BYCATCH OF THE ARTISANAL SHRIMP ... - Amazon Web …cmsdevelopment.sustainablefish.org.s3.amazonaws.com/2012/11/28/...BYCATCH OF THE ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHERY IN THE GULF OF CALIFORNIA

BYCATCH OF THE ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHERY IN THE GULF OF

CALIFORNIA (SONORA AND SINALOA) MEXICO

Report prepared by Alejandro Balmori Ramírez (INAPESCA, CRIP-Guaymas) and Rufino Morales Azpeitia (CIBNOR-Unidad Guaymas), in collaboration with Everardo Miranda Mier and Jesús Guadalupe

Padilla Serrato.

Guaymas, Sonora, México. June 2012

Summary

One of the most important fishing resources in Mexico is shrimp, this is due to its high economic and

social value. Nonetheless, many non-target species are captured incidentally during shrimp-fishing

activities, and grouped as faunal companions or shrimp bycatch (SBC). Most of the SBC species have

not been studied and the impact of this fishery upon them is yet unknown. This document presents the

results of a study on the artisanal shrimp fisheries’ bycatch within the bays of Guaymas, Bahía de Lobos,

and El Tóbari, in the State of Sonora; and in Santa Maria La Reforma in the State of Sinaloa, during the

2011–2012 shrimp fishing season. The study collected shrimp and SBC samples, identified the

organisms to the species level, and recorded biological sampling (biometrics). Logbook data and

sampling information was captured in a database. We documented 854 fishing hauls for all of the bays.

SBC analysis shows a total composition of 46 identified species belonging to different taxonomic groups

such as fishes, crustaceans, gastropods, and elasmobranchs, and an additional 10 species identified to

the genus level only. The most diverse group was that of bony fishes and the most dominant species was

the swimming crab (Callinectes spp.). The amount of SBC species varied spatially (lagoon system).

During the shrimping activity, a high percentage (20-30%) of negative fishing hauls (i.e., without any SBC

captures) was recorded, indicating that the artisanal shrimp fishery does not generate any bycatch in a

third of all fishing hauls. The SBC shrimp ratio average for all bays was 1:0.5, and ranged from 1:0.28 to

1:10.5 — a lower proportion than the reported ratios of 1:8 (Amezcua et al. 2006) and 1:22 (Suenaga

2010). SBC species are mostly discarded (75%), with only some species being retained (25%), and these

are used for their commercial value and for family consumption (e.g., sand bass (Paralabrax

maculatofasciatus), sierra (Scomberomorus sierra), seabass (Cynoscion spp.), mojarras (Eucinostomus

spp.), and swimming crabs (Callinectes spp.)). Regarding species under special protection, only one

individual of Mycteroperca jordani was captured, a species classified as endangered according to the

IUCN, although its frequency of occurrence is 0.003 per thousand fishing hauls. We concluded that the

impacts of the artisanal shrimp fishery upon the SBC are low, due to the low amount of bycatch that is

generated, the low ratio of the capture to SBC species, and the lack of presence of threatened or

endangered species in the SBC. Finally, it is recommended to continue studying the SBC during other

fishing seasons and to analyze the population dynamics of the dominant species to determine the health

status of these populations, since they may be indicative of impacts.

INTRODUCTION

In Mexico, fishing is important because of its annual production volume of about 1.5 million metric tons

and the number of people who depend on it directly or indirectly (SAGARPA 2007). However, when any

resource is fished, the capture includes non-target species, commonly known as faunal bycatch (FBC).

The shrimp bycatch (SBC) represents the species of flora and fauna that are not a target of this fishery,

and is known throughout the world as "bycatch" or as "non-target" species (FAO 1997).

Global estimates of SBC range from 5 to 16 million metric tons, with shrimp fisheries generating the

highest incidental catch volumes, with a ratio of shrimp to SBC of about 1:5 in temperate or subtropical

waters and of 1:10 in tropical areas (FAO 1999). It is estimated that annually between 3 and 7.5 million

metric tons of SBC are discarded in the world (Allsop 1977, Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003, and

Kelleher 2005). In particular, the offshore shrimp trawling fishery, with larger vessels, contributes to the

bycatch problem due to the fishing system used: the trawl net. Although bycatch is also captured by

smaller boats (pangas) using other fishing gear such as cast nets, trawl nets (“change” nets), suripera

nets, and gillnets (Amezcua et al. 2006; SEMARNAP, INAPESCA 2000).

Fishing activities are particularly striking in a marine environment, directly affecting almost all habitats

except for the deep sea, where no fishing takes place. Even with the more restrictive management

practices enforced today, fisheries can have deep impacts on the marine environment, ranging from

overexploitation of species due to extraction, to incidental capture problems, habitat alteration, genetic

changes in populations, and affecting the structure of food webs (Anonymous, 2000).

The problem of bycatch has gained importance in recent decades, and viable solutions have been

sought, ever since the FAO Technical Conference on Fishery Products was held in Tokyo in 1973, and

later the conference of the International Research Center for Development in held Bangkok in 1974

(Pérez-Mellado et al. 1982). Since then and until the present, there have been a series of international

workshops in search for solutions.

Shrimp is one of the most important resources due to its high economic value, generating trade income

for the country and supplying a source of employment. Some estimate it creates 37,000 jobs (SAGARPA,

2006). However, shrimp fishing is strongly criticized for its high SBC capture rates. In the Gulf of

California, the SBC captured by fishing vessels comprises approximately 242 benthic-demersal fish

species, as well as crustaceans, mollusks, and echinoderms, with fish being the dominant group (Nava-

Romo 1994, López-Martínez et al. 2010, Madrid-Vera et al. 2010). Only a few of the SBC species have

been studied (López-Martínez et al. 2007, Rábago Quiroz et al. 2008, González-Ochoa et al. 2009,

Arzola-Sotelo 2010, Morales-Azpeitia et al. 2011).

Fishing vessels contribute between 60 and 70% of the total shrimp production, operating with two trawl

nets with an average length of 95 feet (Heredia-Quevedo 2001). These nets are distinguishable by their

lack of selectivity, since they capture large volumes of fish, crustaceans, and mollusks (López-Martínez et

al. 2000, 2007, Alverson et al. 1996; Pérez-Mellado 1998).

The artisanal Sonoran vessels that fish for shrimp in the riverside zone mainly employ entanglement nets,

also known as “chinchorro de línea”; in the State of Sinaloa, fishermen employ a fishing gear known as

the “suripera”, whish is a modified cast net. Many SBC species are captured during these fishing

activities, but before this report, they had not been studied (Amezcua et al. 2006, Suenaga 2010). This

study will determine the specific composition of organisms caught in the artisanal shrimp fishery within the

main shrimping bays in the Gulf of California, particularly in the States of Sonora and Sinaloa.

Importance of the shrimp resource

Mexico has large areas of coastline, bays, and estuarine systems, all with great diversity of species.

Among the most important groups found in the region are crustaceans, the group to which penaeid

shrimps belong to (Leal-Gaxiola 1999). The shrimp fishery is one of the most important in the country,

generating a large number of jobs. It is also one of the products that finds a high price in the international

markets, generating high foreign exchange earnings for the country (Avila-Pardo 2001).

Currently, Mexico is among the world’s top ten shrimp producers (Gillett 2010). The Mexican shrimp

production yield in the year 2000 was of around 70,144 metric tons (MT), with 52% corresponding to the

Pacific coast’s production, and the states of Sonora and Sinaloa its main producers (Herrera-Valdivia

2002). Usually, only two species of shrimp are exploited, the blue shrimp (Litopenaeus stylirostris) and

the brown shrimp (Farfentepenaeus californiensis) (López-Martínez 2000).

The development of an artisanal fishery encourages the employment of large numbers of fishermen, who

are organized into cooperatives, creating opportunities for economic development in their coastal

communities; additionally, they produce food for human consumption, both locally and regionally.

Currently, however, the economic return from this fishery is considered at the point of a full collapse

(Cruz-Romero et al. 1996), due to lower catches and lower prices (Padilla-Serrato 2005).

Background

The shrimp resource is exploited by two fishing fleets, the first is composed of larger offshore vessels

(ship) and the second, known as the bay or artisanal fleet, consists of smaller panga-type boats. The

bays in the states of Sonora and Sinaloa maintain constant contact with the sea, and due to their higher

evaporation rates they have higher salinity conditions than the surrounding marine area. The dominant

species of shrimp in Sonora is the blue shrimp, Litopenaeus stylirostris (Hernandez-Carballo and Macías

1996), with 90% of the catches, and therefore the coastal fisheries in the state are of great importance

due to the higher market value of this species in the US market. This fishery is carried out during the

species' different life stages and within different bodies of water: one taking place within protected bodies

(bays and estuaries), in which artisanal-type fishing systems are used, and the other using larger offshore

vessels (García-Bourbon et al. 1996).

