summary of caribbean data evaluation sedar january, 2009 3/24/09 todd gedamke (sefsc)

Summary of Caribbean Data Evaluation SEDAR

January, 2009

3/24/09

Todd Gedamke (SEFSC)

Terms of Reference – Data Evaluation SEDAR(paraphrased)

1) Review available data and develop recommendations regarding their accuracy and reliability. Provide complete tables.

2) Review the basis for existing stock complexes.

3) Recommend species or stock complexes for which informative SEDAR benchmark assessments may be feasible.

4) Review alternative methods for estimating mortality rates and abundance trends that might be useful for those species or stock complexes for which data are deemed sufficient.

5) Review the research and monitoring recommendations from the previous assessments in the U.S. Caribbean.

6) Provide guidance on developing ACLs given data accuracy and reliability recommendations.

Terms of Reference – Data Evaluation SEDAR 1) Review available data and develop recommendations regarding their accuracy

and reliability. Provide complete tables.

•Recreational Data

•Fishery Independent Data

•Commercial Trip tickets—Landings

•Commercial Trip Interview Program (TIP)—Length

Frequency Data

Available Data

Recreational Fisheries Data• MRFSS initiated in Puerto Rico in 2000

– In 2005: 470,00 shore mode trips; 380,000 private mode trips; <35,000 charter boat trips

– No data collected on conch, whelk, or lobster

• MRFSS is not conducted in the US Virgin Islands

• Occasional, short-term recreational surveys do occur, e.g. May-Sept. 2000 when 50,000 recreational conch fishers were estimated in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands

• There is no long-

term, ongoing

monitoring of

recreational fishing

in the US Caribbean

other than MRFSS

in Puerto Rico

Fishery-Independent Data

• Catalog of datasets being compiled/reviewed– documenting coverage, focus, availability of data– NMFS/NOS cataloging coral reef monitoring to improve coordination

• Most studies spatially or temporally limited– earlier studies very limited– increase in coverage ~ 2000 to present

• Diver-based studies limited to <100ft– shallow water snapper, groupers, grunts, parrotfishes – OK– no (or few) deep water snapper, big grouper, or pelagics

• Need context of study – e.g., catches from spawning aggregation, targeting depths, methods

Courtesy: Ron Hill

Fishery-Independent Data

• SEDAR’s 4, 8, and 14 did not find a useful time series to conduct assessments

• Need strong recommendations for well-funded, well-designed fishery-independent research programs

Courtesy: Ron Hill

Trip Tickets aka. Sales Records

Self reported commercial fishing dataReported Landings

Snapper/Grouper

Other Finfish

Pot fishNet fish

Hook and line fishSpear gun fish

LobsterConchWhelk

Pelagics (T/D/W)

other-1other-2other-3

Baitfish/fry

GrouperSnapper

GruntJack

SurgeonParrot

ShellfishTriggerfish

AngelfishBarracuda

GoatfishMackerel

Porgy

Shellfish

1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

{other-1 =(conch, whelk, octopus, squid, clams, oysters); other-2 = (does not include conch, whelk); other-3 = "other"}

Quantity of gear and fishing time No effort data (# of pots recorded in shaded years/groups)

Available years of landings data and species groups that were used on the St. Thomas/St. John trip tickets.

Puerto Rico Sales Records

• Available Computerized Since 1983

• Identifies species specific landings on each sales record

• For early/most years not a unique 1:1 relation between sales records and trips (multiple trips on one ticket)

• Trends in Total Catch Landed affected by reporting rates

• Review- reporting rates of fisher sales records vary by year, area, gear

Trip Tickets aka. Sales Records

Self reported commercial fishing dataReported Landings

Expansion Factors

St. Croix

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

Lan

din

gs

(Po

un

ds)

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

Val

ue

(Do

llar

s)

LandingsValue

Reported Landings Only (Not expanded)

Puerto Rico Commercial Fishery Reporting Rates

• USVI1. Lower expansion factors2. No species specific records3. Some effort data exists 4. TIP data can’t be used to estimate species

composition

• Puerto Rico1. Higher expansion factors2. Species specific records3. Questionable effort data hampers CPUE

calculations

Pros/Cons of Trip Ticket Data

Use of Trip Ticket/Landings data to generate indices of abundance

(CPUE)

Data filteringSignificant reduction in sample sizes

• Trips reporting multiple gears or regions fished were excluded

• Hours fished must be reported

• Gear fished must be reported

• Only single trip reports used

Conclusions regarding CPUE Indices

• With careful evaluation of raw data (primarily effort measure) reasonable CPUE indices may be possible but they have limited utility because:

-Short time series limited contrast-Started well after initiation of fishery

• Potential to use CPUE in conjunction with mean length methodology

• Obvious trends could be used in ‘informed judgement’ approach

Trip Interview Program (TIP)

Trip Interview Program (TIP)

• Data collected by port samplers

• Provides length frequency of sampled catch

• In terms of characterizing catch (e.g. species composition, landings verification, or CPUE) there are two issues:

1) Very small fraction of the total landings are sampled. On the order of 1-2% in the

USVI and 3-5% for PR.

