Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
OCTOPUS Octopus vulgaris (Common Octopus), Eledone cirrhosa (Horned Octopus), Eledone moschata (Musky Octopus), Enteroctopus dofleini (Giant Octopus), Octopus cyanea (Day Octopus) Sometimes known as Tako SUMMARY Although Octopus are wide-ranging and have short lifespans, some populations are declining due to heavy fishing pressure. Most Octopuses are caught using bottom trawls, causing habitat damage and bycatch of unwanted wildlife. Management and monitoring of Octopus fisheries are weak in many countries. In almost any situation Argentine or Longfin Squid can be a great substitute for Octopus. Squid however does not need nearly as much time to cook as Octopus. Squid does remarkably well with a quick grill or a minute under the broiler. It pairs well with the Mediterranean flavors often combined with octopus. Criterion Points Final Score Life History 2.75 2.40 - 4.00 Abundance 1.75 1.60 - 2.39 Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts 0.75 0.00 - 1.59 Management 1.50 Bycatch 0.75 Final Score 1.50 Color Color LIFE HISTORY Core Points (only one selection allowed) If a value for intrinsic rate of increase („r‟) is known, assign the score below based on this value. If no r-value is available, assign the score below for the correct age at 50% maturity for females if specified, or for the correct value of growth rate ('k'). If no estimates of r, age at 50% maturity, or k are available, assign the score below based on maximum age. 1.00 Intrinsic rate of increase <0.05; OR age at 50% maturity >10 years; OR growth rate <0.15; OR maximum age >30 years. 2.00 Intrinsic rate of increase = 0.05-0.15; OR age at 50% maturity = 5-10 years; OR a growth rate = 0.16–0.30; OR maximum age = 11-30 years. 3.00 Intrinsic rate of increase >0.16; OR age at 50% maturity = 1-5 years; OR growth rate >0.30; OR maximum age <11 years. Most species of Octopus are short-lived, having life spans from 6 months to five years (Conners and Jorgensen 2006, Norman et al. 1996). The Common Octopus, the main species caught, usually matures between 12 and 18 months and can live up to 24 months (Case 1996, 1999). The intrinsic rate of growth is estimated to be >0.16 (Cephbase 2006). The Horned Octopus matures at 1 year of age (MarLIN 2001b) and can live up to 3 years, although most only live for two years. The Giant Octopus matures between two and three years of age and can live for up to six years (Golden and McCrae 1994). Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 Species has special behaviors that make it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., spawning aggregations; site fidelity; segregation by sex; migratory bottlenecks; unusual attraction to gear; etc.). Some species of Octopus form spawning aggregations which may be easily targeted by commercial fisheries (Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 1999). Other species exhibit migration patterns that can be predicted by fishermen (Case 1999, Tsangridis et al. 2002). Brooding behavior may also make Octopus easy to target. The Common Octopus undergoes seasonal migrations (Case 1999, Tsangridis et al. 2002), moving to coastal waters at the beginning of the year (Quetglas et al. 1998) and congregating in shallow waters to spawn. Fisheries take advantage of spawning aggregations; this is reflected in the seasonal peaks of catch (Hernandez-Garcia et al. 1998). Giant Octopus migrate as well. Alaska populations inhabit deep waters during mating season from July to October and move to shallow waters between October and July to spawn (Conners and Jorgensen 2006). Off Japan, medium to large Giant Octopus migrate inshore between October and November, return to deeper waters from February to March, travel inshore again in late April, and migrate back to deeper waters in August and September (Golden and McCrae 1994). Migration patterns can be predicted and used by fisheries to target Giant Octopus and other species. Horned Octopus migrate vertically, their position in the water column varying by season. Location in the water column can be anticipated and taken advantage of by fisheries (Salman et al. 2000). Female Octopi brood their eggs, jetting water past them during the development period to keep them oxygenated and clean until they hatch. Most species do not eat while spawning and brooding, and die soon after the eggs hatch. Incubation periods generally range from one to five months, but in some species can last up to a year, depending on water temperature. (Norman et al. 1996) Because females stay in one location while brooding and rarely leave their eggs, they can be easily targeted by fisheries. The Common Octopus, which broods in shallow water, is especially easy to target (Case 1999). In the West Indian Ocean, Day Octopus brood year round, but spawning peaks from June through August. At this