About this document
This is a prototype of an automatic report that documents how the user specified the operating model and their various justifications.
Introduction
Describe the history and current status of the fishery, including fleets, sectors, vessel types and practices/gear by vessel type, landing ports, economics/markets, whether targeted/bycatch, other stocks caught in the fishery. Hogfish are found in tropical, subtropical and temperate reefs in the western Atlantic and Caribbean Sea. Handline and spears are the primary gears used to catch hogfish. Hogfish are often targeted along with other species, most of which are abundant in the Southeast Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, but some are less abundant and experiencing overfishing in Puerto Rico (The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016). Hogfish landings were reported from more commercial diving trips than any other finfish in Puerto Rico. Diving has been the most reported fishing gear in the self-reported commercial logbook data in Puerto Rico since 2007. Hogfish occur in the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Western Atlantic from Nova Scotia (Canada) to northern South America (Robins and Ray 1986) (SEDAR 46, 2016). In the U.S. Caribbean, hogfish are part of the “wrasse unit” which also includes puddingwife and Spanishhogfish. However, hogfish account for nearly all of the “wrasse unit” catches (CFMC and NOAA 2011). In PuertoRico, hogfish commercial catches ranged from 50,000 to 130,000 lb from 2000 to 2009 and averaged 80,000 lb(CFMC and NOAA 2011). In recent years hogfish catches have been around 60,000 lbs (CFMC 2016). Hogfish inPuerto Rico are caught predominately by divers using spears (CFMC and NOAA 2014a)(Dolan 2015). Around2,000 lbs of hogfish are also caught in fisheries in the U.S. Virgin Islands (not covered in this assessment)(CFMC 2016). Hogfish are not directly targeted in the U.S. Virgin Islands but are an incidental catch in fisheriesfor other reef fish (CFMC and NOAA 2014a). (The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016.)
Describe the stock’s ecosystem functions, dependencies, and habitat types.
Provide all relevant reference materials, such as assessments, research, and other analysis. Caribbean Data-Limited Species. 2016. SEDAR. Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review. SEDAR 46 stock Assessment Report Addis et al 2018. STOCK ASSESSMENT OF HOGFISH IN THE WEST FLORIDA SHELFSTOCK 1986-2016. Report of the Update Assessment03/2018 Cooper et al 2013. The 2013 Stock Assessment Report for Hogfish in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Fish and Wildlife Research Institute 100 Eighth Ave Southeast St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-5020 The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016. Hogfish. U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Puerto Rico
Fishery Characteristics
Longevity
|
Answered
|
|
Very short-lived (5 < maximum age < 7)
|
|
Short-lived (7 < maximum age < 10)
|
|
Moderate life span (10 < maximum age < 20)
|
|
Moderately long-lived (20 < maximum age < 40)
|
|
Long-lived (40 < maximum age < 80)
|
|
Very long-lived (80 < maximum age < 160)
|
|
Justification
|
|
Consistent with SEDAR 37, the natural mortality rate (M) was assumed time invariant but decreasing with age based on Lorenzen (2005) with a cumulative target of M=0.179-1 across ages was used to scale the age-specific estimates (Table 2.2.1.1). The M vector was computedassuming a maximum age of 25 years (McBride and Murphy 2003), supported by maximum age collected in the life history studies (23 years), and using the von Bertalanffy growth parameters from the life history studies outlined in the benchmark assessment report (SEDAR 37, Ch. 5.5.4).(Addis et al 2018)
|
Stock depletion
|
Answered
|
|
Crashed (D < 0.05)
|
|
Very depleted (0.05 < D < 0.1)
|
|
Depleted (0.1 < D < 0.15)
|
|
Moderately depleted (0.15 < D < 0.3)
|
|
Healthy (0.3 < D < 0.5)
|
|
Underexploited (0.5 < D)
|
|
Justification
|
|
