Shrimp FMP - Division of Marine Fisheries

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Coen, L. E., M.W. Luckenbach, and D.L. Breitburg. 1999. The role of oyster reefs as essentialfish habitat: a review of current knowledge and some new perspectives. p. 438-454 inL.R. Benaka (ed.). Fish habitat: Essential fish habitat and rehabilitation. AmericanFisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, Symposium 22, 459 p.Collie, J. S., S.J. Hall, M.J. Kaiser, and I.R. Poiners. 2000. A quantitative analysis of fishingimpacts on shelf-sea benthos. Journal of Animal Ecology 69: 785-798.Connell, B. and T. Murphey. 2004. A preliminary evaluation on the effects of dock shading ondensity and coverage of shoal grass (Halodule wrightii). DMF, Unpub. rep.Cooper, S. R. and G.S. Brush. 1991. A 2500 year history of anoxia and eutrophication in theChesapeake Bay. Science 254: 992-1001.Currin, C. A., S.Y. Newell, and H.W. Paerl. 1995. The role of standing dead Spartina alternifloraand benthic microalgae in salt marsh food webs: considerations based on multiplestable isotope analysis. Marine Ecology Progress Series 121: 99-116.Dahl, T. E. 1990. Wetlands - losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's. U.S. Fish andWildlife Service, Washington, D.C., Report to Congress, 13p.Dauer, D. M., J.A. Ranasinghe, and S.B. Weisberg. 2000. Relationships between benthiccommunity condition, water quality, sediment quality, nutrient loads, and land usepatterns in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 23(1): 80-96.DeAlteris, J., L. Skrobe, and C. Lipsky. 1999. The significance of seabed disturbance by mobilefishing gear relative to natural processes: A case study in Narragansett Bay, RhodeIsland. American Fisheries Symposium 22: 14.DEHNR (NC Dept. of Environment Health and Natural Resources). 1990. North Carolinacoastal marinas: water quality assessment. DEHNR, Raleigh, NC, 90-01, 69p.Dennison, W. C., R.J. Orth, K.A. Moore, J.C. Stevenson, V. Carter, S. Kollar, P.W. Bergstrom,and R. Batiuk. 1993. Assessing water quality with submerged aquatic vegetation.Bioscience 43: 86-94.DMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 1999. Shrimp and crab trawling in NorthCarolina's estuarine waters. DENR, Morehead City, NC, Report to NC Marine FisheriesCommission , 121p.DMF (North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries). 2001a. North Carolina oyster fisherymanagement plan. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division ofMarine Fisheries, 225 p.Durako, M. J. 1994. Seagrass die-off in Florida Bay (USA): changes in shoot demographiccharacteristics and population dynamics in Thalassia testudinum. Marine EcologyProgress Series 110: 59-66.DWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2000. A citizen's guide to water qualitymanagement in North Carolina. DENR, Div. Water Quality, Planning Branch, Raleigh,NC, 156p.118
DWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2001. Annual report of fish kill events. DENR,Raleigh, NC, 10p.Dyer, K. R. and R.J. Orth. 1994. Changes in fluxes in estuaries: implications from science tomanagement. Olsen and Olsen, Fredenburg, Denmark.Eby and Crowder. 2002. Hypoxia-based habitat compression in the Neuse River Estuary:context-dependent shifts in behavioral avoidance thresholds. Canadian Journal ofFisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59(6): 952-965.Ellifrit, N. J., M.S. Uoshinaka, and D.W. Coon. 1972. Some observations of clam distribution atfour sites on the Hook Canal, Washington. Proceedings of the National ShellfishAssociation 63: 7.Ellis, W. 1995. The intertidal distribution of the daggerblade grass shrimp: effects of vegetationassessed using bottomless liftnet samples. Twenty-third Benthic Ecology Meeting.EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Hydromodification chapter factsheet.http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/MMGI/hydro.html, 12/2001.Epperly, S. P. and S. W. Ross. 1986. Characterization of the North Carolina Pamlico-Albemarleestuarine complex. National Marine Fisheries Service - Southeast Fisheries Center,Beaufort, NC, NMFS-SEFC-175, 55p.Evans, D. W., R.D. Kathman, and W.W. Walker. 