The shrimp fishery inside protected waters dates back to pre-Hispanic times, and it is the oldest in the

Mexico. The main states where this fishery is done are: Sinaloa, Sonora, Chiapas, Oaxaca, Nayarit, and

Baja California Sur (Hernandez-Carballo and Macías 1996). The fishery inside the lagoon systems of

Sonora is based in the southern part of the state, the most productive bays being: Guásimas, Lobos,

Huatabampo, Yávaros, and Agiabampo. The artisanal shrimping season starts in late August and early

September. This is known as the “bay shrimp fishing period,” and fishing can last between two and three

weeks, until it reaches 70% of its total production, with the most common tail-sizes being small (70–90

mm) and medium (95–105 mm); subsequently, all small vessels move to the shore area (deeper area), in

which larger organisms are captured (Herrera-Valdivia et al. 2002). Currently, this fishery has a

management scheme with an established fishing ban period from the month of April to September, but

the dates may vary according to the processes of mass spawning, growth, and the intensity of adult

recruitment within the fishing areas (Aragon-Noriega 2000).

Artisanal or near-shore fishing is done on “pangas” (small boats about 7 m in length on average, with an

outboard motor), right off the coastline at depths between 2 and 20 m. This is where most of the blue

shrimp (L. stylirostris) is caught, using entanglement nets with mesh sizes ranging from 2 to 2 ½ inches.

Suripera nets are used inside the bays, with mesh sizes between 1 ¼ and 1 ¾ inches, and are operated

with the aid of a sail or motor working against the currents. Entanglement nets are also used, with a mesh

size of 2 and 2 ¼ inches, as well as “atarraya” cast-nets. The efficiency and selectivity of the latter two

fishing gears is very high (Anonymous 1995). This fishery is usually based on the capture of juvenile

shrimp and is of enormous importance to fishermen in the months of August and September (Mendez-

Tenorio 2001).

Blue shrimp biology

These organisms are an important component of tropical marine and estuarine systems, where they are

found inhabiting the shallow areas of estuaries and down to depths ranging to 1000 meters on the

continental shelf (Garcia and Le Reste 1987). Their life cycle depends on estuarine systems for their

development and later they return to the open sea where they spend their adult and reproductive phases

(Fig. 1). This indicates that they are exposed to changing environments that affect their abundance and

the degree of this influence varies according to their development, thus their physiology is modified,

developing a certain faculty for osmoregulation. This is because they migrate to different biotopes

throughout their life cycle that are characterized by their salinity gradient (López-Martínez 2000).

Environmental changes can affect the reproductive dynamics of stocks, inducing changes in their

reproductive period (Leal-Gaxiola et al. 2001). Yields in the fishing season will depend on the

effectiveness of the annual class, and this in turn reflects in recruitment success (Garcia and Le Reste

1981). The postlarval phase is essential for recruitment with larval rearing conditions reflecting upon the

strength of the year’s class and these will in turn reflect upon catch volumes (Aragón-Noriega and Garcia-

Juarez 2002). Migration strategies and the effects of external factors on spawning success will help

project the capture trends in the following fishing season. Factors such as wind, currents, and postlarval

migration have an indirect influence on the success of a given year’s cohort, depending on the trajectories

they take and the habitat in which they are placed. If the larvae are carried off to places with little or

inadequate food sources, then spawning will fail; but under favorable environmental conditions it will

succeed (Sinclair 1988, Bakun 1996). The blue shrimp (L. stylirostris) is a crustacean whose larval stage

depends upon wetlands for breeding, spending up to two months of its life cycle inside them (Fig. 1). At

an individual level these organisms are partial spawners, but at the population level they are massive

spawners (Aragon-Noriega 2000, Lopez-Martinez 2000). This species is found from Punta Abreojos, Baja

California Sur, Mexico, to Tumbes, Peru, and it is not evenly represented along the coastline (Hendrickx

1995).

L. stylirostris has a sex ratio of 1:1 (Rodriguez de la Cruz 1981, Rabago-Quiroz 2000). Its breeding

season displays the same pattern as the spawning duration, but shrimp will mature first in Guaymas

(March), then in Puerto Peñasco (April). In both regions, spawning reaches a maximum in June and July.

The breeding season for blue shrimp in the Mexican Pacific coastline occurs from early March until

September, with a maximum peak in May and June. The length at first maturity has been reported

between 162 and 167 mm, at an age of 10 months (Rabago-Quiroz 2000). In its first larval stage, the

nauplius uses its own yolk reserves. In the laboratory, protozoea are fed with phytoplankton and the

mysis stage larvae are fed with zooplankton and phytoplankton. Juveniles and adults in the wild are

considered omnivorous or bottom feeders.

Figure 1. Life cycle of the Penaeid shrimp: a) eggs; b) nauplius; c) protozoea; d) mysis;

e) postlarva; f) juvenile; g) adult; h) breeder (Modified from Benfiel 1999).

GENERAL OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of the artisanal blue shrimp fishery on incidental catch in the states of Sonora

and Sinaloa.

Specific objectives

• Determine the composition of the incidental catch

• Describe the retained bycatch

• Describe the discarded bycatch

• Describe the globally threatened species found in the incidental catch of this fishery

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Study Area

The area of study comprised the following coastal lagoons: the bays of Guaymas, El Tobari, and Bahía

de Lobos in the State of Sonora; and the bay of Santa Maria La Reforma in the State of Sinaloa. These

bays are the most important in terms of the coastal shrimp fishery. The Gulf of California (GoC), or Sea of

Cortez, is a marginal sea located in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean. It is 1,400 km long, 200 km wide,

and 3,600 meters deep; its waters wash upon the mainland states of Sonora, Sinaloa, and Nayarit, and

also upon the states of Baja California and Baja California Sur on the Baja California Peninsula. The GoC

is a great basin ocean, with oceanographic features that are the product of its submarine physiography

and of the islands that are present in this region. The tides in the GoC are mainly caused by co-oscillation

with the tides of the Pacific Ocean, meaning that sea level variations in the Gulf are mainly due to

changes in sea level at the mouth of the Gulf, and not due to the gravitational pull of the sun and moon on

the Gulf’s waters. Oceanographic conditions are different in the upper and central Gulf of California

regions, because the islands act as ecological and physiographic barriers, leading to large planktonic

blooms that are the basis of the food chain involving large numbers of fish and shellfish, and, therefore,

many fisheries (Marinone and Lavin, 1997).

The GoC is divided into four regions: the Upper Gulf, the Northern region, the Southern region (which

houses the study site), and the Mouth area. The GoC’s varying topography and bathymetry creates

differences in the physical processes that control water circulation and its thermohaline structure

(Thomson et al. 1969, Lavin et al. 1997). The Southern region is the largest area with a relevant

bathymetric feature, the continental shelf on the peninsula’s side is almost nonexistent, but on the

continental side (coasts of Sonora and Sinaloa) it averages 30 km.

Bay of Guaymas-Empalme

The Bay of Guaymas is a coastal body of water separated physiographically from the Gulf of California by

a sandbar, communicating with the adjacent sea by means of a 1.2 km-wide mouth; its area measures

33.6 km2 and its average depth is 3 meters. It also has varied habitats, such as shallow waters, sandy

and rocky beaches, islands, coastal dunes, mangrove vegetation, and algae beds. It is also site of

breeding and rearing of shrimps, crabs, and various fish species, such as mullets, bass, and flounders. It

is also a feeding and resting place for waterfowl. The El Rancho estuary, the Empalme lagoon, and the

Bay of Guaymas, are one integrated lagoon system, which herein will be generically called the Bay of

Guaymas. It is located in the central portion of the eastern coast of the Gulf of California at 27o 55' N and

110o 53' W (Fig. 2).

Figure 2. Bays of Guaymas-Empalme and Guásimas, Sonora.

Bahía de Lobos

The Bahía de Lobos bay is located at the middle portion of the eastern coast of the Gulf of California, in

the southern part of the state of Sonora. It is located between 27° 18' and 27° 26' N and 110° 27' and

110° 36' W. The water surface area of this lagoon is about 11,800 ha. Isla Lobos, a sand bar that gives

this lagoon its shape, has a length of 17.5 km and an area of 1,950 ha. It has two permanent mouths:

Boca de las Piedras, known as the Northern mouth (Boca Norte), with a width of 2.4 km; and the

Southern Mouth (Boca Sur), which is 0.8 km wide. In the inner portion of the bay there are several deep

channels, large shallow areas, and mudflats, with plenty of marshes and intertidal channels (Arreola-

Lizarraga 1995).