2) Questions as to whether samples were complete catch samples (i.e. 100% of catch sampled for length).

Grouper Unit 4

SPECIES_NAME TOTAL # PUERTO RICO ST. CROIX ST. THOMAS/ST. JOHN TIGER GROUPER 3320 3238 30 52 YELLOWFIN GROUPER 990 283 272 429 MISTY GROUPER 212 82 79 51 RED GROUPER 159 44 1 113 YELLOWEDGE GROUPER 0 0 0 0

Total Number of Measured fish in TIP Database

Priority FMP Units

PUERTO RICO-GROUPER UNIT 4 GEAR_DESCRIPTION GEARCODE _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 % of Total LINES HAND, OTHER 610 2701 HOOK AND LINE 74.06% DIVING OUTFITS, OTHER 943 672 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 18.43% POTS AND TRAPS, FISH 345 212 TRAPS 5.81% GILL NETS, OTHER 425 23 GILL NETS 0.63% BUOY GEAR, VERTICAL 614 6 HOOK AND LINE 0.16% POTS AND TRAPS, CMB 300 5 TRAP NETS 0.14% POTS AND TRAPS, SPINY LOBSTER 355 5 TRAPS 0.14% BY HAND, OTHER 955 5 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 0.14% TROLL & HAND LINES CMB 600 4 HOOK AND LINE 0.11% LINES LONG, REEF FISH 676 4 LONG LINE 0.11% LINES TROLL, OTHER 660 3 HOOK AND LINE 0.08% ROD AND REEL 611 2 HOOK AND LINE 0.05% LINES LONG SET WITH HOOKS 675 2 LONG LINE 0.05% SPEARS 760 2 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 0.05% TRAMMEL NETS 530 1 TRAMMEL NETS 0.03%

Number of Measured Fish – Puerto Rico – All Grouper Unit 4

Snapper Unit 1

SPECIES_NAME TOTAL # ST. CROIX PUERTO RICO ST. THOMAS/ST. JOHN SILK SNAPPER 25703 2820 22501 344

VERMILION SNAPPER 12664 418 11943 303

BLACKFIN SNAPPER 7419 3730 2828 861

BLACK SNAPPER 404 331 71 2

Number of Measured Fish – Puerto Rico – All Snapper Unit 1

SNAPPER UNIT 1-PUERTO RICO

Gear_DescriptionGEARCOD

E _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 %TOTAL

LINES HAND, OTHER 610 23402 HOOK AND LINE 62.67%

POTS AND TRAPS, FISH 345 10996 TRAPS 29.45%

TROLL & HAND LINES CMB 600 1089 HOOK AND LINE 2.92%

LINES TROLL, OTHER 660 339 HOOK AND LINE 0.91%

LINES LONG, REEF FISH 676 333 LONG LINE 0.89%

POTS AND TRAPS, SPINY LOBSTER 355 305 TRAPS 0.82%

ROD AND REEL 611 234 HOOK AND LINE 0.63%

POTS AND TRAPS, CMB 300 219 TRAP NETS 0.59%

GILL NETS, OTHER 425 142 GILL NETS 0.38%

REEL, MANUAL 612 91 HOOK AND LINE 0.24%

HAUL SEINES, LONG 30 85 SEINE NETS 0.23%

LINES LONG SET WITH HOOKS 675 31 LONG LINE 0.08%

TRAMMEL NETS 530 25 TRAMMEL NETS 0.07%

LINES TROLL, MACKEREL 665 19 HOOK AND LINE 0.05%

DIVING OUTFITS, OTHER 943 13 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 0.03%

BUOY GEAR, VERTICAL 614 10 HOOK AND LINE 0.03%

8 TRAP NETS 0.02%

POTS AND TRAPS, PERWKLE OR CKL 365 2 TRAPS 0.01%

295153196

1095565

9591368

914428285

752823135288285

1220

621505438169

6362198313

610-LINES HAND, OTHER

345-POTS AND TRAPS, FISH

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Number of Measured Fish – St. Croix – All Snapper Unit 1

SNAPPER UNIT 1-ST. CROIX

Gear_Description GEARCODE _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 %TOTAL


