigratory fish stocks.United Nations conferenceon straddling fish stocksand highly migratory fishstocks. 4 August, 1995,New York, USA.Notes1‘Tiny’ being relative: the topicsof theses supervised in thecontext of the Sea AroundUs  Project, being global inscope, are notoriouslyambitious!2 For a list of current and futureRFMOs, see www.fao.org/fishery/rfb/search.3 Unlike coastal fisheries, highseas fishing only reallybegan in the 1950s.4 Dr Jane Lubchenco gave aFISH 500 seminar at theFisheries Centre as part ofthe lecture series inMarch 2008, exactly a yearbefore she becameadministrator ofNOAA.Andbecause wedon’t acceptthis, wecontinue totreat thehigh seaslike a globalcommons.Page 8Sea Around Us – September/October 2009The Upper Gulf of California(UGC) is Mexico’s mostimportant fishing ground(Acosta, 2008). The bulk of thefisheries since the 1930s havetargeted shrimp. Two sectorscoexist: an artisanal and acommercial shrimp fishery. Thelatter use trawlers, while theformer uses a multitude of smallboats or ‘pangas’, with a length ofless than 7.5 m and an outboardmotor. The gear used to catchshrimp is a gillnet or ‘chinchorrode linea’,  forming a curtain inthe water column. Thisgenerates  huge bycatch,including of protected species,for example the giant croakerTotoaba macdonaldi, as well asmarine turtles.Thus, this fishery is viewed as amajor cause for the decline ofPhocoena sinus, or ‘vaquita’(literally: ‘little cow’), a smallendemic porpoise whose lowpopulation (of about 400individuals) suffers ananthropogenic mortality of 40-80 individuals per year (WWF,2006).A number of Mexican andinternational agencies areattempting to mitigate thisproblem. Among the former, theEscuela Nacional de IngenieríaPesquera (UniversidadAutónoma de Nayarit) runs,jointly with the ComisiónNacional de Acuacultura y Pesca,a project to evaluate thepossibility of converting pangasfrom using gill nets to usingmodified trawls equipped withfish-excluding devices, whichwould reduce or eliminate thevaquita and other bycatch.Fishing tests performed in thebuffer zone of the biospherereserve that is part of the UGC(including the delta of theColorado) were encouraging.Consecutive 30-minute haulswere performed in areasselected by fishers, with andwithout modified gear, and catchsamples were obtained whichwere then separated into theshrimp catch and bycatchspecies (CONAPESCA, 2009). Themain result: the modified gearcatch generates less bycatch,and if widely adopted, wouldreduce the threat to vaquita,totoaba and marine turtles.ReferencesAcosta, Y.V. 2008. Aspectos de labiología reproductiva dela curvina golfina(Cynoscion othonopterus)para su aprovechamientosustentable en el AltoGolfo de California. Tesis deLicenciatura, Centro deInvestigaciones Biologicasdel Noreste, La Paz, BCS,Mexico, 78 p.Cudney, R.B. and P.J.B. Turk. 1998.Pescando Entre Mareas delAlto Golfo de California: UnaGuía sobre la PescaArtesanal, su Gente y susPropuestas de Manejo.[www.cedointercultural.org/content/view/65/61/lang,en/ - 164 p.]WWF. 2006. Conservación de laVaquita y su hábitat en elAlto Golfo de California.[www.ine.gob.mx/descargas/dgipea/pea-ar-2006-021.pdf ] CONAPESCA. 2009. RealizaCONAPESCA reunión sobrepesca responsable yprotección de la vaquitamarina [www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx/wb/cona/06_de_julio_de_2009_mazatlan_sin1]Note1 In 2009 Ms Bucio, fromUniversidad Autónoma inMexico, spent July and August asa volunteer with the SeaAround Us Project.The vaquita and selective trawling byshrimpers in MexicoBy Edaysí Bucio1Sea Around Us newsletter printversion will ceaseIn 2010, the Sea Around Us and FishBytes newsletters will be going fully electronic. We want to thankall of our readers for their continued support over the years. We request that those readers who arereceiving hard copy versions of our Sea Around Us newsletter kindly email the editor, atSeaNotes@fisheries.ubc.ca, with their electronic address, and their preference to receive url or pdfmailing. Having a fully electronic format will help us to be more sustainable by reducing our reliance onpaper, and will allow us to use colour for visual aids to communicate with our readers, such as the useof photos and graphs. We appreciate your cooperation and patience as we make this transition. Wehope you will continue to read and enjoy our newsletters! Themodifiedgear catchgenerateslessbycatch,and ifwidelyadopted,wouldreduce thethreat tovaquita,totoabaandmarineturtles.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.52387.1-0107330/manifest

Comment

Related Items