STFA Yellowtail SnapperTag-Recapture Project

and

Consequences of ACLs in St. Thomas/St. John

Trap Vent Program Update• 335 Trips• 3,344 Trap Hauls• 13,841 Fish Caught• Currently Testing– 1.25 by 5.75 Vents– 1.375 by 5.75 Vents – Location on trap– Vent Height

Vent Effects on CPUE

Angelfish Combined

Surgeonfish Combined

Triggerfish Combined

Parrotfish Combined

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Control

Vents

% Reduction

Species Group

Catc

h/Tr

ap H

aul

% R

educ

tion

Population Size, Growth, Mortality and Movement Patterns of Yellowtail Snapper

(Ocyurus chrysurus) in the U.S. Virgin Islands Determined Through a Multi-institutional

Collaboration.

CRP Funded Project NMF4540114Funding :

Federal=$132,850STFA in-kind=11,200

Co Pi: David Olsen, STFA

Adriaan Jordan, SUNY

# STT/STJ Yellowtail Fishing Trips

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Line Fishing TripsSeine Fishing Trips

Line

Fis

hing

Trip

s

Sein

e Fi

shin

g Tr

ips

Yellowtail lbs/Trip

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Seine Fishing Trips

Line Fishing Trips

Yellowtail Snapper Annual STT/STJ Landings# lbs

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000Trap Fishing lbs.Seine Fishing Lbs.Line Fishing Lbs

Annual Yellowtail Landings # Fish

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000Trap Fishing # Fish

Seine Fishing # Fish

Line Fishing # Fish

Average Monthly Handline & SeineTrips (1997-2008 Average)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec70

75

80

85

90

95

100

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Line TripsSeine Trips

# H

andl

ine

Trip

s

# Se

ine

Trip

s

Yellowtail per Trap /Haul

1 3 5 7 9 110.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

f(x) = 0.000012513884 x⁴ − 0.0005968224 x³ + 0.0084656791 x² − 0.04300364805 x + 0.0962463633R² = 0.480002269040821

Average

Polynomial (Average)

Trap Hauls

Month

Fish

/Tra

p Ha

ul

Yellowtail Catch in STFA Studies

Fishing Method Count Average FL Average

Wt (lbs)

Traps 224 305.3 mm 0.97

Hand Line 1855 327.3 mm 1.19

Seine Net 182 347.9 mm 1.42

Length at First Reproduction (FISHBASE) 188 mm Male, 224 mm Female

CFMC Size Limit 304.8 TL, 244.7 FL

Length at First Capture (FL in mm)

Traps 228 mm

Hand Line 208 mm

Nets 198 mm

Length at Full Recruitment

Traps 270 mm

Hand Line 290 mm

Seine Nets 260 mm

Length at 50% Recruitment (to be calculated)

Hand line Size Frequency

200230

260290

320350

380410

440470

500530

560590

620650

680-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Fork Length (mm)

% o

f Tot

al

Fish Trap Size Frequency

200230

260290

320350

380410

440470

500530

560590

620650

6800%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%%

of T

otal

Seine Net Size Frequency

200230

260290

320350

380410

440470

500530

560590

620650

680

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%%

of T

otal

Fork Length (mm)

Pit Tags

Scanner for Port Sampling

Study StatusTagging Trips # Fish Total Lbs

Hand line 8 576 730Traps 10 118 144Total 17 682 864

Port Sampling 58 5006 6823

Weight Calculations

200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 6000

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

f(x) = 4.07311784274785E-05 x^2.83389025365432R² = 0.92811483610145

Length (mm)

Wt (

gms)

Port Sample Locations

Next Steps• Tag retention/mortality study: 40-50 fish in

tanks at UVI . Starts in December/January.• Resume Tagging in March/April (or whenever

we get a break in the weather).• Continue Port Sampling.• Data from DFW.• Additional Funding for Tagging Trips?

Implications of ACLs • St. Thomas/St. John landings have been stable

since around 1980.• Variations due to exogenous rather than fishing

effort factors (Caribbean fish kill, urchin die off, hurricanes, etc).

• Effort in equilibrium with resource.• ACLs create artificial (and unnecessary)

requirement for reduction and administratively create “overfishing”.

• Inconsistent with MSA National Standards.

St. Thomas/St. John Combined Average Finfish Landings

19781980

19821984

19861988

19901992

19941996

19982000

20022004

20062008

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

OFLSTT/STJ Landings

Lbs.

St. Thomas/St. John Combined Finfish Landings (3 yr average)with 2000-2008 OFL

19761978

19801982

19841986

19881990

19921994

19961998

20002002

20042006

2008

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

OFL3 Year AverageLb

s.

St. Thomas/St. John Combined Finfish Landings (3 yr average) with 2000-2008 ACL

19761978

19801982

19841986

19881990

19921994

19961998

20002002

20042006

2008

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

3 Yr Average LandingsACL

Lbs.

National Standard Inconsistency• National Standard 1 requires that Conservation and management

measures shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery.

CFMC ACLs are creating artificial limitations for St. Thomas fishermen which are not required as the fishery has been stable throughout the past four decades while documented overfishing in Puerto Rico is being ignored.

• National Standard 2 requires that Conservation and management

measures shall be based upon the best scientific information available.

Port sampling data is the best data regarding the species and families and has been ignored. Niemeth research ignored, impacts of 2005 actions ignored.

• National Standard 4 requires that “Conservation and management measures

shall not discriminate between residents of different States.”Analysis of the impacts of the ACLs shows that the impacts fall entirely upon Virgin Islands fishermen despite the fact that overfishing in Puerto Rico has been well documented in numerous scientific studies showing overfishing in Puerto Rico.

• National Standard 6 requires that Conservation and management measures

shall take into account and allow for variations among, and contingencies in, fisheries, fishery resources, and catches. Variability within the St. Thomas/St. John fishery is low and almost entirely due to exogenous factors. These cannot be regulated as an element of the fishery but should be considered in establishing a management regime for the District. This has been ignored in setting the ACLs for St. Thomas.

• National Standard 8 Conservation and management measures shall, consistent with the conservation requirements of this Act (including the

prevention of overfishing and rebuilding of overfished stocks), take into account the importance of fishery resources to fishing communities by utilizing economic and social data that meet the requirements of in order to (A) provide for the sustained participation of such communities, and (B) to the extent practicable, minimize adverse economic impacts on such communities.

At its 136th meeting the Caribbean Fishery Management Council voted unanimously to designate the Virgin Islands and certain Puerto Rican fishing villages as “Fishing Communities” under the terms of the MSRA.

Thus, passage of recent ACLs in 2010 and 2011 should have been accompanied by in-depth analysis of the impacts of those actions upon the Virgin Islands fishing communities.

•What can be done within the constraints of the MSA?–Not much, but the Council can at least

acknowledge the problem.– The SSC has not proved to be helpful nor

has it seriously examined actual data. This should change.–Consider seriously the problems with the

national standard inconsistencies.