BUOY GEAR, VERTICAL 614 1593 HOOK AND LINE 21.82%

REEL, ELECTRIC OR HYDRAULIC * 613 1070 HOOK AND LINE 14.66%




POTS AND TRAPS, CMB 300 124 TRAP NETS 1.70% TROLL & HAND LINES CMB 600 71 HOOK AND LINE 0.97%

FYKE AND HOOP NETS, FISH 310 19 TRAP NETS 0.26%


Number of Measured Fish – St. Thomas/St. John – All Snapper Unit 1

SNAPPER UNIT 1-ST. THOMAS/ST. JOHN

Gear_Description GEARCODESP _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 %TOTAL

POTS AND TRAPS, FISH 345 1022 TRAPS 67.68% POTS AND TRAPS, CMB 300 221 TRAP NETS 14.64%





ENCIRCLINLING NETS (PURSE) 100 17 SEINE NETS 1.13%

PUSH NET 725 12 OTHER NETS 0.79%

LINES LONG SET WITH HOOKS 675 5 LONG LINE 0.33%

HOOKS, SPONGE 925 3 OTHER GEAR 0.20%


Parrotfish – All Species

SPECIES_NAME TOTAL # ST. CROIX PUERTO RICO ST. THOMAS/ST. JOHN

REDTAIL PARROTFISH 49989 36078 12613 1229

STOPLIGHT PARROTFISH 41406 25431 15047 911

REDBAND PARROTFISH 8976 7897 850 229

PRINCESS PARROTFISH 4868 3478 1296 91 REDFIN PARROTFISH 2797 2536 174 87

QUEEN PARROTFISH 1924 837 1075 10

BLUE PARROTFISH 81 0 63 18

RAINBOW PARROTFISH 81 1 68 12

STRIPED PARROTFISH 22 19 0 3

MIDNIGHT PARROTFISH 20 1 13 6

PARROTFISHES, SCARIDAE 2812 1819 928 65

PARROTFISH-PUERTO RICO

Gear_DescriptionGEARCOD

E _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 %TOTAL








BY HAND, OTHER 955 102 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 0.32%



POTS AND TRAPS, CRAB, BLUE 330 37 TRAPS 0.12%

POTS AND TRAPS, LOBSTER INSHOR 350 28 TRAPS 0.09%


HAUL SEINES, BEACH 20 18 SEINE NETS 0.06%

15 TRAP NETS 0.05%

ENTANGLING NETS (GILL) UNSPC 400 12 GILL NETS 0.04%


POTS AND TRAPS, EEL 340 9 TRAPS 0.03%

GILL NETS, DRIFT LARGE PELAGIC 520 5 GILL NETS 0.02%

SPEARS 760 3 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 0.01%

LINES TROLL, TUNA 655 1 HOOK AND LINE 0.00%

Number of Measured Fish – Puerto Rico – Parrotfish

Number of measured fishPuerto Rico-All Parrotfish Species

392961215

1098

1321

126722781662

1801836

331399143259514

522

967

736279234329

176

2013

610-LINES HAND, OTHER

425-GILL NETS, OTHER

530-TRAMMEL NETS

943-DIVING OUTFITS, OTHER


353018893084115120547635302317121673268

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Number of Measured Fish – St. Croix – Parrotfish

PARROTFISH-ST.CROIX Gear_Description GEARCODESP _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 %TOTAL


GILL NETS, GL 2 - 4 INCH 505 8086 GILL NETS 10.37%




GILL NETS, GL 1 - 2 INCH 500 1446 GILL NETS 1.85%

SPEARS 760 1035 DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 1.33%





2163351591710734

217

244

776

592

822

350

684

1571

623

1325

3580

2595

953813801

6836

2819

613

4717

2020


505-GILL NETS, GL 2 - 4 INCH

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

PARROTFISH-ST.THOMAS/ST. JOHN

Gear_Description GEARCODESP _FREQ_ GEAR_CLASS1 %TOTAL




54 TRAPS 2.03%

POTS AND TRAPS, BOX TRAP 380 49 TRAPS 1.84%




SPEARS 760 1DIVING BY HAND OR SPEARFISHING 0.04%

Number of Measured Fish – St. Thomas/St. John – Parrotfish

8967

222

80

18

144217

284213

19

5228254458

322

7


1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Evaluation of Spatial Changes in the Fisheries

TIP DATA

# of

mea

sure

d fi

sh (

norm

aliz

ed b

y an

nual

tota

ls)

Change in proportions of regions sampled (two different periods indicated by red arrows

Puerto Rico – Hook and Line (610) -Snapper Unit 1

• Limited information available to evaluate spatial changes (USVI distance from shore variable uninformative)

• Deep water snapper fishery (WNW Puerto Rico) needs to be evaluated separately

Highlighted the need to collect better spatial and depth

information

Cluster Analysis – Species CompositionAndy Strelcheck, Nick Farmer, Jason Reuter

• Analysis was relatively consistent with current FMP species groups

• Discussion group with fisherman resulted in some suggested modifications

• Joe/Jason?

