12.07.2015 Views

the humboldt current system of northern and central chile - figema

the humboldt current system of northern and central chile - figema

the humboldt current system of northern and central chile - figema

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

MARTIN THIEL ET AL.EN events, <strong>the</strong> recovery <strong>of</strong> local macha beds can be extremely slow, as observed in Peru (Arntzet al. 2006).The ‘loco’ fishery (sold as ‘Chilean abalone’ in international markets)The loco fishery makes use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> muricid gastropod, Concholepas concholepas, described as atop predator in <strong>the</strong> intertidal <strong>system</strong>s (Castilla & Paine 1987), but with its fished populations mainlyoccurring in <strong>the</strong> subtidal zone (Stotz 1997). In such areas <strong>and</strong> given that its main prey items aresuspension feeders (barnacles, tunicates), <strong>the</strong> species appears more as a browser, through its preytaking advantage <strong>of</strong> high PP in <strong>the</strong> water column near upwelling areas (Stotz 1997, Stotz et al.2003). Thus, production <strong>and</strong> consequently fishery l<strong>and</strong>ings vary greatly along <strong>the</strong> coast, with mainl<strong>and</strong>ing sites coinciding with <strong>the</strong> most important upwelling areas (Figure 24) (Stotz 1997). GivenHigh larval retention withnormally intense recruitmentModerate larval retention withtemporally variable recruitmentPoor larval retention with weak<strong>and</strong> sporadic recruitmentUpwellingHarvest (ind)500,000400,000300,000200,000100,0000Harvest AMERBPta. ChorosN° fishermen = 1501999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004ChañaralCalderaLoco productionHuascoHarvest (ind)25,00020,00015,00010,0005,0000Harvest AMERBPto. OscuroN° fishermen = 301999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004Pta.ChorosCoquimbo?AMERBHarvest (ind)100,00080,00060,00040,00020,0000Harvest AMERBÑagueN° fishermen = 481999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004Los Vilos0 200 400600 800Average annual l<strong>and</strong>ings (t yr −1 )Figure 24 Concholepas concholepas: Variability <strong>of</strong> larval retention <strong>and</strong> recruitment along <strong>the</strong> coast <strong>of</strong> RegionsIII <strong>and</strong> IV, production (average <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> period 1985–1995) along <strong>the</strong> coast <strong>of</strong> Region IV <strong>and</strong> harvests <strong>of</strong> threeAMERBs located at coastal areas differing in production (note <strong>the</strong> scale <strong>of</strong> y-axis). (Figure adapted fromJ. González et al. (2004) <strong>and</strong> Stotz (1997)) Harvest data <strong>of</strong> AMERB obtained from SERNAPESCA (www.sernapesca.cl); stars show for Region IV <strong>the</strong> approximate locations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> AMERBs, ‘Area de Manejo yExplotación de Recursos Bentónicos’ (MEABR, Management <strong>and</strong> Exploitation Area for Benthic Resources).282

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!