Figure 3. Bahía de Lobos, Sonora

El Tóbari Bay

This coastal lagoon is located between 26° 54' and 27° 10' N and 109° 50' and 110° 24' W. The island of

Tóbari almost completely encloses this water body, communicating with the Burabampo estuary on its

southeast portion. The system comprises several water bodies, including the Ensenada of La Batea (7.7

ha), the Chilico estuary (1.1 ha), Giamora (65.9 ha), La Liebre (23.4 ha), La Pitahaya (50.7 ha), Tóbari

(6421.1 ha), the Ensenada El Gallo (29.9 ha), Punta Verde estuary (14.6 ha), El Conchalito (55.1 ha), El

Tobarito (1038.1 ha), La Peninsula (111.8 ha), La Pitahaya (93.5 ha), Cubula (118.6 ha), Cumora (13.6

ha), El Diablo (38.2 ha) and El Siari (190.7 ha). Its grand total measures 8,273 ha.

Figure 4. El Tóbari Bay, Sonora.

Santa María La Reforma Bay

This is a coastal lagoon, located in the central part of the state of Sinaloa, in the eastern Gulf of

California, located between 24° 50' and 25° 10' N and 107° 55' and 108° 20' W. It is separated from the

Gulf of California by a sandbar that extends from the beach called Isla Altamura, which results in two

mouths connecting with the sea at its ends, the first measuring 3.5 km wide and the second 3 km wide. It

displays a semidiurnal tidal regime with an annual range of 1.10 m.

Figure 5. Santa María La Reforma Bay, Sinaloa.

MATERIALS

Scales with an accuracy of 1 gr were used, as well as 1 mm precision rulers (ichtyometers), plastic bags,

ice coolers, labels, sampling formats, markers, and a freezer.

Information was obtained from various sources:

1. Exhaustive search of published literature on the relationship between SBC and shrimp in different

zones: global, the Pacific Ocean, and the Gulf of California.

2. Contents of the daily fishing logbooks, recorded by on-board observers, within the various bays of

Guaymas-Empalme, El Tobari, and Bahía de Lobos in Sonora; and in the Bay of Santa Maria La Reforma

in Sinaloa, during the Mexican Pacific shrimp fishing season from September to December of 2011.

The fishing gear used in the bays of Sonora were entanglement nets (known as “chinchorro de línea”)

with a length of 266 m and with an average height of 75 to 50 mesh-squares. From 2 to 3 of these

entanglement nets are used per boat, using different mesh sizes (2", 2 ¼", 2 3/8" and 2 ½"). In the state of

Sinaloa, two suripera-type nets were used per vessel, each with a length of 14 m of headline and in mesh

sizes between 1 ¼ " and 1 ¾".

Shrimp and SBC were sampled. 5 kg shrimp (with head) samples were collected, and all of the SBC

obtained per fishing cast; the name of the capture zone, date, depth, the amount of shrimp caught, and

amount of SBC were all recorded. The SBC samples were separated by species and biometry was

performed on each organism (Nikolsky, 1963). The taxonomic identification of the species was performed

using the keys and descriptions of Jordan and Evermann (1896-1900), Meek and Hildebrand (1923-

1928), Miller and Lea (1976), Eschmeyer et al. (1983), Fischer et al. (1995), Michael (1993), Schneider

(1995), Báerez (1996), De la Cruz-Aguero et al. (1997), and Allen and Robertson (2002).

RESULTS

During this study the chinchorro de linea fishing gear was used in the bays of Sonora, and in Sinaloa the

gear in use was the suripera net (Santa Maria La Reforma). From 20 to 30% of all fishing hauls had null

SBC incidence, which means that only the target species (blue shrimp) was captured, clearly indicating

that both types of gear do not capture any SBC in at least a third of their fishing hauls. Regarding the

suripera net, SBC catches remain constantly below 2 kg per day; however the chinchorro line captures up

to 100 kg of SBC in one day.

• Composition of the incidental catch within all the bays

Fifty-eight species of SBC were identified under this study, belonging to various taxonomic groups, such

as fish, elasmobranchs, crustaceans, and mollusks (gastropods), with the dominant group being fish

(Table I).

Table I. SBC species found in the artisanal shrimp fishery of the States of Sonora &

Sinaloa. ED= discarded species, ER= retained species (co: commercial) and EP= protection

status.

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME # of

Orgs

Total

Weight

(Kg)

USE

Brown crab Callinectes bellicosus 3602 2763.96 ER

Pacific anchoveta Cetengraulis mysticetus 2381 1192.18 ED

Sea catfish Arius spp. 388 421.18 ED

Blue crab Callinectes arcuatus 33 394.93 ER

Bass Paralabrax maculatofasciatus 34 230.08 ER

Dark spot mojarra Eucinostomus entomelas 61 92.37 ER

Grunt Haemulopsis elongatus 231 41.75 ED

Snail Phyllonotus erythrostomus 53 30.48 ED

Rooster fish Nematistius pectorales 170 27.69 ED

Green jack Caranx caballus 104 25.25 ED

Seabass Cynoscion xanthulus 262 23.12 ED

Pacific sierra Scomberomorus sierra 76 22.03 ER

Dow’s mojarra Eucinostomus dowii 51 19.02 ER

Panama kingcroaker Menticirrhus panamensis 143 17.30 ED

Shorthead lizardfish Synodus scituliceps 36 14.72 ED

Yellowfin jack Hemocaranx leucurus 49 12.89 ED

Pacific flagfin mojarra Eucinostomus currani 162 11.23 ER

Bullet tuna Auxis spp. 45 10.54 ED

Pacific ladyfish Elops affinis 62 9.73 ED

Herring Ophistonema spp. 40 8.79 ED

Black axillary mojarra Eugerres axilaris 93 7.33 ER

Chano croaker Micropogonias megalops 23 7.29 ED

Longspine grunt Pomadasys macracanthus 103 6.46 ED

Pacific bumper Chloroscombrus orqueta 56 4.32 ED

Silver seabass Isopisthus remifer 47 3.56 ER

Mullet Mugil cephalus 50 2.62 ER

Peruvian moonfish Selene peruviana 56 2.35 ED

Table I. SBC species found in the artisanal shrimp fishery of the States of Sonora &

Sinaloa. ED= discarded species, ER= retained species (co: commercial) and EP= protection

status. Continued


Orgs

Total

Weight

(Kg)

USE

Flounder Etropus spp. 65 2.19 ED

Haller’s round ray Urolophus halleri 30 1.78 ED

Kelp bass Paralabrax clathratus 9 1.74 ED

Silver seabass Cynoscion parvipinis 8 1.60 ED

Shovelnose guitarfish Rhinobatos productus 9 1.32 ED

Shortjaw

leatherjacket Oligoplites refulgens 99 0.56 ED

Anchovy Anchovia macrolepidota 10 0.55 ED

Flounder Paralichthys spp. 22 0.41 ED

Salema butterfish Peprilus snyderi 5 0.34 ED

Ronco croaker Bairdiella icistia 18 0.34 ED

Eastern Pacific bonefish

Albula esuncula 3 0.26 ED

Gulf grouper Mycteroperca jordani 1 0.21 EP, ER

Longjaw leatherjacket Oligoplites altus 6 0.20 ED

Triggerfish Balistes polylepis 35 0.19 ED

Inshore sand perch Diplectrum pacificum 38 0.17 ED

Peruvian mojarra Diapterus peruvianus 1 0.05 ED

Pufferfish Sphoeroides annulatus 35 ED

Shorthead lizardfish Synodus scituliceps 36 14.60 ED

Bichi unidentified species 19 ED

Ratón unidentified species 5 ED

Snail Melongena patula 3 ER

Snapper Lutjanus spp. 7 ER

Shining grunt Haemulopsis nitidus 54 ED

Dow’s mojarra Eucinostomus dowii ED

Pacific spadefish Chaetodipterus zonatus 3 ED

• Retained bycatch

Retained SBC basically consisted of 13 known species consumed regionally and nationally, including: the

sand bass (Paralabrax maculatofasciatus), sierra (Scomberomorus sierra), seabass (Cynoscion spp.),

mojarra (Eucinostomus spp.), and the swimming crabs (Callinectes bellicosus and C. arcuatus). These

species represent 25% of all SBC species. However, in terms of volume they are not abundant, except for

the swimming crabs, the sierras, and the mojarras (Table II). These species were retained mainly

because of their good acceptance as food and for family consumption rather than for their size, since they

were not large. Only rarely do the fishermen sell the SBC, and then, mainly crabs and sierras (Table II).

• Discarded bycatch

During the study it was seen that most SBC species were discarded (75%), because they have no

commercial value. This SBC is composed mainly of small-bodied, spiny, thin, and not very pleasantly

flavored organisms (Table II).

