Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T15:20:33.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Productivity and susceptibility analysis for species caught in Atlantic tuna fisheries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2011

Haritz Arrizabalaga ,
Paul de Bruyn ,
Guillermo A. Diaz ,
Hilario Murua ,
Pierre Chavance ,
Alicia Delgado de Molina ,
Daniel Gaertner ,
Javier Ariz ,
Jon Ruiz  and
Laurence T. Kell
Haritz Arrizabalaga*
Affiliation:
AZTI Tecnalia, Herrera Kaia Portualdea z/g, 20110 Pasaia, Spain
Paul de Bruyn
Affiliation:
AZTI Tecnalia, Herrera Kaia Portualdea z/g, 20110 Pasaia, Spain
Guillermo A. Diaz
Affiliation:
NOAA/NMFS 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910 US
Hilario Murua
Affiliation:
AZTI Tecnalia, Herrera Kaia Portualdea z/g, 20110 Pasaia, Spain
Pierre Chavance
Affiliation:
IRD Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171, 34203 Sète Cedex, France
Alicia Delgado de Molina
Affiliation:
IEO C.O. de Canarias, Apartado 1373, 38080 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Islas Canarias, Spain
Daniel Gaertner
Affiliation:
IRD Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171, 34203 Sète Cedex, France
Javier Ariz
Affiliation:
IEO C.O. de Canarias, Apartado 1373, 38080 Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Islas Canarias, Spain
Jon Ruiz
Affiliation:
AZTI Tecnalia, Txatxarramendi Ugartea z/g, 48395 Sukarrieta, Spain
Laurence T. Kell
Affiliation:
ICCAT Corazón de Maria 8, 28002 Madrid, Spain
*
a Corresponding author: harri@azti.es
Get access

Abstract

Ecological risk assessment is a useful methodology for assisting the management of fisheries from an ecosystem perspective. Atlantic tuna fisheries, managed by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), are economically important and interact with several bycatch species. In spite of these interactions, no comprehensive ecological risk assessment has been conducted for bycatch species caught in ICCAT fisheries. In this paper, we followed a two stage approach with the objective of assessing the relative risk of species being negatively impacted by Atlantic tuna fisheries. An analysis of the ICCAT bycatch species list (which includes all species reported to have interacted with different tuna fishing gears operating in the Atlantic) revealed that most of these species are caught in longline fisheries, followed by gillnets and purse seines. According to the IUCN red list, 7 species of the ICCAT bycatch list (3 coastal sharks, 3 sea turtles and one seabird) are categorized as critically endangered. In our study, and based on their life history characteristics, marine mammals and coastal sharks caught in ICCAT fisheries showed the highest intrinsic vulnerability values. A productivity susceptibility analysis for the European Union (EU) tropical tuna purse seine fleet and the United States (US) pelagic longline fleet revealed two groups with high relative risk scores. The first one included pelagic and coastal sharks, characterized by relatively low productivities, and the second one included teleosts, characterized by higher productivities but high susceptibility to purse seine and longline gears. Some alternative approaches to conduct productivity susceptibility analyses in the context of ecological risk assessments are discussed.