BlueMidnightRainbow

Parrotfish Unit 2

PrincessQueenRedfinRedtailStoplightRedbandStriped

BlueMidnightPrincessQueenRainbowRedfinRedtailStoplightRedbandStriped

Parrotfish

YellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 5

YellowfinRedTigerBlack

YellowfinRedTigerYellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 4

Red hindConeyRock hindGraysby

Red hindConeyRock hindGraysbyCreole-fish

Grouper Unit 3

Yellowtail SnapperYellowtail SnapperSnapper Unit 4

GrayLaneMuttonDogSchoolmasterMahogany


Snapper Unit 3

Queen Cardinal (Pristopomoidesmacrophthalmus)

Queen Wenchman (Pristopomoidesaquilonaris)

Snapper Unit 2

SilkBlack BlackfinVermilion Wenchman (Pristopomoidesaquilonaris)

SilkBlack BlackfinVermilion

Snapper Unit 1

ProposedCurrentComplex

BlueMidnightRainbow

Parrotfish Unit 2



Parrotfish

YellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 5



Grouper Unit 4



Grouper Unit 3




Snapper Unit 3



Snapper Unit 2



Snapper Unit 1


BlueMidnightRainbow

Parrotfish Unit 2



Parrotfish

YellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 5



Grouper Unit 4



Grouper Unit 3




Snapper Unit 3



Snapper Unit 2



Snapper Unit 1


BlueMidnightRainbow

Parrotfish Unit 2



Parrotfish

YellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 5



Grouper Unit 4



Grouper Unit 3




Snapper Unit 3



Snapper Unit 2



Snapper Unit 1


BlueMidnightRainbow

Parrotfish Unit 2



Parrotfish

YellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 5



Grouper Unit 4



Grouper Unit 3




Snapper Unit 3



Snapper Unit 2



Snapper Unit 1


BlueMidnightRainbow

Parrotfish Unit 2



Parrotfish

YellowedgeMisty

Grouper Unit 5



Grouper Unit 4



Grouper Unit 3




Snapper Unit 3



Snapper Unit 2



Snapper Unit 1


Estimating Mortality from Mean Lengths in Non-equilibrium Situations

(Gedamke and Hoenig 2006)

Photos from Nancie Cummings Life History report--Photos reprinted from http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/gallery/descript/muttonsnapper/muttonsnapper.html.

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/gallery/descript/muttonsnapper/muttonsnapper.html

Age

Freq

uenc

y

F = 0.2

F = 0.4

More Fishing Less Older/Larger Fish

5 assumptions:

1. Asymptotic growth, K and L known & constant

over time.

2. No individual variability in growth.

3. ‘Constant’ & continuous recruitment over time.

4. Mortality constant with age (eg. Selectivity, M).

5. Mortality constant over time Population in

equilibrium (mean length reflects mortality)

Beverton-Holt mean length mortality estimator

cLL

LLKZ

)(

Z2

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

0.1 - 16 14 12 11 10 9 8 7 7 0.2 23 - 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 0.3 26 11 - 6 6 6 6 6 6 5

Z1 0.4 27 13 7 - 4 5 5 5 5 5 0.5 28 14 8 4 - 3 4 4 4 4 0.6 28 15 9 6 3 - 2 3 4 4 0.7 29 15 10 7 5 2 - 2 3 3 0.8 29 15 10 7 5 4 2 - 2 2 0.9 29 16 10 8 6 4 3 2 - 2 1 29 16 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 -

Assumption 5

Population in equilibrium (enough time elapsed after change in mortality that mean length reflects new mortality).

Hard to meet in the real world!

Years to “reach” equilibrium after change in mortality

Life History Parameters from Goosefish

Time Relative to Change in Z

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10

Me

an

Le

ngth

(cm

)

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50fishing mortality instantaneously

increased from 0.4 to 1.0

Z will be underestimated

until new equilibrium is

reached


-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10

Mea

n Le

ngth

(cm

)

36

38

40

42

44

46

48



With new method able to calculate mean length at any time after

change

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year

Mea

n L

eng

th (

cm)

Z = 0.14 Z = 0.31 Z = 0.56 Z = 0.25

Goosefish Mortality Estimates--Northern Management Region NEFSC Fall Groundfish Survey

Sample sizes range from 12 to 108 per year

Puerto Rico – Silk Snapper - Traps (345) – All DepthsZ = 1.12 0.31 in 2001.8

260

280

300

320

340

360

380

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Mea

n Le

ngth

(mm

)