• Globally threatened species found in the SBC

During this study a single specimen of a fish commonly known as the gulf grouper (Mycteroperca jordani)

was captured, this species is found in the red list (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/14049/0) under the

status of endangered species, mainly due to its slow growth, its age at first reproduction, and its incidental

capture in the trawling fisheries (Table II).

• Description of retained, discarded, and threatened species per bay

Bay of Guaymas-Empalme

Table II and Figure 6 show that the dominant species in the Bay of Guaymas is the swimming crab

(Callinectes spp.), with 38%, followed by the Pacific anchovy. There were twelve retained species, and all

other organisms were discarded. Only one of the species is endangered. It is worth mentioning that only

one specimen was captured throughout the study, and it was only within this bay.

Table II. SBC species in the Bahia de Guaymas, common & scientific names. # of orgs=

number of organisms, %= percentage, ed= discarded species, er= retained species (co:

commercial) and ep= protection status.

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME # of Orgs

% ED ER EP

Blue crab Callinectes bellicosus 2183 37.77 Co No

Pacific anchoveta Cetengraulis mysticetus 1868 32.32 No

Sea catfish Arius spp. 320 5.54 No

Grunt Haemulopsis elongatus 216 3.74 No

Rooster fish Nematistius pectoralis 144 2.49 No

Pacific flagfin mojarra

Eucinostomus currani 139 2.41 No

Table II. SBC species in the Bahia de Guaymas, common & scientific names. # of orgs= number of organisms, %= percentage, ed= discarded species, er= retained species (co: commercial) and ep= protection status. Continued


% ED ER EP

Green Jack Caranx caballus 104 1.80 No

Longspine grunt Pomadasys macracanthus 98 1.70 No

Black axillary mojarra

Eugerres axilaris 93 1.61 No

Pacific sierra Scomberomorus sierra 59 1.02 Co No

Pacific bumper Chloroscombus orqueta 48 0.83 No

Yellowfin jack Hemocaranx leucuruz 44 0.76 No

Herring Ophistonema spp. 40 0.69 No

Peruvian moonfish Selene peruvianis 40 0.69 No

Pacific ladyfish Elops affinis 37 0.64 No

Snail Phyllonotus erythortomus 35 0.61 Co No

Swimming crab Callinectes arcuatus 33 0.57 Co No

Shorthead lizardfish Synodus scituliceps 33 0.57 No

Panama kingcroaker

Menticirrhus panamensis 28 0.48 No

Haller’s round ray Urolophus halleri 25 0.43 No

Silver seabass Isopisthus remifer 24 0.42 Co No

Flounder Paralichthys spp. 22 0.38 Co No

Dow’s mojarra Eucinostomus dowii 21 0.36 No

Shortjaw leatherjacket

Oligoplites refulgens 21 0.36 No

Chano croaker Micropogonias megalops 20 0.35 Co No

Flounder Etropus spp. 13 0.22 No

Anchovy Anchovia macrolepidota 10 0.17 No

Kelp bass Paralabrax clathratus 9 0.16 No

Silver-blue seabass Cynoscion parvipinis 8 0.14 Co No

Shovelnose guitarfish

Rhinobathus productus 8 0.14 Co No

Longjaw leatherjacket

Oligoplites altus 6 0.10 No

Inshore sand perch Diplectrum pacificum 6 0.10 No

Salema butterfish Peprilus snyderi 5 0.09 No

Table II. SBC species in the Bahia de Guaymas, common & scientific names. # of orgs= number of organisms, %= percentage, ed= discarded species, er= retained species (co: commercial) and ep= protection status. Continued


% ED ER EP

Mullet Mugil cephalus 3 0.05 Co No

Bullet fish Albula esuncula 3 0.05 No

Triggerfish Balistes polilepys 3 0.05 Co No

Snail Melongena patula 3 0.05 No

Spotted sand bass Paralabrax maculatofasciatus

2 0.03 No

Dark spot Mojarra Eucinostomus entomelas 1 0.02 No

Paloma pompano Trachinotus paitensis 1 0.02 No

Gulf grouper Mycteroperca jordani 1 0.02 Co Si

Yellow-white seabass

Cynoscion xanthulum 1 0.02 Co No

Peruvian mojarra Diapterus peruvianus 1 0.02 No

Figure 6. SBC composition in the Bay of Guaymas, Sonora.

Bahía de Lobos Bay

Table III and Figure 7 show that the dominant species found in Bahía de Lobos Bay is the swimming crab (Callinectes spp.) with 45%. Six species were retained,

C. bellicosus, 49.82

C. mysticetus, 22.87

Arius spp, 8.12

C. arcuatus, 7.67

P.maculatofasciatus, 4.47

E. entomella

, 1.75

Otros, 5.16

Fig. 6. Composiciónde la FAC en la Bahía de Guaymas.

corresponding to 25%; the rest of the species were discarded and none of these is threatened. The green crab (Callinectes bellicosus) is the main species of interest because of its size.

Table III. SBC species in Bahia de Lobos, common & scientific names. # of orgs= number of

organisms, %= percentage, ed= discarded species, er= retained species (co: commercial) and

ep= protection status.

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME # of Orgs % ED ER EP

Swimming crab Callinectes spp. 1000 45.60 Co No


Seabass Cynoscion xanthulum 261 11.90 Co No

Panama Kingcroaker

Menticirrus panamensis 115 5.24 No

Shortjaw leatherjacket

Oligoplites refulgens 78 3.56 No

Bullet tuna Auxis spp. 45 2.05 No

Dark spot mojarra Eucinostomus entomelas 42 1.92 No


Roosterfish Nematistius pectoralis 26 1.19 No

Flounder Etropus spp. 23 1.05 No


Peruvian moonfish Selene peruviana 16 0.73 No


10 0.46 Co No



Pacific bumper Chloroscombus orqueta 8 0.36 No

Ronco croaker Bairdiella icistia 5 0.23 No

Longspine grunt Pomadasys macracanthus 5 0.23 No

Yellowfin jack Hemicaranx leucurus 5 0.23 No

Haller’s round ray Urolophus halleri 5 0.23 No

Pacific spadefish Chaetodipterus zonatus 3 0.14 No

Chano croaker Micropogonias megalops 3 0.14 Co No

Shorthead

lizardfish Synodus scituliceps 3 0.14 No

Shovelnose guitarfish

Rhinobathus productus 1 0.05 Co No

Pufferfish Sphoeroides annulatus 11 0.50 Co No

Figure 7. SBC composition in Bahía de Lobos, Sonora.

Bahia del Tobari

Table IV and Figure 8 show that the dominant species at El Tobari Bay is the swimming crab (Callinectes

spp.) with 72%. Six other species were retained, corresponding to 55%; the rest of the species were

discarded, with none listed as threatened.

Callinectes spp 46%

C. mysticetus 21%

C. xanthulum 12%

M. panamensis 5%

O. refulgens 4%

Auxis spp 2%

Otros 11%

Fig. 7.- Composición de la FAC en Bahía de Lobos, Son.

Table IV. SBC species in the Bahia del Tobari, common & scientific names. # of orgs=

number of organisms, %= percentage, ed= discarded species, er= retained species (co:



% ED ER EP

Swimming crab Callinectes spp. 419 71.99 Co No


Dow’s mojarra Eucinostomus dowii 30 5.15 No


Snail Phyllonotus erythortomus 18 3.09 Co No

Mojarra Eucinostomus entomelas 18 3.09 No


Snapper Lutjanus spp. 6 1.03 Co No

Figure 8. SBC composition in Bahia del Tobari, Sonora.

Callinectes spp 72%

C. mysticetus 10% E. dowii

5%

M. cephalus 5%

P. erythortomus 3%

E. entomella 3%

S. sierra 1%

Lutjanus spp 1%

Otros 5%

Fig. 8. Composición de la FAC en Bahía del Tobari

Santa María La Reforma Bay

Table V and Figure 9 show that the dominant species observed in this bay was the grunt or the triggerfish

with 15.7%. There were 4 retained species, the rest of the species were discarded, and none were listed

as threatened.

Table V. SBC species in the Bahia Santa Maria-La Reforma, common & scientific names. # of

orgs= number of organisms, %= percentage, ed= discarded species, er= retained species (co:



Orgs % ED ER EP

Grunt Haemulopsis nitidus 54 15.74 No


Triggerfish Balistes polylepis 32 9.33 Co No

Inshore sand perch Diplectrum pacificum 32 9.33 No

Flounder Paralichthys spp. 29 8.45 No

Pufferfish Sphoeroides annulatus 24 7.00 Co No

Silver seabass Isopisthus remifer 23 6.71 Co No

Mojarra Eucinostomus currani 23 6.71 No


22 6.41 Co No

Bichi Unidentified species 19 5.54 No


Panama kingcroaker Haemulopsis elongatus 15 4.37 No

Ronco croaker Bairdiella icistia 13 3.79 No

Ratón Unidentified species 5 1.46 No

Snapper Lutjanus spp. 1 0.29 Co No

Figure 9. SBC composition in La Reforma, Sinaloa.