Keywords

Ecological risk assessmentProductivitySusceptibilityEcosystem approachBycatchPurse seineLongline fishery
Type
Research Article
Information
Aquatic Living Resources , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
© EDP Sciences, IFREMER, IRD 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amande, J.M., Ariz, J., Chassot, E., Delgado de Molina, A., Gaertner, D., Murua, H., Pianet, R., Ruiz, J., Chavance, P., 2010, Bycatch of the European purse seine tuna fishery in the Atlantic ocean for the 2003-2007 period. Aquat. Living Resour. 23, 353–364. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astles K.L., 2008, A systematic approach to estimating ecological risks in marine fisheries. CABI Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 3, 16.
Astles, K.L., Holloway, M.G., Steffe, A., Green, M., Ganassin, C., Gibbs, P.J., 2006, An ecological method for qualitative risk assessment and its use in the management of fisheries in New South Wales, Australia. Fish. Res. 82, 290–303. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braccini, J.M., Gillanders, B.M., Walker, T.I., 2006, Hierarchical approach to the assessment of fishing effects on non-target Chondrichthyans: case study of Squalus megalops in southeastern Australia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 63, 2456-2466. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, W., Pitcher, T., Pauly, D., 2005, A fuzzy logic expert system to estimate intrinsic extinction vulnerability of marine fishes to fishing. Biol. Conserv. 124, 97–111. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, W.W.L., Watson, R., Morato, T., Pitcher, T.J., Pauly, D., 2007, Intrinsic vulnerability in the global fish catch. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 331, 1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compagno L.J.V., 2001, Sharks of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Volume 2. Bullhead, mackerel and carpet sharks (Heterodontiformes, Lamniformes and Orectolobiformes). FAO Species Catalogue for Fishery Purposes. No. 1, Vol. 2. Rome, FAO.
Cortés, E., Arocha, F., Beerkircher, L., Carvalho, F., Domingo, A., Heupel, M., Holtzhausen, H., Santos, M.N., Ribera, M., Simpfendorfer, C., 2010, Ecological risk assessment of pelagic sharks caught in Atlantic pelagic longline fisheries. Aquat. Living Resour. 23, 25–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz, G.A., Beerkircher, L.R., Restrepo, V.R., 2009, Description of the U.S. Pelagic Observer Program (POP). Collect. Vol. Sci. Pap. ICCAT 64, 2415–2426. Google Scholar
Dulvy, N.K., Ellis, J.R., Goodwin, N.B., Grant, A., Reynolds, J.D., Jennings, S., 2004, Methods of assessing extinction risk in marine fishes. Fish Fish. 5, 255–276. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, W.J., 2005, The application of qualitative risk assessment methodology to prioritize issues for fisheries management. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 62, 1576–1587. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, W.J., Chesson, J., Sainsbury, K.J., Hundloe, T.J., Fisher, M., 2005, A flexible and practical framework for reporting on ecologically sustainable development for wild capture fisheries. Fish. Res. 71, 175–183. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonteneau A., Pallarés, P. 2005, Tuna natural mortality as a function of their age: the bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) case. Collect. Vol. Sci. Pap. ICCAT 57, 127–141.
Francis, R.I.C.C., Shotten, R., 1997, “Risk” in fisheries management: a review. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54, 1699–1715. Google Scholar
Froese R., Pauly D. (Eds.), 2010, FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org
Furness, R.W., Tasker, M.L., 2000, Seabird-fishery interactions: Quantifying the sensitivity of seabirds to reductions in sandeel abundance, and identification of key areas for sensitive seabirds in the North Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 202, 253–264. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsworthy, S.D., Page, B., 2007, A risk-assessment approach to evaluating the significance of seal bycatch in two Australian fisheries. Biol. Conserv. 139, 269–285. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, S.P., C, D.T.B., Heales, D.S., Milton, D.A., Stobutzki, I.C., 2006, Validating ecological risk assessments for fisheries: assessing the impacts of turtle excluder devices on elasmobranch bycatch populations in an Australian trawl fishery. Mar. Freshw. Res. 57, 395–401. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobday A.J., Smith A.D.M., Stobutzki I.C., Bulman C., Daley R., Dambacher J.M., Deng R.A., Dowdney J., Fuller M., Furlani D., Griffiths S.P., Johnson D., Kenyon R., Knuckey I.A., Ling S.D., Pitcher R., Sainsbury K.J., Sporcic M., Smith T., Turnbull C., Walker T.I., Wayte S.E., Webb H., Williams A., Wise B.S., Zhou S., 2011, Ecological Risk Assessment for the effects of fishing. Fish Res., in press.