There has been no formal assessment of hogfish in the Caribbean, but a data-limited assessment of Puerto Rico reef fishes suggests hogfish are likely overexploited. However, a recent data limited assessment of Puerto Rico reef fishes suggests that hogfish is likelyoverexploited (Ault and Smith 2015). ( The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016)
|
Resilence
|
Answered
|
|
Not resilient (steepness < 0.3)
|
|
Low resilience (0.3 < steepness < 0.5)
|
|
Moderate resilence (0.5 < steepness < 0.7)
|
|
Resilient (0.7 < steepness < 0.9)
|
|
Very Resilient (0.9 < steepness)
|
|
Justification
|
Effort from the commercial logbooks for the spear fishery has seen a steady increase since 1993 (Table 2.3.3.1 and Figure 2.3.3.1). Total number of days fished in the Florida trip ticket database for the spear fishery was relatively high in 1996-1997 and again in 2009-2010 as well as in 2014 (Table 2.3.3.2 and Figure 2.3.3.2). Reported effort for the hook and line fishery was high in 2001 but has since steadily declined aside from abnormally high effort in 2009. These generally declining trends of the effort time series are also supported by the total number of commercial licenses (SPLs) in Florida where both diving and hook and line fisheries peaked in the mid- 1990s and declined through 2007. Since 2008, however, commercial diving SPLs have increased
steadily (Table 2.3.3.3 and Figure 2.3.3.3) Figure 2.3.3.1. Total effort from the logbook analyses for WFL diver hours (for spear). Note: the WFL hook and line records were too sparse to create a CPUE index and not provided (Addis et al 2018)
|
Historical effort pattern
|
Answered
|
|
Stable
|
|
Two-phase
|
|
Boom-bust
|
|
Gradual increases
|
|
Stable, recent increases
|
|
Stable, recent declines
|
|
Justification
|
|
Figure 2.4.1 Nominal CPUE and diagnostics for the standardized index for hogfish from the diving fishery in Puerto Rico. a) Nominal CPUE, standardized index, and the 95% confidence intervals (SEDAR 46, 2016)
|
Inter-annual variability in historical effort
|
Answered
|
|
Not variable (less than 20% inter-annual change (IAC))
|
|
Variable (maximum IAC between 20% to 50%)
|
|
Highly variable (maximum IAC between 50% and 100%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
Figure 2.4.1 Nominal CPUE and diagnostics for the standardized index for hogfish from the diving fishery in Puerto Rico. a) Nominal CPUE, standardized index, and the 95% confidence intervals SEDAR 46, 2016)
|
Historical fishing efficiency changes
|
Answered
|
|
Declining by 2-3% pa (halves every 25-35 years)
|
|
Declining by 1-2% pa (halves every 35-70 years)
|
|
Stable -1% to 1% pa (may halve/double every 70 years)
|
|
Increasing by 1-2% pa (doubles every 35-70 years)
|
|
Increasing by 2-3% pa (doubles every 25-35 years)
|
|
Justification
|
|
no info was provided
|
Future fishing efficiency changes
|
Answered
|
|
Declining by 2-3% pa (halves every 25-35 years)
|
|
Declining by 1-2% pa (halves every 35-70 years)
|
|
Stable -1% to 1% pa (may halve/double every 70 years)
|
|
Increasing by 1-2% pa (doubles every 35-70 years)
|
|
Increasing by 2-3% pa (doubles every 25-35 years)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No info mas provided
|
Length at maturity
|
Answered
|
|
Very small (0.4 < LM < 0.5)
|
|
Small (0.5 < LM < 0.6)
|
|
Moderate (0.6 < LM < 0.7)
|
|
Moderate to large (0.7 < LM < 0.8)
|
|
Large (0.8 < LM < 0.9)
|
|
Justification
|
Life history studies have estimated female size and age at 50% maturity to occur between 151.6 – 192.7 mm FL and 0.9 – 1.6 years (McBride et al., 2008; Collins and McBride 2011). Size and age at female maturation was significantly larger in the FLK region (192.7 mm FL, 1.6 y; McBride et al., 2008) than in WFL (McBride et al., 2008; Collins and McBride 2011). Males may occur as small as 197 mm FL, but size at 50% male maturity has been estimated as 416 mm FL and 7 years for the FLK and 426 and 6.5 years in WFL (McBride et al., 2008). Additionally, subsequent work in WFL demonstrated that Hogfish in this region will transition to male earlier and younger in shallow water (343 mm FL and 4.9 years versus 638 mm FL and 9.8 years within deep water). (see Cooper et al 2013). 15.16/84.89=0.178584 to 19.27/84.89=0.2269996. Females reach sexual maturity at an average age of 1-1.5 years and an average size of 15-19 cm in length (McBride et al. 2008)(Collins and McBride 2011).
