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

  1. 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. Historically, capelin was captured domestically on spawning beaches for food, bait and fertilizer. A directed offshore fishery began in the 1970’s, but was closed between 1979 and 1992 (depending on the area). Also during the 1970s, and inshore roe fishery developed. “The inshore fishery has been prosecuted by capelin traps, purse seines and, to a lesser extent, beach seines. Since 1998, modified beach seines called “tuck seines” have been deployed because capelin stayed in deeper waters and were unavailable to capelin traps and conventional beach seines. The use of tuck seines or capelin traps has varied from location to location…The inshore fishery has been prosecuted by capelin traps, purse seines and, to a lesser extent, beach seines. Since 1998, modified beach seines called “tuck seines” have been deployed because capelin stayed in deeper waters and were unavailable to capelin traps and conventional beach seines. The use of tuck seines or capelin traps has varied from location to location." (Capelin Stock Assessment SA2 + 3KL.pdf)

  2. Describe the stock’s ecosystem functions, dependencies, and habitat types. Juveniles can be in bays and offshore areas. In spawning season (June and July), spawning schools migrate to beaches and demersal spawning sites. Historically, spawners were age 3 and 4; since 1990s spawners are now age 2 and 3. Larvae eat small invertebrates and are preyed upon by larger invertebrates; older fish eat copepods (O’Driscoll et al. 2001). Capelin are an important food source among larger predators; they are preyed upon by whales, seals, cod and seabirds (Montevecchi et al. 2007; Capelin stock assessment 4RST.pdf; Capelin stock assessment SA2 + 3KL.pdf).

  3. Provide all relevant reference materials, such as assessments, research, and other analysis. Capelin stock assessment 4RST.pdf Capelin stock assessment SA2 + 3KL.pdf O’Driscoll et al. 2001 Montevecchi, W.A., Buren, A., Burke, C.M., Andrews, D., Davoren, G.K., May, C., Penton, P., Reinfort, B., Record, N., de Young, B. and Rose-Taylor, C., 2007. An ecosystem-based research program for capelin (Mallotus villosus) in the northwest Atlantic: overview and results. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Science, 39, pp.35-48.


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
Capelin observed up to age-10 (Wheeler et al. 2009).

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
Capelin abundance has fluctuated wildly over the last 50 years and is largely environmentally driven. No carrying capacity has been estimated, so no depletion level is known.

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
No estimates of steepness are available.

Historical effort pattern

Answered
Stable
Two-phase
Boom-bust
Gradual increases
Stable, recent increases
Stable, recent declines
Justification
No index of fishing effort is available. The fishery was confined to inshore areas until the 1970s when an offshore fishery was developed. This fishery was closed by 1992. Meanwhile, an inshore roe fishery started in the 1980s and has continued, although effort has declined through the 2000s due to market constraints and low prices (Capelin stock assessment SA2 + 3KL.pdf).

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
No direct information; but no indication that effort is particularly variable from year-to-year

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
The fishery has changed dramatically over the last 50 years. Each change is associated with methods for catching the new target of the fishery, and the fishery slowly adapts to improve efficiency. For example, since 1998, the fishery has shifted from beach seines to ‘tuck seines’, which can more effectively target deeper spawning capelin.

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
I presume moderate improvements in catch efficiency as the fishery improves targeting.

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
Capelin mature at age-2 to age-3 (230-300mm); maximum length is 360mm (Wheeler et al. 2009).

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
Fish are caught primarily by seine and trawl targeting mature fish. Gear is relatively selective but catches fish as they mature.

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
There does not appear to be any decline in selectivity with age because all fish spawn in the same areas and all mature fish are vulnerable to the gear.

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
Discarding of males was historically high because the fishery was targeting roe. More recently, changes to regulations has prohibited at-sea discards and markets have opened for capelin as food for zoo animals (Capelin stock assessment 4RST.pdf and Capelin stock assessment SA3 + 3KL.pdf).

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
Time to mortality (due to air exposure) is extremely low (Benoit et al. 2013); post release mortality assumed to be near 100%.

Recruitment variability

Answered
Very low (less than 20% 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
IAC is very high for this species (see Figure 7.pdf (from Capelin stock assessment SA3 + 3KL.pdf), which does not include the highly anomalous year class from early 1990s.