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Res

idua

ls

Integrating Catch Rates into the Mean Length

Analysis

Model Development Extensions to base model to maximize use of available data

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1990 1994 1998 2002 2006

Year

Catc

h I

ndex

Observed Index

Predicted Index

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1990 1994 1998 2002 2006

Year

Catc

h I

ndex

Observed Index

Predicted Index

CP

UE

In

dex

Year

Standardized CPUE Indices—Mutton Snapper Pot Fishery—Puerto Rico

Multi-Species / Multi-Gear Approach

Assumes that species within ‘complex’ are subject to similar

patterns of effort (e.g. same year of change or same proportional

change in F)

200

220

240

260

280

300

320

340

360

380

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010

Mean

Len

gth

(m

m)

Blackfin

Silk

Vermillion

1.15

1.21

3.0

0.80

0.83

1.8

1

3627

3390

243

42

194

1175 284342 112

1745

60

96

4044

39 16

973

26

35

150

200

250

300

350

400

1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009

Mea

n L

eng

th

BlackfinSilk

Vermillion

Multi-gear Analysis – Traps and Hook/Line

1

3627

3390

243

42

194

1175 284342 112

1745

60

96

4044

39 16

973

26

35

150

200

250

300

350

400

1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009

Mea

n L

eng

th

BlackfinSilk

Vermillion


Silk

Reference lines - Expected Mean Length assuming F = M as proxy for Fmsy

1

3627

3390

243

42

194

1175 284342 112

1745

60

96

4044

39 16

973

26

35

150

200

250

300

350

400

1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009

Mea

n L

eng

th

BlackfinSilk

Vermillion


Silk

Reference lines - Expected Mean Length assuming F = M as proxy for Fmsy

Fmsy

Fcur

Fmsy / Fcur = 1.2

Summary Tables

Summary rating of the quality of commercial, recreational and fishery independent data available for species listed in the Caribbean Fishery Management Council’s fishery management plans.

The labels ‘BENCH’ or ‘OFL’ indicate the data may be sufficient to warrant either a full SEDAR benchmark assessment or OFL advice, respectively (it is assumed a benchmark assessment would also render OFL advice).

The numerical rating scale is: (5) reliable data for more than 10 years; (4) reliable data for recent years; (3) data for more than 10 years, but reliability, comprehensiveness or coverage is questionable; (2) data for recent years, but reliability, comprehensiveness or

coverage is questionable; (1) scattered or occasional observations, reliability questioned; (0) data unavailable or unreliable.

St. Croix

Commercial Recrea-

ional Fishery

independent FMP unit (species)

Catch Length CPUE length index length

Advice potential

Snapper Unit 1 Black snapper 0 1 0 1? 0 0 Blackfin snapper 0 3 0 1? 1 1 Silk snapper 0 3 0 1? 0 0 Vermillion snapper 0 2 0 1? 0 0 Grouper Unit 4 Tiger grouper 0 1 0 0 1 1 Yellowfin grouper 0 1 0 0 2 2 Yellowedge grouper 0 0 0 0 0 0 Misty grouper 0 1 0 0 0 0 Red grouper 0 0 0 0 0 0 ParrotFish 3 3 3 1? 3 3 BENCH Queen Conch 3 0 0 1? 3 3 Nassau grouper 0 1 0 0 3 1 Goliath grouper 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spiny lobster 3 3 3 1? 1 1 OFL Snapper Unit 2 Queen snapper 0 3 0 1? 1 1 Wenchman snapper 0 2 0 1? 0 0 Snapper Unit 3 1? Gray snapper 0 2 0 1? 3 1 Lane snapper 0 1 0 1? 3 1 Mutton snapper 0 2 0 1? 2 1 Dog snapper 0 1 0 1? 3 1 Schoolmaster snapper 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Mahogany snapper 0 2 0 1? 3 2 Snapper Unit 4 Yellowtail snapper 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Grouper Unit 3 Red hind 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Coney 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Rock hind 0 1 0 1? 3 1 Graysby 0 1 0 1? 3 1 Creole fish 0 0 0 1? 3 1 Grunts (6 spp.) 3 3 3 1? 3 1 BENCH Goatfish (2 spp.) 3 3 2 1? 3 1 OFL Porgies (4spp) 3 1 2 1? 3 1 OFL Squirrelfish (4 spp) 3 3 1 1? 3 1 OFL Tilefish (2 spp) 0 0 0 1? 3 3 Jacks (7 spp) 3 3 3 1? 3 1 OFL Surgeonfish (3 spp) 3 3 3 1? 3 3 BENCH Triggerfish & filefish (6 spp.) 3 3 3 1? 3 1 BENCH Boxfish (5 spp.) 3 3 0 1? 3 1 OFL Wrasse (3 spp.) 0 0 0 1? 3 1 Angelfish (3 spp.) 3 2 1 1? 3 1 OFL

Commercial Recrea-tional.