|
Selectivity of small fish
|
Answered
|
|
Very small (0.1 < S < 0.2)
|
|
Small (0.2 < S < 0.4)
|
|
Half asymptotic length (0.4 < S < 0.6)
|
|
Large (0.6 < S < 0.8)
|
|
Very large (0.8 < S < 0.9)
|
|
Justification
|
|
Linf (max FL cm) = 84.89. From Figure 2.6.7 Logistic fit to the observed cumulative proportions of hogfish caught by diving gears in Puerto Rico. Source: Trip Interview Program. 36/84.89 = 0.424
|
Selectivity of large fish
|
Answered
|
|
Asymptotic selectivity (SL = 1)
|
|
Declining selectivity with length (0.75 < SL < 1)
|
|
Dome-shaped selectivity (0.25 < SL < 0.75)
|
|
Strong dome-shaped selectivity (SL < 0.25)
|
|
Justification
|
|
Figure 3.2.1.3.1. Estimated length-based selectivity functions for the fisheries and surveys in the WFL stock (addis et al 2018)
|
Discard rate
|
Answered
|
|
Low (DR < 1%)
|
|
Low - moderate (1% < DR < 10%)
|
|
Moderate (10% < DR < 30%)
|
|
Moderate - high (30% < DR < 50%)
|
|
High (50% < DR < 70%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
Reports of Hogfish discards were infrequent and because of those low sample sizes the proportions of dead and alive were the mean rate over the years 2002-2016 for each gear. Discard rate data were available for the years 2002-2016. Divers reported 26% of discarded WFL Hogfish as all the fish were dead or the majority of the fish were dead. An additional 74% were reported as kept by divers. Table 2.3.2.1 presents the total discards estimated for each year for diver reported WFL Hogfish. Addis et al (2018)
|
Post-release mortality rate
|
Answered
|
|
Low (PRM < 5%)
|
|
Low - moderate (5% < PRM < 25%)
|
|
Moderate (25% < PRM < 50%)
|
|
Moderate - high (50% < PRM < 75%)
|
|
High (75% < PRM < 95%)
|
|
Almost all die (95% < PRM < 100%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
Release Mortality. Consistent with SEDAR 37 and for the purposes of the update assessment, a discard mortality rate of 10% was assumed for hook and line and 100% for spear. See table Table 2.3.2.3 (Addis et al 2018)
|
Recruitment variability
|
Answered
|
|
Very low (less than 10% inter-annual changes (IAC))
|
|
Low (max IAC of between 20% and 60%)
|
|
Moderate (max IAC of between 60% and 120%)
|
|
High (max IAC of between 120% and 180%)
|
|
Very high (max IAC greater than 180%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
0.6 see Table 3.2.1.2. List of SS parameters for the WFL Hogfish stock. The list includes fixed and estimated parameter values and their associated standard errors from the continuity model run, and any prior estimates that were used. (Addis et al 2018)
|
Size of an existing MPA
|
Answered
|
|
None
|
|
Small (A < 5%)
|
|
Small-moderate (5% < A < 10%)
|
|
Moderate (10% < A < 20%)
|
|
Large (20% < A < 30%)
|
|
Very large (30% < A < 40%)
|
|
Huge (40% < A < 50%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No info was provided
|
Spatial mixing (movement) in/out of existing MPA
|
Answered
|
|
Very low (P < 1%)
|
|
Low (1% < P < 5%)
|
|
Moderate (5% < P < 10%)
|
|
High (10% < P < 20%)
|
|
Fully mixed
|
|
Justification
|
|
No info was provided
|
Size of a future potential MPA
|
Answered
|
|
None
|
|
Small (A < 5%)
|
|
Small-moderate (5% < A < 10%)
|
|
Moderate (10% < A < 20%)
|
|
Large (20% < A < 30%)
|
|
Very large (30% < A < 40%)
|
|
Huge (40% < A < 50%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No info was provided
|
Spatial mixing (movement) in/out of future potential MPA
|
Answered
|
|
Very low (P < 1%)
|
|
Low (1% < P < 5%)
|
|
Moderate (5% < P < 10%)
|
|
High (10% < P < 20%)
|
|
Fully mixed
|
|
Justification
|
|
No info was provided
|
Initial stock depletion
|
Answered
|
|
Very low (0.1 < D1 < 0.15)
|
|
Low (0.15 < D1 < 0.3)
|
|
Moderate (0.3 < D < 0.5)
|
|
High (0.5 < D1)
|
|
Asymptotic unfished levels (D1 = 1)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No justification was provided
|
Management Characteristics
Types of fishery management that are possible
|
Answered
|
|
TAC (Total Allowable Catch): a catch limit
|
|
TAE (Total Allowable Effort): an effort limit
|
|
Size limit
|
|
Time-area closures (a marine reserve)