Hollowed, A.B., Bax, N., Beamish, R., Collie, J., Fogarty, M., Livingston, P., Pope, J.G., Rice, J.C., 2000, Are multispecies models an improvement on single-species models for measuring fishing impacts on marine ecosystems? ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 707–719. Google Scholar
Hope, B.K., 2006, An examination of ecological risk assessment and management practices. Environ. Int. 32, 983–995. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ICCAT, 2008, Report of the 2007 meeting of the Sub-Committee on Ecosystems. Collect. Vol. Sci. Pap. ICCAT 62, 1671–1720.
ICCAT, 2009, Report of the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics. Madrid, October 2009.
ICCAT, 2010, ICCAT Manual. Chapter 2, Description of species. First edition, January 2010.
IUCN 2010, IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. http://www.iucnredlist.org
Jefferson T.A., Leatherwood S., Webber M.A., 1994, FAO species identification guide. Marine mammals of the world. Rome, FAO.
Kirby D.S., 2006, Ecological risk assessment for species caught in WCPO tuna fisheries: inherent risk as determined by productivity-susceptibility analysis WCPFC-SC2-2006/EB WP-1, 24 p.
Márquez M.R., 1990, FAO species catalogue. Vol.11: Sea turtles of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of sea turtle species known to date. FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 125, Vol. 11. Rome, FAO.
Morato, T., Cheung, W.W.L., Pitcher, T.J., 2006, Vulnerability of seamount fish to fishing: fuzzy analysis of life-history attributes. J. Fish Biol. 67, 1–13. Google Scholar
Murawski, S.A., 2000, Definitions of overfishing from an ecosystem perspective. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 649–658. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murua H., Arrizabalaga H., Huang J.J.H.-W., Romanov E., Bach P., Bruyn P. de, Chavance P., Molina A.D.d., Pianed R., Ariz J., Ruiz J., 2009, Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) for species caught in fisheries managed by the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC): a first attempt. IOTC-2009-WP-20.
Palomares M.L.D., Pauly D. (Eds.), 2010, SeaLifeBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. http://www.sealifebase.org
Patrick, W.S., Spencer, P., Link, J., Cope, J., Field, J., Kobayashi, D., Lawson, P., Gedamke, T., Cortés, E., Ormseth, O., Bigelow, K., Overholtz, W., 2010, Using productivity and susceptibility indices to assess the vulnerability of United States fish stocks to overfishing. Fish. Bull. 108, 305–322. Google Scholar
Scandol J.P., Ives M.C., Lockett M., 2009, Development of national guidelines to improve the application of risk-based methods in the scope, implementation and interpretation of stock assessments for data-poor species (Final Draft). FRDC Project No. 2007/016, NSW Department of Primary Industries.
Smith, A.D.M., Fulton, E.J., Hobday, A.J., Smith, D.C., Shoulder, P., 2007, Scientific tools to support the practical implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 64, 633–639. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stelzenmüller, V., Ellisa, J.R., Rogers, S.I., 2010, Towards a spatially explicit risk assessment for marine management: Assessing the vulnerability of fish to aggregate extraction. Biol. Conserv. 143, 230–238. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stobutzki, I.C., Miller, M.J., Brewer, D.T., 2001a, Sustainability of fishery bycatch: a process for assessing highly diverse and numerous bycatch. Environ. Conserv. 28, 167–181. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stobutzki, I.C., Miller, M.J., Heales, D.S., Brewer, D.T., 2001b, Sustainability of Elasmobranchs caught as bycatch in a tropical prawn (shrimp) trawl fishery. Fish. Bull. 100, 800–821. Google Scholar
Zhou, S., Griffiths, S.P., 2008, Sustainability Assessment for Fishing Effects (SAFE): A new quantitative ecological risk assessment method and its application to Elasmobranch bycatch in an Australian trawl fishery. Fish. Res. 91, 56–68. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, S., Griffiths, S.P., Miller, M., 2009, Sustainability assessment for fishing effects (SAFE) on highly diverse and data-limited fish bycatch in a tropical prawn trawl fishery. Mar. Fresh. Res. 60, 563–570. CrossRefGoogle Scholar