2000. Trophic accumulation and depuration ofmercury by blue crabs (Callinectus sapidus) and pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum).Marine Environmental Research 49(5): 419-434.Feierabend, S. J. and J.M. Zelazny. 1987. Status report on our nation's wetlands. NationalWildlife Federation, Washington, D.C., 50p.Ferguson, R. L. and L.L. Wood. 1994. Rooted vascular aquatic beds in the Albemarle-Pamlicoestuarine system. NMFS, NOAA, Beaufort, NC, Project No. 94-02, 103 p.Fonseca, M. S. 1996. The role of seagrasses in nearshore sedimentary processes: a review. p.261-286 in C. Roman and K. Nordstrom (eds). Estuarine Shores: Hydrological,Geomorphological and Ecological Interactions. Blackwell, Boston, MA.Fonseca, M. S., W. J. Kenworthy, and G. W. Thayer. 1998. Guidelines for the conservation andrestoration of seagrasses in the United States and adjacent waters. NOAA CoastalOcean Office, Silver Springs, Md., NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision AnalysisSeries No. 12, 222p.Funderburk, S. L., J.A. Mihursky, S.J. Jordan, and D. Riley. 1991. Habitat requirements forChesapeake Bay living resources. Habitat Objectives Workgroup, Living ResourcesSubcommittee and Chesapeake Research Consortium with assistance from MarylandDepartment of Natural Resources, Solomons, MD.Garbisch, E. W., P.B. Woller, W.J. Bostian, and R.J. McCallum. 1973. Biotic techniques forshore stabilization. p. 405-407 in L.E. Cronin (ed.). Estuarine Research. AcademicPress Inc., New York, NY, II.119
Page 4 and 5:
2. TABLE OF CONTENTS1. ACKNOWLEDGME
Page 6 and 7:
10.2 SUMMARY OF MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
Page 8 and 9:
and ocean waters 24% of the total h
Page 10 and 11:
4. INTRODUCTION4.1 LEGAL AUTHORITY
Page 12 and 13:
ycatch reduction devices, area clos
Page 14 and 15:
4.5 EXISTING PLANS STATUTES, AND RU
Page 16 and 17:
RCGL trawling, 50 crabs, not to exc
Page 18 and 19:
coastal and inland fishing waters.
Page 20 and 21:
Pink shrimp:Pink shrimp are found f
Page 22 and 23:
Brown shrimp marked by McCoy (1968)
Page 24 and 25:
Pamlico County fishermen began land
Page 26 and 27:
6.1.3 State Landings and EffortLand
Page 28 and 29:
Table 6.2.Percent contribution of l
Page 30 and 31:
account for the remaining landings.
Page 32 and 33:
from the fall fishery, where it is
Page 34 and 35:
NorthernPamlicoCentralSouthernFigur
Page 36 and 37:
Figure 6.8. Acreages of North Carol
Page 38 and 39:
$30,000,000$25,000,000Inflated Valu
Page 40 and 41:
Table 7.1.Detail values of pounds l
Page 42 and 43:
from 1994 through 2003, 50% of all
Page 44 and 45:
Table 7.3 (cont.) Pounds and value
Page 46 and 47:
Table 7.4.Number of participants in
Page 48 and 49:
Number of Dealers310290270250230210
Page 50 and 51:
These two numbers estimate that ove
Page 52 and 53:
as opposed to those who made day tr
Page 54 and 55:
Table 8.1. Most frequently cited co
Page 56 and 57:
Figure 8.1. Frequency of conflict e
Page 58 and 59:
Figure 8.3. Frequency of negative e
Page 60 and 61:
Table 8.3.Fishing related issues co
Page 62 and 63:
Table 8.4. Demographic characterist
Page 64 and 65:
8.5 Definitions and AcronymsCommerc
Page 66 and 67:
Table 9.1.Spawning seasons for Pena
Page 68 and 69:
Figure 9.1a.Distribution of riparia
Page 70 and 71:
Figure 9.1c.Distribution of riparia
Page 72 and 73:
uppermost portion of shallow creek
Page 74 and 75: Figure 9.2b.Shrimp nursery areas, i
Page 76 and 77: an area closed to mechanical harves
Page 78 and 79: of nutrients from non-point sources
Page 80 and 81: designated areas. Much of the desig
Page 82 and 83: Figure 9.3b. Areas where mechanical
Page 84 and 85: Shell bottomShell bottom habitat is
Page 86 and 87: asins are excessive sediment loadin
Page 88 and 89: polychaetes and large clams might b
Page 90 and 91: shrimp. The effect of bacteria on m
Page 92 and 93: Habitat Areas” (SHAs). Strategic
Page 94 and 95: funding (state and federal) may be
Page 96 and 97: Action 5:Current Phase II stormwate
Page 98 and 99: Committee. Bycatch characterization
Page 100 and 101: 10.1.7.3 Recommended Management Str
Page 102 and 103: 10.1.10 GEAR SIZE RESTRICTIONS10.1.