time, the species is easily targeted (IUCN). Outside of the spawning season, Octopi are generally solitary, shy, shelter-seeking animals (Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 1999). -0.25 Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity >20 years; sequential hermaphrodites; extremely low fecundity). -0.25 Species has a small or restricted range (e.g., endemism; numerous evolutionarily significant units; restricted to one coastline; e.g., American lobster; striped bass; endemic reef fishes). -0.25 Species exhibits high natural population variability driven by broad-scale environmental change (e.g. El Nino; decadal oscillations). The size of Octopus populations changes from year to year (Conners and Jorgensen 2006). The Canary Islands artisanal Common Octopus fishery has witnessed strong fluctuations in catch. Peaks that occurred in 1982 and 1984 may have been caused by warm-cold climate episodes like El Nino (Hernandez-Garcia et al. 1998). Alternatively, these fluctuations could indicate an overexploited fishery. Similarly, from 1986 to 1995 Horned Octopus populations exhibited fluctuations of 4.5 kg/km2 to 65.1 kg/km2 (ADRIAMED 2008a). In other areas, CPUE fluctuates with amount of runoff from rivers; and wet and dry seasons influence recruitment success (Relini et al. 2006). Environmental conditions can influence the lengths of spawning and brooding seasons, changing the age structure of populations (Belcari et al. 2002b). Under favorable conditions Octopi may grow more quickly and reach sexual maturity earlier than usual, altering a population's normal age structure (Silva 2004). +0.25 Species does not have special behaviors that increase ease or population consequences of capture OR has special behaviors that make it less vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., species is widely dispersed during spawning). +0.25 Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially resilient to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity <1 year; extremely high fecundity). Octopus spawn only once, then die (Conners and Jorgensen 2006). A Common Octopus female may lay from 100,000 to 500,000 eggs (Case 1999). Fecundity of Giant Octopus is believed to be 75,000 eggs per year (MSAP). In the Gulf of Cadiz, Musky Octopus have a mean fecundity of 443 eggs per female (Silva 2004). This is a moderate fecundity so no points are added. +0.25 Species is distributed over a very wide range (e.g., throughout an entire hemisphere or ocean basin; e.g., swordfish; tuna; Patagonian toothfish). Octopus species are found throughout the world (Norman et al. 1996). The Common Octopus is a wide-ranging, common in the Eastern Atlantic, Pacific, Mediterranean, and Indian Oceans (Wilson 2006, Quetglas et al.1998, ARKive 2008a, Case 1999). The Horned Octopus is also widely distributed, occurring in the northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea. It can also be found along the coast of Britain (ADRIAMED 2008a, ARKive 2008b). The Musky Octopus can be found along the Atlantic coasts of Portugal and Spain and throughout the Mediterranean Sea (Belcari et al. 2002b, ADRIAMED 2008b). The Day Octopus occurs throughout the tropical and sub-tropical Indo-Pacific (Waikiki Aquarium). The Giant Octopus can be found in the north Pacific from southern California to the northwest of the Americas and to Japan (Scheel 2001) +0.25 Species does not exhibit high natural population variability driven by broad-scale environmental change (e.g., El Nino; decadal oscillations). 2.75 Points for Life History ABUNDANCE Core Points (only one selection allowed) Compared to natural or un-fished level, the species population is: 1.00 Low: Abundance or biomass is <75% of BMSY or similar proxy (e.g., spawning potential ratio). 2.00 Medium: Abundance or biomass is 75-125% of BMSY or similar proxy; OR population is approaching or recovering from an overfished condition; OR adequate information on abundance or biomass is not available. Abundance values were not available. The Common Octopus is considered to be a common and widespread species (ARKive 2008a), and is abundant at least in the Mediterranean Sea (Tsangridis et al. 2002). One population south of Mauritania is recovering from an overexploited condition (FAO 1997). The Horned Octopus is also considered to be common and widespread (ARKive 2008b), and is considered abundant in the Mediterranean Sea (Belcari et al. 2002b, Relini et al. 2006). A previously overexploited population in the South Adriatic Sea is recovering (Relini et al. 2006). The Musky Octopus is also common, particularly in the Northern Adriatic Sea (ADRIAMED 2008b). 3.00 High: Abundance or biomass is >125% of BMSY or similar proxy. Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 The population is declining over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE). While studies conducted in the 1990's indicate a slight increase or stability in some Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean Octopus populations, more recent studies show declining abundances (Salman et al. 2000, Belcari et al. 2002b, Hernandez-Garcia et al. 1998). For example, the Mauritania catch dropped from 9,000 tons in 1993 to 4,500 tons in 2001 despite an increased fishing effort in 2001 (Humber et al. 2006). Catches of Mediterranean Horned and Musky Octopus, which are in danger of becoming overfished, have dropped drastically since the 90's (Reuters 2005). Although fluctuations in CPUE and catch size may be also related to fishing strategies and changes in gear (Belcari et al. 2002b) points were subtracted because some populations are shrinking in size -0.25 Age, size or sex distribution is skewed relative to the natural condition (e.g., truncated size/age structure or anomalous sex distribution). Some Octopus populations in the Mediterranean Sea exhibit a skewed sex distribution with more females than males. Other populations have been skewed with more males than females. However, non-fished populations of octopus can deviate from a 1:1 sex ratio (Silva 2004). Additionally, depending on time of year, size distributions may be skewed (Katsanevakis and Verriopoulos 2004). This is due to naturally occurring mass die-offs of mature adults after spawning (Conners and Jorgensen 2006). Because skewed sex and size distributions occur in non-fished populations, no points were subtracted. -0.25 Species is listed as "overfished" OR species is listed as "depleted", "endangered", or "threatened" by recognized national or international bodies. The Octopus fishery in the Mediterranean Sea was thought to be fully exploited in 1997. Octopi in Mauritanian fisheries (Africa, Atlantic Ocean) have been overexploited (UNEP 2002). Fisheries in the Southwest Pacific were considered moderately exploited in 1997 (FAO 1997). The Common Octopus is not listed as a threatened species (ARKive 2008a) but there is potential for it to become overfished. One population south of Mauritania is recovering from an overexploited condition. Another population off Northwest Africa is considered fully exploited (FAO 1997). Fluctuations in the Canary Islands artisanal fishery catch indicates that the fishery may be overexploited (Hernandez-Garcia et al. 1998). Horned and Musky Octopus are not threatened, but populations in the Mediterranean Sea are in danger of becoming overfished, and catches have dropped drastically since the 90's (Reuters 2005). Fluctuations have been observed in Horned Octopus catches (Belcari et al. 2002b), and in the 1990's the species was overexploited in the South Adriatic Sea. CPUE was dramatically reduced, and populations are now recovering (Relini et al. 2006). The Giant Octopus is not threatened (Eisenberg 1999). While none of the species being reviewed are listed as threatened or endangered, some populations are overexploited. No points were subtracted. -0.25 Current levels of abundance are likely to jeopardize the availability of food for other species or cause substantial change in the structure of the associated food web. +0.25 The population is increasing over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE). +0.25 Age, size or sex distribution is functionally normal. +0.25 Species is close to virgin biomass. +0.25 Current levels of abundance provide adequate food for other predators or are not known to affect the structure of the associated food web. 1.75 Points for Abundance HABITAT QUALITY AND FISHING GEAR IMPACTS Core Points (only one selection allowed) Select the option that most accurately describes the effect of the fishing method upon the habitat that it affects 1.00 The fishing method causes great damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., cyanide; blasting; bottom trawling; dredging). Bottom trawls are the primary gear type used to catch Octopus (Tsangridis et al. 2002). Trammel nets, beach seines, set nets, fyke nets, pots, and traps are also used (Tsangridis et al. 2002, Weeber 2005, Belcari et al. 2002a,b, Relini et al. 2006, Katsanevakis and Verriopoulos 2004, Hernandez-Garcia et al. 1998, Quetglas et al. 1998). In the West Indian Ocean, Octopus are caught by snorkeling along reefs or walking along reef flats at low tide (IUCN). In two Mediterranean fisheries (Kavala and Limenas), bottom trawls make up over 67% of the Octopus catch, fyke nets make up 30%, beach seines compose a small fraction of the catch, and trammel net catch is negligible (Tsangridis et al. 2002). In another Mediterranean fishery (Vilanova) trawls make up 49% of the Octopus catch while pots make up 46%. Trawls, which are wide-mouthed nets towed by a boat (Weeber 2005), are dragged along the ocean bottom to catch sedentary species like Octopus. Bottom trawling is detrimental to benthic habitats, ripping up