|
|
Justification
|
1. Describe what, if any, current management measures are used to constrain catch/effort.
Hogfish and other co-landed species are managed under general reef fish management plans by several federal and state organizations; typical management measures include catch limits, minimum size limits, gear restrictions, and closed areas. The “wrasse unit”ACLs for the commercial and recreational fisheries in Puerto Rico are 24.56 mt (54,147 lbs) and 2.29 mt(5,050 lbs), respectively (NOAA 2011). In Puerto Rico territorial waters regulations include gear specifications for traps/pots and prohibit use of spear guns < 100ft from coast or near docks and artificial reefs (PR-DNER2010). Some species have specific regulations, but there are no specific regulations for hogfish in Caribbean territorial waters (NOAA 2011). A catch limit is in place for this fishery, but it remains uncertain if the catch limit is sufficient to sustain the Puerto Rico hogfish population(CFMC/NMFS 2014a) (The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016)
2. Describe historical management measures, if any.
There are no specific regulations for hogfish in Caribbeanterritorial waters (NOAA 2011 in The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016)
3. Describe main strengths and weaknesses of current monitoring and enforcement capacity.
4. Describe and reference any legal/policy requirements for management, monitoring and enforcement.
|
TAC offset: consistent overages/underages
|
Answered
|
|
Large underages (40% - 70% of recommended)
|
|
Underages (70% - 90% of recommended)
|
|
Slight underages (90% - 100% of recommended)
|
|
Taken exactly (95% - 105% of recommended)
|
|
Slight overages (100% - 110% of recommended)
|
|
Overages (110% - 150% of recommended)
|
|
Large overages (150% - 200% of recommended)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
TAC implementation variability
|
Answered
|
|
Constant (V < 1%)
|
|
Not variable (1% < V < 5%)
|
|
Low variability (5% < V < 10%)
|
|
Variable (10% < V < 20%)
|
|
Highly variable (20% < V < 40%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
TAE offset: consistent overages/underages
|
Answered
|
|
Large underages (40% - 70% of recommended)
|
|
Underages (70% - 90% of recommended)
|
|
Slight underages (90% - 100% of recommended)
|
|
Taken exactly (95% - 105% of recommended)
|
|
Slight overages (100% - 110% of recommended)
|
|
Overages (110% - 150% of recommended)
|
|
Large overages (150% - 200% of recommended)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
TAE implementation variability
|
Answered
|
|
Constant (V < 1%)
|
|
Not variable (1% < V < 5%)
|
|
Low variability (5% < V < 10%)
|
|
Variable (10% < V < 20%)
|
|
Highly variable (20% < V < 40%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
Size limit offset: consistent overages/underages
|
Answered
|
|
Much smaller (40% - 70% of recommended)
|
|
Smaller (70% - 90% of recommended)
|
|
Slightly smaller (90% - 100% of recommended)
|
|
Taken exactly (95% - 105% of recommended)
|
|
Slightly larger (100% - 110% of recommended)
|
|
Larger (110% - 150% of recommended)
|
|
Much larger (150% - 200% of recommended)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
Size limit implementation variability
|
Answered
|
|
Constant (V < 1%)
|
|
Not variable (1% < V < 5%)
|
|
Low variability (5% < V < 10%)
|
|
Variable (10% < V < 20%)
|
|
Highly variable (20% < V < 40%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
Data Characteristics
Available data types
|
Answered
|
|
Historical annual catches (from unfished)
|
|
Recent annual catches (at least 5 recent years)
|
|
Historical relative abundance index (from unfished)
|
|
Recent relative abundance index (at least 5 recent years)
|
|
Fishing effort
|
|
Size composition (length samples)
|
|
Age composition (age samples)
|
|
Growth (growth parameters)
