15.12.2012 Views

modifications to the harbor porpoise take reduction plan - Northeast ...

modifications to the harbor porpoise take reduction plan - Northeast ...

modifications to the harbor porpoise take reduction plan - Northeast ...

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.

LIST OF TABLES<br />

Table 1-1: U.S. Fishery-Related Mortality Estimates for <strong>the</strong> GOM/BOF S<strong>to</strong>ck of Harbor Porpoises ........2<br />

Table 3-1: Protected Species Found in New England and Mid-Atlantic Waters .......................................52<br />

Table 3-2: Estimated Marine Mammal Mortalities in Nor<strong>the</strong>ast Sink Gillnet Fishery ..............................53<br />

Table 3-3: Estimated Marine Mammal Mortalities in Mid-Atlantic Gillnet Fishery .................................53<br />

Table 3-4: U.S. Fishery-Related Mortality Estimates for <strong>the</strong> GOM/BOF S<strong>to</strong>ck of Harbor Porpoises ......61<br />

Table 3-5: Estimates of abundance and <strong>the</strong> associated CV, minimum estimate, and PBR for <strong>the</strong> coastal<br />

and offshore bottlenose dolphin management units ...........................................................................63<br />

Table 3-6: Observed Sea Turtle Bycatch 1995 – 2006 in Mid-Atlantic Gillnet Fishery (all mesh sizes)<br />

from January – April ..........................................................................................................................70<br />

Table 3-7: Number of vessels using sink or anchored gillnet gear <strong>to</strong> land seafood in a given port group..<br />

............................................................................................................................................................76<br />

Table 3-8: Percentage of Nor<strong>the</strong>ast fisheries vessels, live weight landings and value accounted for by<br />

gillnet vessels, by port group, average for 2002-2006 .......................................................................77<br />

Table 3-9: Number of gillnet vessels by principle port, based on port with highest portion of annual<br />

revenues..............................................................................................................................................78<br />

Table 3-10: Total live weight landings (m<strong>to</strong>ns) by port group for gillnet vessels .....................................78<br />

Table 3-11: Total revenues (in thousands of constant 2002 dollars) by port group for gillnet gear ..........79<br />

Table 3-12: Average price per metric <strong>to</strong>n (in constant 2002 dollars) by port group, for landings by gillnet<br />

gear.....................................................................................................................................................79<br />

Table 3-13: Average (2002-2006) distribution of monetary value within a port group by species ...........80<br />

Table 3-14: Average (2002-2006) distribution of live weight landings within a port group by species....81<br />

Table 4-1: A summary of average bycatch estimates, by season and fishery (Nor<strong>the</strong>ast and Mid-Atlantic<br />

gillnets), under <strong>the</strong> actual conditions data were collected during 2005 and 2006 and under <strong>the</strong><br />

average situations for each alternative as reported in Palka and Orphanides (2008b).. .....................83<br />

Table 4-2: Maximum number of nets fished and <strong>to</strong>tal pinger cost by vessel type and fishing location. ...98<br />

Table 4-3: Total number of potentially affected gillnets vessels by port group and size class, and<br />

percentage included in CAM model.................................................................................................100<br />

Table 4-4: Average revenues per vessel for status quo (2006) and percent change in revenues by<br />

alternative compared <strong>to</strong> Alternative 1 by port and vessel size .........................................................104<br />

Table 4-5: Percent change in profits for affected vessels by port, vessel length and alternative .............105<br />

Table 4-6: The percent of a port’s landings caught in <strong>the</strong> Gulf of Maine (GOM), Georges Bank (GB),<br />

sou<strong>the</strong>rn New England Management Area (SNE), south of sou<strong>the</strong>rn New England (SSNE), Waters<br />

Off New Jersey (WONJ), and <strong>the</strong> Mid-Atlantic (MA) under Alternative 1 (No Action). ...............106<br />

iv

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!