plants and disturbing sediment as well as catching targeted and non targeted fish (Sewell et al. 2006, FAO 2001). Excessive bottom trawling in the Gulf of Gabes in Tunisia has resulted in environmental damage and caused a drop in Octopus population and catch sizes (Ezzedine and El Abed). Bottom trawling for Octopus occurs on stone, sand, and muddy bottoms (Relini et al. 2006, Quetglas et al. 1998). Set nets, or nets anchored in one position, are used to catch some Octopus (Weeber 2005, Belcari et al. 2002a,b, Relini et al. 2006). Set nets sometimes drag along the ocean floor causing damage. They can also be damaging if they become lost; drifting for years and entangling fish (FAO 2, Sewell et al. 2006). Fykes nets (net bags with hoops inside) and jigs (barbed hooks) are less harmful methods of fishing and are used in some Common Octopus fisheries (Weeber 2005). Fyke nets are selective and in the Mediterranean are usually used in shallow water (Tsangridis et al. 2002). Pots and baited traps are also used, often on rocky substrate (Katsanevakis and Verriopoulos 2004, Belcari et al. 2002ab, Hernandez-Garcia et al. 1998, Relini et al. 2006, Quetglas et al. 1998). Pots are made of clay and are attached by the thousands to string webs that cover vast areas of the ocean floor (Quetglas et al. 1998). In one Spanish fishery (Vilanova), pots are left for a whole season and are checked daily for Octopus (Tsangridis et al. 2002). In Alaska, pots rest on the sea floor until an Octopus enters, then are pulled up (Eisenberg 1999). Traps and pots cause far less damage than other gear, but if lost they can continue to trap animals for years (Sewell et al. 2006). Octopus are also hand-caught in some places using SCUBA (Fisheries and Oceans Canada). Because the majority of Octopus are caught using bottom trawls, a score of 1 was awarded. 2.00 The fishing method does moderate damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., bottom gillnets; traps and pots; bottom longlines). 3.00 The fishing method does little damage to physical or biogenic habitats (e.g., hand picking; hand raking; hook and line; pelagic long lines; mid-water trawl or gillnet; purse seines). Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 Habitat for this species is so compromised from non-fishery impacts that the ability of the habitat to support this species is substantially reduced (e.g., dams; pollution; coastal development). -0.25 Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are not protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc. Although some Octopus populations benefit from marine protected areas in parts of the USA (WDFW 2007), Australia (GWA Department of Fisheries 2005), Madagascar (Heid and Steets 2006) and Bermuda (Pierce and Wood), the majority of Octopus fisheries do not protect critical habitat. -0.25 No efforts are being made to minimize damage from existing gear types OR new or modified gear is increasing habitat damage (e.g., fitting trawls with roller rigs or rockhopping gear; more robust gear for deep-sea fisheries). Bottom trawling has resulted in environmental damage in some regions of the Mediterranean Sea (Ezzedine and El Abed) and no efforts to minimize this damage have been reported. -0.25 If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is very slow (e.g., deep water corals; rocky bottoms). +0.25 Habitat for this species remains robust and viable and is capable of supporting this species. +0.25 Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc. +0.25 Gear innovations are being implemented over a majority of the fishing area to minimize damage from gear types OR no innovations necessary because gear effects are minimal. +0.25 If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is fast (e.g., mud or sandy bottoms) OR gear effects are minimal. Bottom trawls are generally used on mud or sandy bottoms (Relini et al. 2006, Belcari et al. 2002, Quetglas et al. 1998). 0.75 Points for Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts MANAGEMENT Core Points (only one selection allowed) Select the option that most accurately describes the current management of the fisheries of this species. 1.00 Regulations are ineffective (e.g., illegal fishing or overfishing is occurring) OR the fishery is unregulated (i.e., no control rules are in effect). 