|
|
Absolute biomass survey
|
|
Justification
|
1. Provide the time series (specify years, if possible) that exist for catch, effort, and CPUE/abundance indices.
Table 2.3.1 Summarized annual total landings (whole weight, pounds) for species evaluated in the SEDAR 46 stock evaluation. Landings from Puerto Rico include commercial and recreational data. 1983-2014. The limited self-reported commercial discard information was available for the period 2011−2014. No commercial discard information was presented at the SEDAR 46 DW/AW Workshop . Table 2.3.4 Puerto Rico annual recreational landings and discards for hogfish and yellowtail snapper. Landings are provided in number and in pounds (whole weight). Estimates of discards were provided only in numbers. Table 2.4.1 Nominal measures of catch per unit of effort for the species considered in the SEDAR 46 stock evaluation. (SEDAR 46, 2016)
2. Describe how these data collected (e.g., log books, dealer reporting, observers).
Commercial fishery landings data for Puerto Rico were available from self-reported fisher logbooks (2012-current) and sales receipts for the years 1983−2011. Data were reported by species (during most years), fishing gear, and fishing center where the catch was landed. Puerto Rico commercial landings have been incompletely reported and thus required use of correction/expansion factors to estimate total landings (SEDAR 2009). For the years 2003 to 2014, correction/expansion factors have been coast-specific (north, south, east, west). Estimation of commercial fishery landings for years prior to 2003 used a single, island-wide, expansion factor (SEDAR 46, 2016)
3. Describe what types of sampling programs and methodologies exist for data collection, including the time-series of available sampling data and quality.
Puerto Rico’s Department of Natural and Environmental Resources has a fisheries research laboratory andcommercial statistics program that assists in the collection of fisheries data (NOAA 2009). Commercialfishermen report catches through trip tickets monthly. The fisheries reporting system makes it difficult toeffectively collect data on commercial catches, especially for hogfish since they are reported with two otherspecies as ‘wrasse unit’ and not always by species (NOAA 2011). Additions are made to annual catches by thegovernment to account for mis-reporting and non-reporting. This is done by using a ratio of weight reportedto weight observed during surveys (NOAA 2009). Additionally there is very little research on life history ofCaribbean species and limited recreational data collected (Munoz et al. 2013), although the MRIP system hasbeen collecting recreational fishing data since 2000 (NMFS 2016a). (The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016)
4. Describe all sources of uncertainty in the status, biology, life history and data sources of the fishery. Include links to documentation, reports.
While some progress has been made on data collection,research is still lacking in Puerto Rico, especially long-term data (NOAA 2009)(Munoz et al. 2013). Commercial annual catch limits (ACLs) in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are monitored through paperlog-books only (NMFS 2015b); there is no observer program so landings are consistently underreported (Trumble 2011). Further, the lag in receipt of accurate landings logbook data prevents effective management of commercial ACL monitoring (Trumble 2011)(The Safina Center Seafood Analysts 2016)
|
Catch reporting bias
|
Answered
|
|
Strong under-reporting (30% - 50%)
|
|
Under-reporting (10% - 30%)
|
|
Slight under-reporting (less than 10%)
|
|
Reported accurately (+/- 5%)
|
|
Slight over-reporting (less than 10%)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
Hyperstability in indices
|
Answered
|
|
Strong hyperdepletion (2 < Beta < 3)
|
|
Hyperdepletion (1.25 < Beta < 2)
|
|
Proportional (0.8 < Beta < 1.25)
|
|
Hyperstability (0.5 < Beta < 0.8)
|
|
Strong hyperstability (0.33 < Beta < 0.5)
|
|
Justification
|
|
No information was provided
|
Available data types
|
Answered
|
|
Perfect
|
|
Good (accurate and precise)
|
|
Data moderate (some what inaccurate and imprecise)
|
|
Data poor (inaccurate and imprecise)
|
|
Justification
|
|
see data section
|
Version Notes
The package is subject to ongoing testing. If you find a bug or a problem please send a report to t.carruthers@oceans.ubc.ca so that it can be fixed!
shiny-2019-08-01-19:47:20
Open Source, GPL-2 2019