Page 104 and 105: frequently shrimped by Recreational
Page 106 and 107: is limited to a few patches in the
Page 108 and 109: small white shrimp recruit to the a
Page 110 and 111: when they reach a marketable size,
Page 112 and 113: who benefit are a few channel net f
Page 114 and 115: a) Implement headrope size limit on
Page 116 and 117: 2. Harvest Season (Month (s), or Mo
Page 118 and 119: 10.1.26.2 Management Options1. Stat
Page 120 and 121: mid July (based on predetermined he
Page 122 and 123: 10.2.5 Biological Research Needs (n
Page 126 and 127: Gilmore, G. and Trent X. 1974. Abun
Page 128 and 129: Maiolo, J.R. 2004. Hard Times and a
Page 130 and 131: Paerl, H. W., J. Pinckney, J. Fear,
Page 132 and 133: Teal, J. 1962. Energy flow in salt
Page 134 and 135: 12. APPENDICES12.1 Appendix 1 SUMMA
Page 136 and 137: ADMINISTRATIVEORGANIZATIONLICENSESR
Page 138 and 139: 12.2 Appendix 2 MANAGEMENT OF TRAWL
Page 140 and 141: substrates, and destabilizing the r
Page 142 and 143: In North Carolina, Corbett et al. (
Page 144 and 145: depth, tides, bottom types, sea gra
Page 146 and 147: V. MANAGEMENT OPTIONS/IMPACTS1. Sta
Page 148 and 149: VIII.LITERATURE CITEDASMFC (Atlanti
Page 150 and 151: 12.3 Appendix 3 SHRIMP TRAWL BYCATC
Page 152 and 153: accounting for 80% of all finfish l
Page 154 and 155: made up 94% of the finfish bycatch
Page 156 and 157: thought that such species-specific
Page 158 and 159: North Carolina are considered healt
Page 160 and 161: gain was demonstrated from raising
Page 162 and 163: threshold estimates. Also, biomass
Page 164 and 165: only recently has the affect of byc
Page 166 and 167: the 8" webbing. This hoop is 30" in
Page 168 and 169: the case in South Carolina, most of
Page 170 and 171: ‚ From December 1 through March 3
Page 172 and 173: VII.Literature Cited:Alverson, D.L.
Page 174 and 175:
Pearce, K.B., D.W. Moye, and S.K. S
Page 176 and 177:
Table 2.Percent Shrimp trawl landin
Page 178 and 179:
Table 5. Yearly finfish landings (l
Page 180 and 181:
Table 6.Total shrimp trawl landings
Page 182 and 183:
Table 8. ContinuedYear %Species 199
Page 184 and 185:
Table 10.Total monthly value of fin
Page 186 and 187:
Table 13.Monthly shrimp trawl crab
Page 188 and 189:
Table 16.Total monthly value of cra
Page 190 and 191:
Table 19.Monthly shrimp trawl Mollu
Page 192 and 193:
Table 22. Total monthly value of Mo
Page 194 and 195:
Table 26. ContinuedArea Rank Specie
Page 196 and 197:
Table 27. ContinuedArea Rank Specie
Page 198 and 199:
Table 29.Finfish catch composition
Page 200 and 201:
Table 32.Results of 1 ½” diamond
Page 202 and 203:
Table 34.Results of experimental to
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Table 38. Results of experimental t
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Top viewTop viewof trawlcenterline1
Page 212 and 213:
Figure 3.Diagram of modified large
Page 214 and 215:
12.4 Appendix 4. SOUTHERN FLOUNDER
Page 216 and 217:
CAA NUMBERS2,000,0001,800,0001,600,
Page 218 and 219:
confirms this analysis. A theoretic
Page 220 and 221:
12.5 Appendix 5. SHRIMP MANAGEMENT
Page 222 and 223:
occurs.Closing an area in mid-seaso
Page 224 and 225:
12.6 Appendix 6. SHRIMP POUND NET S
Page 226 and 227:
lead and pound or heart in use.V. M
Page 228 and 229:
700000600000500000400000Figure 1.Po
Page 230 and 231:
minimum distance requirements is th
Page 232 and 233:
12.8 Appendix 8. THE RECREATIONAL S
Page 234 and 235:
Individuals01 to 1011 to 100101 to
Page 236 and 237:
NorthernPamlicoCentralSouthernFigur
Page 238 and 239:
Central8%Southern3%Northern33%Pamli
Page 240 and 241:
6) Seasonal / Daily - Weekly Restri
Page 242 and 243:
subject on several occasions as it
Page 244 and 245:
western part of the sound. These ar
Page 246 and 247:
Typically, the annual shrimp manage
Page 248 and 249:
a given year made only one or two t
Page 250 and 251:
New River - 2003New River - 2004Inv
Page 252 and 253:
Number of Trips by Participants in
Page 254 and 255:
RecommendationsAC Recommendation: S
Page 256 and 257:
Biomass Percent (lbs) Chadwick Bay
Page 258 and 259:
252
Page 260 and 261:
12.12 Appendix 12. SHRIMP MANAGEMEN
Page 262 and 263:
Pamlico SoundCore SoundNew RiverNew
Page 264 and 265:
Table 1.Catch and effort data on sh
Page 266 and 267:
Biomass Percent (lbs), Stump/Topsai
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
The size (counts) of shrimp landed
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Table 1.Trip ticket data from the o
Page 278 and 279:
Preliminary bycatch results from a
Page 280 and 281:
8Frequency642041-5051-6061-7071-808
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
each year (Figure 6). The majority
Page 286 and 287:
Map 1.IWW from Cape Fear River to H
Page 288 and 289:
Table 1. Catch and Effort data on s
Page 290 and 291:
high tides when beds were more acce
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Management Option/Impacts+ potentia
Page 296 and 297:
- Eliminates potentially lucrative
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Figure 1.Neuse River open.In review
Page 304 and 305:
Figure 3.North side of Neuse River
Page 306 and 307:
Table 3.Finfish catch composition (
Page 308 and 309:
MFC Recommendation: Restrict total
Page 310 and 311:
most abundant species accounting fo
Page 312 and 313:
Table 2. Monthly percent contributi
Page 314 and 315:
Table 5. Percent contribution of da
Page 316 and 317:
Pounds%cumulative pounds14,000100.0
Page 318 and 319:
Map 1. Map of Pamlico and Albemarle
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Table 1.Landings (lbs) of finfish f
Page 326 and 327:
Table 3.Monthly shrimp landings (lb
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Table 7. Percent contribution of va
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
WadesPointMap 3. Map of Pamlico Riv
Page 338 and 339:
enefit the stock. Management of Pun
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Upper PungoCPUE = 14Mid PungoCPUE =
Page 346 and 347:
3. Area Closuresa) Prohibit all shr
Page 348 and 349:
35000003000000250000020000001500000
Page 350 and 351:
5,000,0004,500,0007,035,8694,000,00
Page 352 and 353:
The National Marine Fisheries Servi
Page 354 and 355:
4) Prohibit all trawling+ Possible
Page 356 and 357:
and number. Atlantic croaker, spot,
Page 358 and 359:
Page 360 and 361:
Page 362 and 363:
Page 364 and 365:
Map 3 Shrimp areas closed by procla
Page 366 and 367:
Page 368 and 369:
8,000,000Pamlico Sound Total landin
Page 370 and 371:
Page 372 and 373:
RoanokeSoundMap 1. Map of Pamlico a
Page 374 and 375:
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Table 1.Landings (lbs) of finfish f
Page 380 and 381:
Page 382 and 383:
Map 2. Map of Croatan Sound North C
Page 384 and 385:
Page 386 and 387:
(B)(C)(D)Not more than 100 yards of
Page 388 and 389:
22.8671' N - 75° 33.5851' W in Avo
Page 390:
Amended Eff. March 1, 1994;Recodifi
show all

Shrimp FMP - Division of Marine Fisheries

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?