Fishery-independent FMP unit

(species) Catch length CPUE length index length

Advice potential

Snapper Unit 1 Black snapper 0 0 0 1? 0 0 Blackfin snapper 0 2 0 1? 0 0 Silk snapper 0 2 0 1? 0 0 Vermillion snapper 0 2 0 1? 0 0 Grouper Unit 4 Tiger grouper 0 1 0 1? 1 1 Yellowfin grouper 0 2 0 1? 2 2 Yellowedge grouper 0 0 0 1? 0 0 Misty grouper 0 1 0 1? 0 0 Red grouper 0 1 0 1? 0 0 ParrotFish 3 2 2 1? 3 3 BENCH Queen Conch 3 0 0 1? 3 3 Nassau grouper 0 1 0 1? 3 3 Goliath grouper 0 0 0 1? 0 0 Spiny lobster 3 3 3 1? 1 1 OFL Snapper Unit 2 Queen snapper 0 2 0 1? 1 1 Wenchman snapper 0 1 0 1? 1 1 Snapper Unit 3 0 1? Gray snapper 0 1 0 1? 3 3 Lane snapper 0 2 0 1? 3 3 Mutton snapper 0 2 0 1? 1 1 Dog snapper 0 1 0 1? 1 1 Schoolmaster snapper 0 2 0 1? 3 3 Mahogany snapper 0 1 0 1? 3 3 Snapper Unit 4 Yellowtail snapper 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Grouper Unit 3 Red hind 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Coney 0 3 0 1? 3 3 Rock hind 0 1 0 1? 3 3 Graysby 0 1 0 1? 3 3 Creole fish 0 0 0 1? 3 3 Grunts (6 spp.) 3 3 2 1? 3 3 OFL Goatfish (2 spp.) 1 1 1 1? 3 3 Porgies (4spp) 3 1 2 1? 3 3 OFL Squirrelfish (4 spp) 3 2 2 1? 3 3 OFL Tilefish (2 spp) 0 0 0 1? 2 2 Jacks (7 spp) 3 3 3 1? 3 3 OFL Surgeonfish (3 spp) 3 3 2 1? 3 3 OFL Triggerfish & filefish (6 spp.) 3 3 3 1? 3 3 BENCH Boxfish (5 spp.) 3 2 0 1? 3 3 OFL Wrasse (3 spp.) 3 0 0 1? 3 3 OFL

St. Thomas/St. John

Puerto Rico

Commercial Recrea-tional

Fishery-independent FMP unit

(species) Catch length CPUE length index length

Advice potential

Snapper Unit 1 Black snapper 3 1 0 2 0 0 Blackfin snapper 3 2 1 2 1 1 Silk snapper 3 3 3 2 0 3 BENCH Vermillion snapper 3 3 1 2 1 1 OFL Grouper Unit 4 Tiger grouper 1 2 0 2 1 1 Yellowfin grouper 3 1 1 2 2 2 Yellowedge grouper 0 0 0 2 0 0 Misty grouper 3 2 1 2 0 0 Red grouper 0 1 0 2 0 0 ParrotFish 3 3 3 2 3 3 BENCH Queen Conch 3 0 0 2 3 3 OFL Nassau grouper 3 2 1 2 1 1 Goliath grouper 0 1 0 2 0 0 Spiny lobster 3 3 3 2 1 1 OFL Snapper Unit 2 Queen snapper 3 3 3 2 0 0 BENCH Wenchman snapper 1 2 1 2 0 0 Snapper Unit 3 Gray snapper 1 3 0 2 3 3 Lane snapper 3 3 3 2 3 3 OFL Mutton snapper 3 3 3 2 1 1 OFL Dog snapper 1 3 0 2 3 3 Schoolmaster snapper 0 3 0 2 3 3 Mahogany snapper 1 3 0 2 3 3 Snapper Unit 4 Yellowtail snapper 3 3 3 2 3 3 OFL Grouper Unit 3 Red hind 3 3 3 2 3 3 OFL Coney 3 3 1 2 3 3 OFL Rock hind 0 1 0 2 3 3 Graysby 0 3 0 2 3 3 Creole fish 0 0 0 2 3 3 Grunts (6 spp.) 3 3 3 2 3 3 BENCH Goatfish (2 spp.) 3 3 1 2 3 3 OFL Porgies (4spp) 3 3 1 2 3 3 OFL Squirrelfish (4 spp) 3 1 1 2 3 3 OFL Tilefish (2 spp) 1 1 0 2 3 3 Jacks (7 spp) 3 3 1 2 3 3 OFL Surgeonfish (3 spp) 0 1 0 2 3 3 Boxfish (5 spp.) 3 2 3 2 3 3 OFL Wrasse (3 spp.) 3 0 0 2 3 3 OFL Angelfish (3 spp.) 0 1 0 2 3 3

Conclusions/Recommendations of Caribbean Data Evaluation SEDAR

If stock has adequate length and catch data (listed as ‘OFL’ in Summary Table)

• Estimate total mortality (Z) using the Gedamke and Hoenig (2006) base model and newly developed multispecies/multigear extensions to the method.