Proportion of incidental catches

For the duration of this study, information was obtained from a total of 854 fishing hauls working within the

study site. On average there were 210 fishing hauls per bay, with a null-SBC amount of hauls of 20-30%

(average of bays), in which the only species captured was shrimp.

The analysis of the ratio of average shrimp to SBC in all the bays was of 1:0.4, although this ratio varied

between bays. Ratios per bay are shown in tale See Table VI.

Table VI. Shrimp to SBC proportion by bay, during the 2011 shrimping season.

Locality Proportion (Shrimp:SBC)

Bay of Guaymas 1 : 0.50

Bahía de Lobos Bay 1 : 0.28

El Tobari Bay 1 : 0.49

La Reforma Bay 1 : 0.50

H. nitidus, 15.74

Arius spp, 9.91

B. polylepis,

9.33

D. pacificum, 9.33

Paralichthys spp, 8.45

S. annulatus, 7.00

I. remifer, 6.71 E. currani, 6.71 P.

maculatofasciatus, 6.41

bichi, 5.54

Otros, 14.87

Fig. 9.- Composición de la FAC en La Reforma, Sin.

DISCUSSION

The artisanal shrimp fisheries’ bycatch in Mexico has been little studied, with the exception of Amezcua et

al. (2006) and Suenaga (2010) who conducted studies on the effects of artisanal fishing, and their results

are an important reference for this study, given the scarcity of available literature. Nonetheless, there are

several studies about the offshore shrimp trawling fishery, which is conducted by larger vessels, and

several studies report that the proportion of shrimp to SBC averages 1:10 kg (Alverson et al. 1996, García

and Gómez 2000, Lopez-Martinez et al. 2005, Morales-Azpeitia 2011). Therefore, the shrimp trawling

fishery is regarded worldwide as one of the highest SBC capture fisheries (Kelleher 2005, Gillett 2010).

The SBC generated by these fishing vessels, by zones, is highly variable (Arvizu and Chavez 1972,

Chapa 1976, Pérez-Mellado 1980, Yañez-Arancibia 1984, Villaseñor-Talavera 1997), even between

seasons within the same area (Pérez-Mellado 1980, Grande-Vidal and Diaz-Lopez 1981, Villaseñor-

Talavera 1997, Pérez-Mellado 1998, Lopez-Martinez et al. 2007).

While it is true that in terms of engineering the several types of fishing gear used throughout the world all

have the ability to capture incidental fauna, which is allowed up to a certain percentage, it is highly

relevant that this study found a high percentage of null-SBC fishing hauls (20-30%) in the bays of Sonora,

when the chinchorrode linea was being used. This means that at least one third of the hauls performed

using this shrimp fishing gear did not capture any SBC, and in terms of the negative impacts upon the

communities of marine and coastal lagoon ecosystems, these are nonexistent. Another benefic factor for

the marine ecosystem, in terms of the extraction of natural resources, is that this activity does not take

place throughout the year, occurring during only four months (September to December). However, SBC

was captured during the artisanal shrimp fishing operations in all of the bays and months of duration of

this present study, and these ranged in average between 1:0.2 to 1:1 (shrimp:SBC). This figure is eight

times lower than the proportion of SBC generated using shrimp trawling boats (García-Caudillo and

Gómez-Palafox 2005, Morales-Azpeitia 2011).

The proportion of shrimp SBC in this study was lower than that reported by other authors for this same

fishery. Amezcua et al. (2006) found a ratio of 1:15 in the La Reforma lagoon system and Suenaga

(2010) reported a ratio of 1:22 for the Bay of Guaymas. The high proportion of shrimp SBC reported by

Amezcua et al. may be due to the fact that sampling was conducted between December 2001 and May

2002, a period in which shrimp abundances are either too low or next to zero. In the case of Suenaga’s

study, even when the work was done throughout the 2003-2004 shrimp fishing season, shrimp catches

had a very low yield, since these were obtained from just a single fishing vessel. It is worth mentioning

that for the duration of the commercial shrimp fishery the best fishing zones are always actively sought,

and fishing areas known to yield SBC are avoided (for example, in order to avoid the capture of the sea

catfish/chihuil (Arius spp.)) and a fishermen’s experience plays a very important role in this.

With respect to the composition of the SBC, within all bays 46 species were identified during the present

study, but only 10 were identified at the genus level (such as Paralichthys, Lutjanus, and Etropus), but

these do not represent a volume any greater than 1% of the total catch. The number of species found in

this study were higher than those reported by Suenaga (2010), who reported 44 species just in Guaymas.

The difference may be due to the higher number of bays studied.

The most diverse group was fish, but the dominant SBC species, in terms of volume, was the swimming

crab (Callinectes spp.).

As to the SBC species retained by bay, on average this represents 25% of the total of species. These

species are mainly intended for family consumption, except when volumes are higher (over 20 kg) and

only if there is a buyer present then it is marketed; the swimming crabs, the Pacific sierra, and the corvina

are the main species in this category. Of all SBC species, 75% are discarded (Table II).

In Sonora, particularly, the fishing effort has increased by 83% in just a decade (1980–1990), yet shrimp

catches are decreasing. The most outstanding point about this situation is the decrease of the fishing

season itself — ever since 1981–1986 the shrimping season lasted until February, according Padilla-

Serrato (2005), and during this study, the season was reduced to end in December, which, according to

Hernandez-Carballo and Macias (1996), has been the norm since the 1991–1992 season.

The coastal shrimp fishery has had an increase in its fishing efforts and these may cause socio-economic

deficiencies. These are due to the variation in shrimp pricing during the fishing season or can be

explained by an increase in the yield of larger-sized organisms, which command higher prices on the

international markets (Cruz-Romero et al. 1996).

The shrimp resource has been strongly and consistently exploited, both in the artisanal zone and at high

sea, thus it is said to be on the verge of a collapse (Wadsworth 1976). It is said that this problem is due to

the elaboration of sophisticated models and to a prolonged capture of time classes, resulting in

overexploitation. Two of the biggest problems in the collapse of this fishery may be due to the effect of

unaccounted externalities; one of these is the stock’s externality, which may cause capture declines,

which can be accounted for by the entry of new vessels to the fishery that have casued a reduction of the

resource to existing fishermen and thus increase the fishing costs. This is commonly observed not only in

the Guaymas area, but also in other areas and is due to incorrect fisheries management and to a lack of

supervision that allows the introduction of hundreds of boats that only capture this resource during the

first fishing days of the season. Another possible factor could be the increase and agglomeration of boats

within a fishing area, which results in a reduction of the fishing area under which the fishing effort is not

successfully applied (Seijo et al. 1997, Flores Olivares 2003).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

• The impacts of the artisanal blue shrimp fishery are low, both in terms of catch volumes of SBC and the

number of species caught, and can be summarized under four main factors:

1. A third of the fishing hauls made in the bays and coasts were null (SBC was not captured), which

reduces the impact of fishing on the ecosystem.

2. The average proportion shrimp to SBC in this study was 1:0.5.

3. The fishing season is only four months long (September to December).

4. SBC volumes captured using the suripera net are less than 2 kg per fishing day.

• The SBC’s retained species per bay is on average a 25% of the total of species caught. These species

are used mostly for home consumption and some are marketed, such as the crab, sierra, and corvina.

• Most of the SBC species are discarded (75%).

• Of the total number of captured species, only a single specimen of one species (Mycteroperca jordani),

considered as under special protection, was found within the bay of Guaymas-Empalme.

• This study should be continued for several fishing seasons, in order to strengthen the results and

analyze the population dynamics of the dominant SBC species, thus helping to determine the health

status of these populations which may be indicative of impacts.

• Fishing gear verification is recommended, mainly on the gillnets as their design and construction

characteristics are beyond those established under the Mexican Official Standards Policy (NOM). The

use of authorized fishing gear guarantees a lower impact on bycatch.

• It is recommended to perform studies on both intraspecific and multispecies selectivity, in order to

increase the fishing efficiency of this type of gear.

List of participants

Jesús Guadalupe Padilla Serrato, M.Sc. (Bahía Guaymas-Empalme)

Everardo Miranda Mier, Fisheries Technician (Bahía Guaymas-Empalme)

Alejandro Valdez Pelayo, M.Sc. (Bahía de Lobos)

Marina Estefanía García González, B.Sc. (Bahía de Lobos)

José Francisco Cueto Moreno, B.Sc. (Bahía el Tobarí)

Tomás Sánchez y Ramón (Bahía Santa María La Reforma)

Also, we wish to thank the fishermen who supported the study and provided information about their daily

fishing activities.