2.00 Management measures are in place over a major portion over the species' range but implementation has not met conservation goals OR management measures are in place but have not been in place long enough to determine if they are likely to achieve conservation and sustainability goals. While management exists for Octopus fisheries in many parts of their range, there is no management in other areas. When management exists, it may be unenforced or ineffective. Japan has one of the largest Octopus fisheries (Russo 2004). A Governors' License is required to fish for Octopus in Japan. Fishing is prohibited in some areas and seasons, and restrictions regarding vessel horsepower and tonnage are enforced. Additionally, the number of nets and mesh size are regulated for trawlers in the East China Sea and the Yellow Sea (Asada 1983). Mediterranean nations have their own regulations for commercial Octopus fisheries. In Greece, it is necessary to have a license to trawl for Octopus in one region (FAO 3). In the province of Kavala, there is a closed season for trawling from June through September and minimum mesh sizes are set at 28 mm (Tsangridis et al. 2002). Gear restrictions are also in effect. Throughout Greece, it is illegal to catch or sell Octopus weighing less than 500 grams (European Commission: Fisheries). In the Vilanova fishery of Spain, artisanal boats fishing with nets may use only 1500 m of net per fisherman. There are no regulations for fishing Octopus with pots (Tsangridis et al. 2002). In Majorca, trawling for Common Octopus in water deeper than 50 m is illegal (Quetglas et al. 1998). In Morrocco, a summer fishing quota for 2007 was set at 10,000 tons (Josupeit 2007). Trawls targeting juvenile Octopus in certain areas of the Eastern Ligurian Sea are illegal (Relini et al. 2006). In Italy there are restrictions on towed fishing gear like trawls. This gear cannot be used in coastal areas less than 50 m deep or within 3 nautical miles of a coastline. There are seasonal closures for trawlers (FAO 2005). While these restrictions affect Octopus fisheries, they are not directly aimed at these fisheries. In a document listing fishing laws by country, no laws specific to Octopus were listed for Italy (European Commission: Fisheries). Similarly, no regulations specific to Octopus fisheries were listed for France (European Commission: Fisheries). Laws in Tunisia regarding Octopus fisheries include a ban on fishing for Octopus weighing less than 1 kilogram between mid-May and mid-October. The specific dates can be adjusted. Unfortunately, many juvenile Octopus are still caught in the off-season and excessive pressure is put on Octopus populations outside of fishing season despite regulations (Ezzedine and El Abed). In Malta, bottom trawling is limited. The Octopus bottom trawling fishery occurs within a 25 nautical mile area, and usually occurs just 3 to 4 nautical miles from shore. Trawling is undertaken in areas with muddy or clay bottoms that are 150 to 200 m deep (University of Malta). While there are extensive laws governing Octopus fisheries in various Mediterranean countries, there are not adequate regulations for fishing with artisanal gear (Tsangridis et al. 2002). In African, various nations are instituting Octopus fishery regulations. There are regulations in Mauritania, but most fishermen and boats do not comply with regulations and there is an overall lack of enforcement. This has led to continued over-exploitation, and Octopus catches have fallen by 50% (UNEP 2002). Other nations have been more successful in regulating Octopus fisheries. A rotating no-take zone in Tanzania resulted in an increase in Octopus catch size (Heid and Steets 2006). Another no-take zone has been implemented in Madagascar and has achieved similar results. This zone was set up around Nosy Fasy island and operated from November 2004 to June 2005 (Heid and Steets 2006, BlueVentures 2006). There was one violation of the closed area during this time (Heid and Steets 2006). When the zone was re-opened for fishing, Octopus weight had doubled and catch size nearly doubled. These increases lasted for one month. The area was closed to Octopus fishing again from December 2005 to April 2006. This closure resulted in quadrupled catch size and average Octopus weight. 3.00 Substantial management measures are in place over a large portion of the species range and have demonstrated success in achieving conservation and sustainability goals. Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 There is inadequate scientific monitoring of stock status, catch or fishing effort. Although there have been increasing numbers of Octopus studies over the last few years, more studies are necessary to fully understand their biology and determine effective management practices (Tsangridis et al. 2002, Belcari et al. 2002a). While the Common Octopus is one of the best known and widely studied species (Belcari et al. 2002a, Katsanevakis and Verriopoulos 2004), many studies were done in the laboratory (Tsangridis et al. 2002) and field studies have been limited to a few areas (Belcari et al. 2002a). This lack of basic knowledge of Octopus biology is compounded by a lack of adequate reporting of catches and population assessments. It is difficult to conduct population assessments on Octopus because of their solitary, reclusive nature and their abilities to camouflage themselves (Russo 2004). With such