• Compute recent fishing mortality rate by subtracting out an assumed natural mortality rate (F = Z – M).

• Select a proxy for FMSY such as the natural mortality rate or the fishing mortality rate associated with a given spawning potential ratio

• Set OFL = FMSY*(recent average catch)/F

Otherwise, if no reliable catch data exist, develop rationale for alternative management measures that do not conform to the framework established in the NS1 guidelines.

Otherwise, if stock has adequate catch data, then use informed judgment

• if consensus can be reached on a proxy for FMSY and the level of depletion relative to unfished levels, d = (Bfirst – Blast)/B0, then set OFL = (average catch)/(n + d/(0.4*FMSY))

• if consensus can be reached on a vulnerability scalar from a PSA analysis, then set OFL = (average catch) * vulnerability scalar

• if no consensus can be reached, adopt protocol of PFMC, i.e., OFL = average catch and ABC = 0.5*(average catch).









• if consensus can be reached on a proxy for FMSY and the level of depletion relative to unfished levels, d = (Bfirst – Blast)/B0, then set OFL = (average catch)/(n + d/(0.4*FMSY)) - (Alec MacCall – DCAC)











• if consensus can be reached on a proxy for FMSY and the level of depletion relative to unfished levels, d = (Bfirst – Blast)/B0, then set OFL = (average catch)/(n + d/(0.4*FMSY))




Thank you!

Meeting summary for: Caribbean Data Evaluation SEDAR

March, 2009

Summary CFMC Annual Catch Limit Working Group (ACLG)

MeetingCAROLINA, PUERTO RICO

FEBRUARY 23-25, 2009


Day 1 – SEDAR Report and Summary/Discussion of Methodologies

Day 2 – Two Working Groups: -Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis-Development of Decision Table for

setting of ACL’s (Scenarios table)

Day 3 – Discussion, Evaluation of Recent Catch, and recommendations for ACL’s

Attributes List (N = 22)Scored on a 1-3 scale (high, med, low)

Separate weighting score

Productivity

•Intrinsic rate of increase (r)

•Maximum age (Tmax)

•Maximum size (Lmax)

•Growth Coefficient (k)

•Natural Mortality (M)

•Fecundity

•Breeding Strategy

•Recruitment Pattern

•Age at Maturity (Tmat)

•Mean Trophic Level

Susceptibility

•Management Strategy

•Areal Overlap (range)

•Geographic Concentration

•Vertical Overlap (water depth)

•Fishing Rate (F) relative to M

•Biomass of Spawners (SSB) or other proxies

•Seasonal Migrations

•Schooling/Aggregation and Other Behavioral Responses

•Morphology Affecting Capture

•Survival After Capture and Release

•Desirability/Value of the Fishery

•Fishery Impact to EFH or Habitat in General for Non-targets

ACLG Working Group – Decision Table for ACL’sScenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Scenario 7 Scenario 8

Life History Demographics Yes Yes Not useful Yes/No Yes Yes Yes/NoRepresentative Lengths Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No - single time period (recent only) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No - multiple time period Yes No Yes No Yes Yes NoCatch Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes NoNo recruitment anomaly Yes Yes Yes NA Yes NA

Can trend in stock be determined? Yes No Yes No Yes No NoCan stock status be determined? Yes Yes (with lag) No No Yes No NoCan OFL be determined? Yes No No No No No NoCan ABC be determined? Yes No No No No No NoCan ACL be determined? Yes No No No No No No

Management Advice:

Notes: Catch should not be increased if

overfishing may be taking place.

Can give management advice (e.g.,

effort), but not

Council may place additional limits if it

wants to be precautionary.

May take into account vulnerability using

scalers

Catch level should not exceed

average catch in recent years

(determined on a case by case

Taking into account fishery

independent research, control a

fishery with the purpose of

collecting needed data. Catch and/or effort is limited to what is required to collect sufficient

data.

If trend in F is increasing, catch level should be reduced from

recent levels. If not, catch level

should not exceed recent catch.

Participation in the fishery is

dependent on following all data

collection protocols.


scalers


scalers


scalers

OFL would be >, =, or < recent catch based on ratio of

Fmsy/F.

Decrease if Council wants to be

precautionary


precautionary


precautionary

Catch would need to be set lower

than in Scenario 1 because of single point estimate and possible time lag

due to non-equilibrium status.

No there are anomalies

identified

Catch level should not exceed recent catch. If F/Fmsy >1 then reduce catch based on

The result is the same as Scenario 4. If it's possible to

correct for the anomaly, it

becomes the same as Scenario 1.