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 spatial closures for this fishery.

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 spatial closures for this fishery

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 spatial closures projected for this fishery.

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 spatial closures projected for this fishery.

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
Depletion unknown.


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.
The fishery has a TAC. Catches are monitored using logbooks, dockside monitoring and VMS in purse seine vessels; the fishery is closed when TAC is exceeded or when fishing ceases due because price exceeds revenue. The fishery opens for a brief period each spring/summer (depending on area). Openings are specific to different areas of the coast.

2. Describe historical management measures, if any.

3. Describe main strengths and weaknesses of current monitoring and enforcement capacity.
Strengths
There may be on-board observers
Fish may only be offloaded in the presence of a certified dockside observer
Compliance occurs through a combination of routine patrols; dockside inspections; at-sea inspection; aerial surveillance; VMS; at-sea observer coverage.

Weaknesses
The recreational sector is not monitored
There is recognition that there will be complex non-compliance, such as trans-shipment vessels, unmonitored landings, etc. These are prioritized by compliance officers, but remain an issue.

4. Describe and reference any legal/policy requirements for management, monitoring and enforcement.
Integrated fisheries management plans:
Capelin Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Divisions 4RST (Capelin Fishing Areas 12-16) (https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/capelin-capelan/index-eng.htm#toc9.0)
Capelin Newfoundland & Labrador Region 2+3 (Capelin Fishing Areas 1-11) (http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/capelin-area1-11-zone-capelan/capelin-capelan-2018-eng.htm)


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
The fishery typically underachieves its TAC, though there have been occasional periods where the TAC is slightly overachieved. See Figure 3.png (from Capelin stock assessment SA2 + 3KL.pdf) and Figure 4.png (from Capelin stock assessment 4RST.pdf).


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
Recently, TAC and integrated fishery management plans will be in place for several years; previously, TAC was much more variable (see Figure 3.png and Figure 4.png)


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 TAE


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 TAE


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 size limits


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 size limits


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.
Landings from 1960 (in some areas)
Acoustic biomass (in some areas) from 1988
Sex ratio from 1984
Lengths from 1980
Ages from 1980
Condition from 1984

2. Describe how these data collected (e.g., log books, dealer reporting, observers).
Abundance assessed through spring acoustic surveys and fall bottom trawl surveys.
Spawning timing monitored through local and indigenous participants
Biological samples collected through commercial inshore fishery
Productivity monitored through chlorophyll; mortality monitored through predator abundance and growth

3. Describe what types of sampling programs and methodologies exist for data collection, including the time-series of available sampling data and quality.
No additional information on their sampling programs is available.

4. Describe all sources of uncertainty in the status, biology, life history and data sources of the fishery. Include links to documentation, reports.
Reference points are missing, and would largely be meaningless given the wide fluctuations in recruitment strength. Recruitment is believed to be largely influenced by environmental factors (Capelin stock assessment SA2 + 3KL.pdf; Capelin stock assessment 4RST.pdf), but this means prediction is poor. Total stock mortality is linked to predation risk, but this in turn relies on accurate assessment of predator abundance.


Catch reporting bias

Answered
Strong under-reporting (30% - 50%)
Under-reporting (10% - 30%)
Slight under-reporting (0% - 10%)
Reported accurately (+/- 5%)
Slight over-reporting (less than 10%)
Justification
Reporting is primarily by logbook, so some underreporting is expected. This is corrected by at-sea observer data (Capelin IMP: https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/ifmp-gmp/capelin-capelan/index-eng.htm).


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
Abundance indices (where available) are by acoustic abundance surveys, which should be proportional to abundance assuming a standardized sampling plan.


Available data types

Answered
Perfect
Good (accurate and precise)
Data moderate (some what inaccurate and imprecise)
Data poor (inaccurate and imprecise)
Justification
Data is reasonable, though data used varies across regions and presumably within regions (i.e. from different fishing bays).


Version Notes

The package is subject to ongoing testing. If you find a bug or a problem please send a report to so that it can be fixed!




tcar_-2019-11-26-10:25:40

Open Source, GPL-2 2019