REFERENCES

Allsopp, H. 1985. La fauna acompañante del camarón. Perspectivas y Manejo, p. 635-

644. In A. Yañez-Arancibia (ed.). Recursos Pesqueros Potenciales de México:

La Pesca Acompañante del Camarón. UNAM. México, D.F.

Álvarez Sánchez, L.G., M.R. Stevanson, and B. Wyatt. 1978. Circulación y masas de

agua en la región de la boca del Golfo de California en la primavera de 1970,

Ciencias Marinas, 5, 57-69.

Alverson, D.L., M.H. Freeberg, J.G. Pope, and S.A. Marawski. 1994. A global

assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper.

No. 339. Rome, FAO. 1994. 233 pp.

Alverson, D.L. 1997. Global assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards: a summary

overview. In Global trends: fisheries management (E. K. Pikitch, D. D. Huppert,

and M. P. Sissenwine, eds.), 115–125 p. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp., Vol. 20.

Amezcua F., J. Madrid-Vera, and H. Aguirre-Villaseñor. 2006. Efecto de la pesca

artesanal del camarón sobre la ictiofauna en el sistema lagunar de Santa Maria

La Reforma, suroeste del Golfo de California. Rev. Ciencias Marinas. U.A.B.C.

Vol. 32, No.01B. 97-109pp.

Anonymous, 2006. Anuario Estadístico de Pesca 2005. Secretaria de Agricultura,

Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación. México D.F.

Anonymous, 2000b. Estudio de crecimiento de camarón azul Litopenaeus stylirostris en

las bahías de Guásimas y Lobos, en el litoral de Sonora. SINADES. 23 pp.

Anonymous, 2003. Comportamiento del mercado del camarón. Ocean Garden

Products, Inc. Boletín. Enero-Marzo del 2003. Núm. 105. 12 pp.

Aragón-Noriega, E.A., C. Cervantes-Valle, A.R. García-Juárez, and L.E. Calderón-

Aguilera. 1997. Distribución y abundancia de la población desovante de

camarones del norte del Golfo de California durante el verano de 1996. Ciencia y

Mar. 37-48 pp.

Aragón-Noriega, E.A. 2000. Ecología del reclutamiento del camarón azul Litopenaeus

stylirostris (Stimpson, 1871) en el Alto Golfo de California. Tesis Doctorado en

Ciencias. CICESE. Div. de Oceanología. Depto. de Ecología. Ensenada B.C. 117

pp.

Aragón-Noriega, E.A., and L.E. Calderón-Aguilera. 2001. Age and growth of shrimp

(Decapoda: Penaeidae) postlarvae in the upper Gulf of California. Aqua-Journal

of Ichthyology and Aquatic Biology. Vol. 4(3). 99-104 pp.

Aragón-Noriega, E.A., and A.R. García-Juárez. 2002. Reclutamiento de postlarvas de

camarón azul Litopenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson, 1871) a condiciones

antiestuarinas provocadas por actividades antropogénicas. Hidrobiológica 12(1):

37-46 pp.

Arreola-Lizarraga, J.A. 1995. Diagnosis Ecológica de Bahía de Lobos, Sonora, México.

Tesis Maestria. CICIMAR-IPN. La Paz, B.C.S. México. 120p.

Arzola-Sotelo, E.A. 2010. Aspectos poblacionales del camarón mantis

(STOMATOPODA: Squilla) componentes de la fauna de acompañamiento del

camarón en el Golfo de California. Tesis de licenciatura. UNISON. México. 101

pp.

Ávila-Pardo, O. 2001. Estimación mensual de el coeficiente de capturabilidad del

camarón café (Farfantepenaeus californiensis) y su relación con variables

ambientales. Tesis Profesional. ITMAR 03, Guaymas Sonora. 61 pp.

Babel, J.S. 1967. Reproduction, life history and ecology of the round stingray

Urolophus halleri Cooper. Fish. Bull. Calif. Dep. Fish Game 137:104 p.

Bakun, A. 1996. Patterns in the ocean: Ocean processes and Marine Population

Dynamics. California Sea Grant College System, NOAA CIBNOR. La Paz,

México. 323 p.

Béarez, P. 1996. Lista de los peces marinos del Ecuador continental. Rev. Biol. Trop.

44(2):731-741

Beman, J.M., and F. Christopher A. 2006. Diversity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Archaea and

Bacteria in the Sediments of a Hypernutrified Subtropical Estuary: estero de

Tóbari, Mexico. Applied & Environmental Microbiology. 72 (12): 11.

Bray, N.A. 1988. Thermohaline circulation in the Gulf of California. Journal of

Geophysical Research, 93: 4993-5020.

Castro-Aguirre, J., L.M. Pichardo, and B. Kwiecinsky. 1984. Efecto del nivel de esfuerzo

y algunos parámetros ambientales sobre la captura de camarón blanco

(Penaeus occidentalis Storer) en el Golfo de Panamá. Centroamérica. An. Esc.

Nc. Cienc. Biol., México, 28: 149-166.

Chapa, S.H. 1976. La fauna acompañante del camarón como índice de monopesca.

Memorias del Simposium sobre biología y dinámica poblacional del camarón,

Guaymas, Sonora. Agosto de 1976. INP, México, D.F. 173-185 pp.

Chávez, H., and J. Arvizu. 1972. Estudio de los recursos pesqueros demersales del

Golfo de California, 1968-1969. III. Fauna de acompañamiento del camarón

(peces finos y “basura”). En: Carranza, J. (ed.). Memorias del IV Congreso

Nacional de Oceanografía. México, D.F. noviembre 1969. 361-378 pp.

Chirichigno, N.F. 1974. Clave para identificar los peces marinos del Perú. Inf. Inst. Mar

Perú (44):387 p.

Cruz-Romero, M., E. Espino-Barr, and A. García-Boa. 1996. Potencial de la pesca

ribereña del estado de Colima, México, en 1989. INP. SEMARNAP. Ciencia

Pesquera No 12. 30-34.

De la Cruz-Agüero, J., M. Arellano Martínez, V.M. Cota Gómez, and G. de la Cruz-

Agüero. 1997. Catalogo de los peces marinos de Baja California Sur. IPN-

CICIMAR, La Paz, México. P. 346.

De la Rosa, M.K. 2005. Fauna de acompañamiento de camarón en Bahía Magdalena,

B.C.S. México. Tesis de Maestría de Instituto Politécnico Nacional CICIMAR.

155 pp.

Earys, S. 2007. Guía para reducir la captura de fauna incidental (bycatch) en las

pesquerías por arrastre de camarón tropical. Organización de las Naciones

Unidas para la agricultura y la Alimentación, FAO Rome, 2007.

Eschmeyer, W.N., E.S. Herald, and H. Hammann. 1983. A field guide to Pacific coast

fishes of North America. Houghton Mifflin Comp. Boston U.S.A. 336 p.

FAO, 1997. Informe del taller regional sobre la utilización de la fauna de

acompañamiento del camarón (SBC). Centro de Investigaciones Pesqueras de

Cuba, Camagüey, Cuba. FAO 1997.

FAO, 2009. Estado mundial de la pesca y acuacultura 2008. (SOFIA). Organización de

las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación. Rome 2008.

Fischer W., F. Krupp, W. Schneider, C. Sommer, K.E. Carpenter, and V.H. Niem, 1995.

En: Guía FAO para la identificación de especies para los fines de pesca.

Pacífico Centro-Oriental, Vol. II-III: 648-1652. FAO, Rome.

Flores-Olivares, J., 2003. Modificaciones a las artes de pesca en busca de selectividad

con un enfoque ecosistémico. In: Selectividad de sistemas de pesca de arrastre

para camarón. Implicaciones para el ordenamiento pesquero. 1-27 p.

CONAPESCA-SAGARPA-INAPESCA.

Flores, C.C. 1986. Distribución, abundancia y madurez gonadal de camarones

Penaeus, en la costa de Sinaloa, durante primavera y verano de

1985.Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa. 14-21 pp.

Froese, R., and D. Pauly, 2009. Fishbase. World Wide Web Electronic publication [on

line] <www.fishbase.org>.

García, S., and L. Le Reste. 1987. Life cycles, dynamics, explotation and management

of coastal penaeid shrimp stocks. FAO Fish Tech. Pap. 203:215 pp.

García-Borbón, J.A., E.F. Balart, J. De Jesús Gallo, and P.A. Loreto-Campos. 1996.

Pesquería de camarón. 187-205 pp. In: Casas-Valdez M. and G. Ponce (Eds.).

Estudio del potencial pesquero y acuícola de Baja California Sur. Vol. 1.

Secretaria del Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca. Gobierno del

Estado de Baja California Sur. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la

Agricultura y la Alimentación. Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur.

Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste. Centro Interdisciplinario de

Ciencias Marinas. Centro Regional de Investigación Pesquera La Paz. Centro de

Estudios Tecnológicos del Mar. 350 pp.

García-Caudillo, J.M., A. Balmori-Ramírez, and M.A. Cisneros-Mata, 2000.

Performance of a bycatch reduction device in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of

California, México. REV. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 92:199-205 pp.

García-Caudillo, J.M. and J.V. Gómez-Palafox, 2005. La pesca industrial de camarón en

el Golfo de California: Situación económico-financiera e impactos socio-

ambientales. Conservación Internacional México. 104p.

Gillett, R., 2010. Estudio mundial sobre las pesquerías del camarón

FAO Documento Técnico de Pesca. No. 475. Rome, FAO. 2010. 386p.

González-Ochoa, O., J. López-Martínez, and N. Hernández-Saavedra, 2009.

Population characteristics of spotter rose snapper Lutjanus guttatus caught as

shrimp bycatch in the Gulf of California. Rev. INTERCIENCIA. Vol. 34

no.11.808-813.

Grande-Vidal, J.M., and M.L. Díaz-López, 1981. Situación actual y perspectivas de

utilización de la fauna de la fauna de acompañamiento del camarón en México.

Ciencia Pesquera 1(2): 43-56.

Hendrickx, M. 1995. Camarones. 417-537 In: Fisher, W., F. Krupp, W. Schneider, C.

Sommer, K.E. Carpenter and V.H. Niem (Eds). Guía FAO para la identificación

de especies con fines de la pesca. Pacífico centro-oriental. Vol. I. Plantas e

Invertebrados. Rome. 646 pp.

Heredia-Quevedo, J.A., 2001. Shrimp trawl design improvements suggested for

Mexican fisheries. Final project. The United National University (UNU).

Fisheries training programme. P.O. box. 1390, Skulagata 4. 120 Reykjavok,

Iceland. 56 pp.

Hernández-Carballo, A. 1987. Pesquería y ciclo biológico del camarón en el océano

Pacífico mexicano. Edit. SEPESCA (INP). Mazatlán, Sin.

Hernández-Carballo, A., and E. Macías. 1996. La pesquería del camarón en aguas

protegidas. Pacífico de México. 65-93 p. In. Pesquerías Relevantes de México.

XXX aniversario del INP. Tomo I. 555 pp.

Herrera-Valdivia, E. 2002. Impactos del evento El Niño 1997-1998 en la pesquería del

camarón en el litoral sonorense. Periodo 1996-1999. Tesis de Maestría. Instituto

Tecnológico del Mar, Guaymas Son. México. 79 pp.

Herrera-Valdivia, E., R. Morales-Azpeitia, and Alcántara-Razo. 2002. Análisis de los

muestreos biológicos de camarón provenientes de la Bahía, Arribado en

Guaymas Sonora. 2002. Informe Técnico. CIBNOR. Unidad Guaymas. 9 p.

INP. 2003. Catalogo de sistemas de captura de las principales pesquerías comerciales:

Capitulo I. Arrastre. 1-45 pp.

Jordan, D.S., and B. Evermann, 1900. The fishes of North and middle America. Bulletin

of the United States Natural History Museum 47: 1-3313.

Kelleher, K., 2005. Discard in the word’s marine fisheries: An update. FAO Fisheries

Technical Paper 470: 1-131p.

Lavín, M.F., E. Beier, and A. Badan. 1997. Estructura hidrográfica y circulación del

Golfo de California: escalas estacional e interanual. En: M.F. Lavín, editor.

Contribuciones a la oceanografía física en México. Monografía No. 3. Unión

Geofísica Mexicana. 141-171 pp.

Leal-Gaxiola, A. 1999. Análisis de la variabilidad interanual en el patrón reproductivo y

talla de primera madurez sexual del camarón café Farfantepenaeus

californiensis (Holmes 1900) en el litoral sonorense. Tesis de licenciatura. UAS.

76 pp.

Leal-Gaxiola, A., J. López-Martínez, E.A. Chávez, S. Hernández-Vázques, and F.

Méndez-Tenorio. 2001. Interanual variability of the reproductive period of the

brown shrimp, Farfantepenaeus californiensis (Holmes, 1900) (Decapoda,

Natantia). Crustacean 74(9): 839-851.

López-Martínez, J., E. Morales-Bojorques, F. Paredes-Mallón, D. Lluch-Belda, and C.

Cervantes-Valle. 2000. La Pesquería de Altamar en Sonora. En: D. Lluch-Belda,

J. Elorduy-Garay, Lluch-Cota, S.E y G. Ponce-Díaz (eds). Centros de Actividad

Biológica del Pacífico Mexicano. CIBNOR-CICIMAR-CONACYT.

López-Martínez J., C. Rábago-Quiróz, M.O. Nevárez-Martínez, A.R. García-Juárez, G.

Rivera-Parra, and J. Chávez-Villalba, 2005. Growth, reproduction, and size at

first maturity of blue shrimp, Litopenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson, 1874) along the

east coast of the Gulf of California, México. Fisheries Research 71: 93-102.

López-Martínez J., S. Hernández-Vázquez, C. Rábago-Quiroz, E. Herrera-Valdivia, and

R. Morales-Azpeitia. 2007. Efectos ecológicos de la pesca de arrastre de

camarón en el Golfo de California. Estado del arte del desarrollo tecnológico de

las artes de pesca.13-47 pp. In: Santinelli J. (Ed.) La situación del sector

pesquero en México. México, D.F., Impreso en Centro de Estudios para el

Desarrollo Rural Sustentable y la Soberanía Alimentaria-CEDRSSA. Palacio

Legislativo de San Lázaro.

López-Martínez, J., E. Herrera-Valdivia, J. Rodríguez-Romero, and S. Hernández-

Vázquez, 2010. Composición taxonómica de peces integrantes de la fauna de

acompañamiento de la pesca industrial de camarón del Golfo de California,

México. Biol. Trop. Vol. 58 (3): Septiembre 2010.

López-Martínez, J., J. Rodríguez-Romero, N.Y. Hernández-Saavedra, and E. Herrera-

Valdivia, 2011. Population parameters of the Pacific flagfin mojarra

Eucinostomus currani (Perciformes: Gerreidae) captured by the shrimp trawling

fishery in the Gulf of California. Biol. Trop. Junio 2011.

Mann, K.H., and J.R.N. Lazier. 1996. Dynamics of marine ecosystems. Biological-

physical interactions in the oceans. Blackwell Sci. Cambridge, USA. 394 p.

Marinone, S.G., and M.F. Lavín. 1997. Mareas y corrientes residuales en el Golfo de

California. In: M.F. Lavin, editor. Contribuciones a la Oceanografía Física en

México. Monografía No. 3, Unión Geofísica Mexicana, 113-139.

McEachran, J.D. 1995. Urolophidae. Rayas redondas. p. 786-792. In W. Fischer, F.

Krupp, W. Schneider, C. Sommer, K.E. Carpenter and V. Niem (eds.) In: Guía

FAO para la identificación de especies para los fines de pesca. Pacífico Centro-

Oriental. FAO, Rome.

Meek, S.E., and S.F Hildebrand, 1928. The marine fishes of Panama. Publication Field

Museum of Natural History, Zoological Series 15(1-4): 1-1045.

Méndez-Tenorio, F.J. 2001. Análisis biológico pesquero del camarón Litopenaesus

stylirostris y Farfantepenaeus californiensis en la parte central y sur del Golfo de

California durante las temporadas de pesca de 1994/1995 y 1995/1996. Tesis de

Licenciatura. IPN. 82 pp.

Menz, A., and A.B. Bowers. 1980. Bionomics of Penaeus vannamei Bonne and

Penaeus stylirostris Stimpson in a lagoon on the Mexican Pacific Coast.

Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science. 10:685-697.

Michael S.W., 1993. Reef sharks and rays of the world. A guide to their identification,

behavior, and ecology. Sea Challengers, Monterey, Ca. 107 p.

Miller, D.J., and R.N. Lea. 1976. Guide to the coastal marine fishes of California.

California Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin 157: 1-249.

Morales-Azpeitia, R. 2011. Variación Espacial y Temporal de la relación camaron fauna

acompañante y su uso como indicador de la afectación ecológica de la

pesquería de camarón en el Golfo de California.

Morales-Azpeitia, R. 2011. Distribución, abundancia y patrón reproductivo de

Pseudupeneus grandisquamis y Urobatis halleri en el Golfo de California. Rev.

Investigación y Ciencia. U.A.A. Vol. 52. 3-14pp.

Morgan, L.E., and R. Chuenpagdee, 2003. Addressing the Collateral Impacts of Fishing

Methods in U.S. Shifting Gears. Science series International Pan American.