Note: SEDAR recommended

treating this situation as having

no length data (Scenario 4).

Fishery determined to be underutilized


precautionary


scalers




collecting needed data. Catch and/or effort is limited to control the rate of

development of the fishery to avoid

overshooting OFL.

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Scenario 7 Scenario 8Life History Demographics Yes Yes Not useful Yes/No Yes Yes Yes/NoRepresentative Lengths Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No - single time period (recent only) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No - multiple time period Yes No Yes No Yes Yes NoCatch Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes NoNo recruitment anomaly Yes Yes Yes NA Yes NA


Management Advice: OFL would be >, =, or < recent catch based on ratio of

Fmsy/F.

ACLG Working Group – Decision Table for ACL’s

cLL

LLKZ

)(

Beverton-Holt mean length mortality estimator

length at which all animals are fully vulnerable to gear

mean lengthtotal mortality

growth rate maximum length




Fmsy/F.


# of

mea

sure

d fi

sh (

norm

aliz

ed b

y an

nual

tota

ls)

Change in proportions of regions sampled (two different periods indicated by red arrows

Puerto Rico – Hook and Line (610) -Snapper Unit 1

• Limited information available to evaluate spatial changes (USVI distance from shore variable uninformative)

• Deep water snapper fishery (WNW Puerto Rico) needs to be evaluated separately

Highlighted the need to collect better spatial and depth

information


-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10

Me

an

Le

ngth

(cm

)

36

38

40

42

44

46

48



Z will be underestimated

until new equilibrium is

reached

Tiger Grouper – Hook and Line – Code 610 – Puerto Rico

ZBevHolt = 0.59

Given:Linf = 740 mmK = 0.11 yr-1

M = 0.115 yr-1

Lc = 514.5 mm

• If Lmean =550 mm then ZBevHolt = 0.59 yr-1


ZBevHolt = 0.59


M = 0.115 yr-1

Lc = 514.5 mm

• If Lmean =550 mm then ZBevHolt = 0.59 yr-1

?


ZBevHolt = 0.59

587mm when F=M


M = 0.115 yr-1

Lc = 514.5 mm (Ault =300 mm)

• If Lmean = 550 mm then ZBevHolt = 0.59 yr-1

• When F = M, Lmean = 587 mm


ZBevHolt = 0.18

ZBevHolt = 0.59

587mm when F=M


M = 0.115 yr-1

Lc = 514.5 mm (Ault =300 mm)


• When F = M Lmean = 587 mm


?




Fmsy/F.


Age

Freq

uenc

y

F = 0.2

F = 0.4

More Fishing Less Older/Larger Fish

Constant Recruitment



Management Advice:

Notes: Catch should not be increased if

overfishing may be taking place.


effort), but not




scalers




If trend in F is increasing, catch level should be reduced from

recent levels. If not, catch level

should not exceed recent catch.


scalers


scalers


scalers


Fmsy/F.


precautionary


precautionary


precautionary

Catch would need to be set lower

than in Scenario 1 because of single point estimate and possible time lag

due to non-equilibrium status.

Catch level should not exceed recent catch. If F/Fmsy >1 then reduce catch based on


precautionary


scalers



Management Advice:

Notes:


scalers


Fmsy/F.


precautionary



Management Advice:

Notes:


effort), but not




scalers







collecting needed data. Catch and/or effort is limited to what is required to collect sufficient

data.

Participation in the fishery is

dependent on following all data

collection protocols.


scalers


precautionary

No there are anomalies

identified

The result is the same as Scenario 4. If it's possible to

correct for the anomaly, it

becomes the same as Scenario 1.

Fishery determined to be underutilized




collecting needed data. Catch and/or effort is limited to control the rate of

development of the fishery to avoid

overshooting OFL.

Summary ACLG Scenario Recommendations

PR STT STX

QC ACL EEZ =0

closely monitor

ACL=50,000 lb

ACL EEZ=0

(ACL=EEZ+State=50,000 lb; 200 qc/boat

5-month closed

Nassau ABC=0

monitor aggregations

ABC=0 ABC=0

NOTE: Commercial Sector

Summary ACLG Scenario Recommendations

PR STT STX

Parrotfish 3 (99-06 avg.) (80,000)

4 (94-06 avg.) (ABC=50,000)

4 (94-06 avg.) (max. 270,000)

GU4 7 7

SU1 1 (99-06 avg.)

(284,400)

7 7

NOTE: Commercial Sector


Thank you!

Meeting summary for: CFMC ACLG Group

March, 2009

summary of caribbean data evaluation sedar january, 2009 3/24/09 todd gedamke (sefsc)

Documents

data accuracy

sales recordsself

reliability recommendations

sales recordfor

monitoring recommendations

trips multiple trips

fisheryindependent datasedars

shore mode trips