Nava-Romo, J.M., 1995. Impactos a corto, mediano y largo plazo, en la biodiversidad y

otras características ecológicas en la comunidad bentónico-demersal capturada

por la pesquería del camarón en el norte del Alto Golfo de California, México.

Tesis de Maestría. Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de

Monterrey, Campus Guaymas. 84 pp.

Nikolsky, G.V. 1963. The Ecology of Fishes. Academic press. London. U. K. 352 pp

Ontiveros-Granillo, A. 2009. Dinámica Poblacional de Urobatis halleri (Cooper, 1863) y

Urobatis maculatus (Garman, 1913) en una laguna costera del Golfo de

California. Tesis de Licenciatura. Centro de Estudios Superiores del Estado de

Sonora, Hermosillo, Son. México. 50 pp.

Padilla-Serrato, J.G. 2005. Estudio de la pesquería de camarón azul (L. stylirostris) en

la Bahía de Guaymas, Son. Tesis de licenciatura. U.A.B.C. 62 pp.

Park, T. 1934. Studies in population physiology: Effect of conditioned flour upon the

productivity and population decline of tribolium confusum. Journal of

experimental Zoology 68:167-182.

Pérez-Mellado, J. 1980. Análisis de la fauna de acompañamiento del camarón

capturado en las costas de Sonora y Sinaloa, México. Tesis de maestría.

I.T.E.S.M. Escuela de Ciencias Marinas, Guaymas, Sonora 98 pp.

Pérez-Mellado, J., J.M. Romero, R.H. Young, and L.T. Findley. 1982. Yields and

composition of by-catch from the Gulf of California. 55-57 pp. In:

FAO/CIID/IDRC (eds.) Fish by-catch–Bonus from the sea. Report of Technical

Consultation on shrimp by-catch utilization. Georgetown, Guyana, 27-30

October 1981. Ottawa, Ont., CIID, 1982. 163 p.

Pérez-Mellado, J. 1998. Problemática de la fauna de acompañamiento del camarón

capturado en el Golfo de California. México. Informe Instituto tecnológico del

Mar Guaymas, Sonora. 98 pp.

Pérez-Farfante, I., and B. Kensley. 1997. Penaeoid and sergestoid shrimp and praws of

the world (keys and diagnoses for the families and genera). In: Memories Du

Museum National D´Histoire Naturalle. Tome 175. París, France. 233 pp.

Rábago-Quiroz, C. 2000. Crecimiento, patrón de reclutamiento y talla de primera

madurez sexual del camarón azul (Litopenaeus stylirostris Stimpson, 1871) en

el litoral sonorense. Tesis Licenciatura. Instituto tecnológico de Los Mochis. 66

pp.

Rábago-Quiroz, C.H., J. López-Martínez, E. Herrera-Valdivia, M.O. Nevárez-Martínez,

and J. Rodríguez-Romero, 2008. Population dynamics and spatial distribution of

flatfish species in shrimp trawl bycatch in the Gulf of California. Hidrobiológica

18(2):193-202. Méx.

Rábago-Quiroz, C.H., J. López-Martínez, E. Valdez-Holgin, and M.O. Nevárez-

Martínez, 2011. Distribución latitudinal y batimétrica de las especies más

abundantes y frecuentes en la fauna acompañante del camarón del Golfo de

California, México. Rev. Biol. Trop. Vol. 59.

Ramírez E., N. Vázquez, R. Márquez, and C. Guerra, 1965. Investigaciones ictiológicas

en las costas de Sinaloa (1). Lista de peces colectados en las capturas

camaroneras. Inst. Nal. de Pesca, México. Publicación 12. 36 pp.

Ramírez-Hernandez, E., and J. Arvizu-Martinez, 1965. Investigaciones Ictiologicas en

las costas de Baja California. I Lista de peces marinos colectados en las costas

de Baja California. Colectados en el periodos 1961-1965. Anales del Instituto

de investigaciones Biológicas y Pesqueras. 1: 293-324.

Robertson, D.R., and G.R. Allen. 2002. Shore fishes of the Tropical Eastern Pacific: an

information system. CD-ROM. Smith-sonian Tropical Research Institute,

Balboa, Panama.

Roden, G.I. 1964. Oceanographic aspects of the Gulf of California. In: Marine Geology

of the Gulf of California. (T.H. Van Andel y G.G. Shore, Jr. Eds.). Amer. Ass.

Petrl. Geol. Memoir (3):30-58.

Roden, G.I., and Emilsson. 1979. Physical Oceanography of the Gulf California, en

Simposium El Golfo de California, manuscrito no publicado, Universidad

Autónoma de México. México City, 1-46.

Roden and Groves. 1959. Recent oceanographic investigation in the Gulf California,

Journal of Marine Research, 18, 10-35.

Rodríguez de la Cruz, M.C. 1981. Aspectos pesqueros del camarón de altamar en el

pacifico mexicano. Rev. Ciencia Pesquera. 1(2): 1-19.

Rodríguez de la Cruz, M.C., and E. Chávez Ortiz. 1994. La pesquería de camarón en

altamar. Pacífico de México. Documento editado como conmemoración del

XXX aniversario del INP. Secretaria de Pesca. Pp. 11-37.

Rosales-Juárez, F. 1976. Contribución al conocimiento de la fauna de acompañamiento

del camarón en altamar frente a las costas de Sinaloa, México. In. Inst. Nal. de

la Pesca. Memorias sobre los recursos de la pesca costera en México,

Veracruz, Méx. 25-80.

SAGARPA, 2006. Anuario Estadístico de Pesca 2005. Secretaria de Agricultura,

Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación.

SAGARPA, 2007. Anuario Estadístico de Pesca 2006. Secretaria de Agricultura,

Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación.

Schneider, M. 1995. Mullidae. Salmonetes. p. 1299-1300. In W. Fischer, F. Krupp, W.

Schneider, C. Sommer, K.E. Carpenter and V. Niem (eds.) Guía FAO para

Identificación de Especies para lo Fines de la Pesca. Pacifico Centro-Oriental. 3

Vols. FAO, Rome.

Seijo, J., O. Defeo, and S. Salas. 1997. Bioeconomía Pesquera: Toería, modelación y

manejo. FAO. Rome. 176 pp.

SEMARNAP. 2000. Sustentabilidad y pesca responsable en México. Evaluación y

manejo. Instituto Nacional de la Pesca. 691 pp.

SEMARNAP. 2000. Catálogo de los Sistemas de Captura de las Principales Pesquerías

Comerciales. INAPESCA

Shepherd, J.G. 1987. A Weekly parametric method for estimating growth parameters

from length composition data, p. 113-119. In: Pauly, D. y R. Morgan (eds)

Length-based methods in fisheries research. ICLARM Conf. Proc. 13, 468 pp.

Sinclair, M. 1988. Marine populations: An essay on Population Regulation and

Speciation. University of Washington Press. Seattle, 252 pp.

Suenaga-Jara, V.A. 2010. Selectividad de las redes de enmalle para la pesca de

camarón en la bahía de Guaymas, Sonora, México. Tesis de maestría. Instituto

Tecnológico de Guaymas. 55 pp. Guaymas, Son. Dec 2010.

Sverdrup, H.U. 1941. The Gulf de California: Peliminary discution of the cruise of the “E.

W. Scripps in Febrary and March, 1939. Proc. 6th Pacific Science Congr., 3,

161-166.

Thompson, R.W. 1969. Tidal currents and general circulation. In; Enviromental impact

of brine effluents on Gulf of California. U.S. Report Ins. And Dev. Prog. Rep.

num. 387.

Thomson, D.A., L.T. Findley, and A.N. Kerstitch. 2000. Reef fishes of the Sea of Cortez.

The rocky-shore fishes of the Gulf of California. University of Texas, Texas,

USA. 353 pp.

Tjeerd, H.V.A. 1963. Algunos aspectos de la sedimentación reciente en el Golfo de

California. Bio. Soc. Geol. Mexicana. XXVI, n, 2, p. 85-94.

Torres-Orozco, E. 1993. Análisis volumétrico de las masas de agua del Golfo de

California. Tesis de maestría, CICESE, Ensenada, Baja California, 80 pp.

Wadsworth, P.T. 1976. La Necesidad de limitación de esfuerzo en la pesca de camarón

en México. Memorias del simposio sobre biología y dinámica poblacional de

camarones. Instituto Nacional de la Pesca. S.I.C. Guaymas, Sonora. Del 8 al 13

de Agosto de 1976.

Documents

BYCATCH OF THE ARTISANAL SHRIMP ... - Amazon Web …cmsdevelopment.sustainablefish.org.s3.amazonaws.com/2012/11/28/...BYCATCH OF THE ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHERY IN THE GULF OF CALIFORNIA