limited information, it is difficult to properly manage Octopus fisheries (Russo 2004). In most regions, Octopus catches are either not monitored or poorly monitored (Guerra 1991). In areas where catches are monitored, they are not monitored by species but are reported in lumped groups. For example, catches may be reported as 'Cephalopod,' 'Octopus,' or 'Common Octopus.' Several Octopus species are often reported in a „mixed group' (Belcari et al. 2 2002, Quetglas et al. 1998, Conners and Jorgensen 2006). This makes it impossible to keep track of population status of individual species. Lack of specific reporting contributes to the lack of information that in turn restricts the ability to implement effective management (Belcari et al. 2002b). It is unlikely that reliable population assessments are being conducted in most regions because basic catch and effort data are so inadequate. Octopi are also sold in mixed groups, so it is difficult for the consumer to know exactly which species is being bought and/or consumed (Weber 1998).Even where catches are monitored, not all catches are reported. One study estimated that about 40% of Common Octopus landed in Spain's artisanal fishery were unreported. However, regional bodies occasionally collaborate in the assessment of Cephalopod fisheries (El Afia 1991). For example, the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (FAO 1997) and the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) (Guerra 1991) both established working groups to evaluate major Cephalopod resources in their respective management areas. -0.25 Management does not explicitly address fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems. As there is no adequate management in place, fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems are not explicitly addressed. -0.25 This species is overfished and no recovery plan or an ineffective recovery plan is in place. Although catches of Common, Horned and Musky Octopus have dropped (Reuters 2005, ARKive 2008a, ARKive 2008b) and there are indicators that other populations are being overexploited (Tsangridis et al. 2002, IUCN), none of the species on which this report focuses are considered overfished. Thus, no points were subtracted. -0.25 Management has failed to reduce excess capacity in this fishery or implements subsidies that result in excess capacity in this fishery. +0.25 There is adequate scientific monitoring, analysis and interpretation of stock status, catch and fishing effort. +0.25 Management explicitly and effectively addresses fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems. +0.25 This species is overfished and there is a recovery plan (including benchmarks, timetables and methods to evaluate success) in place that is showing signs of success OR recovery plan is not needed. +0.25 Management has taken action to control excess capacity or reduce subsidies that result in excess capacity OR no measures are necessary because fishery is not overcapitalized. 1.50 Points for Management BYCATCH Core Points (only one selection allowed) Select the option that most accurately describes the current level of bycatch and the consequences that result from fishing this species. The term, "bycatch" used in this document excludes incidental catch of a species for which an adequate management framework exists. The terms, "endangered, threatened, or protected," used in this document refer to species status that is determined by national legislation such as the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (or another nation's equivalent), the IUCN Red List, or a credible scientific body such as the American Fisheries Society. 1.00 Bycatch in this fishery is high (>100% of targeted landings), OR regularly includes a "threatened, endangered or protected species." Bottom trawling, the most common Octopus fishing method, is known to catch high numbers of unwanted wildlife. It should be noted that in several Octopus trawl fisheries, they are not the only target species (Conners and Jorgensen 2006, Sanchez et al. 2003, Silva 2004, Quetglas et al. 1998). Some Octopus trawl fisheries, like the Canadian fishery, produce only limited bycatch (Fisheries and Oceans Canada), while other fisheries catch a lot of bycatch. For example, Octopus account for <10% of total catch in some Mediterranean Octopus fisheries (Sanchez et al. 2003). Other gear types used in octopus fishing, such as fyke nets, traps, and pots, are more selective (Tsangridis et al. 2002, Fisheries and Oceans Canada). Diving and handcatching methods are also selective. 2.00 Bycatch in this fishery is moderate (10-99% of targeted landings) AND does not regularly include "threatened, endangered or protected species" OR level of bycatch is unknown. 3.00 Bycatch in this fishery is low (<10% of targeted landings) and does not regularly include "threatened, endangered or protected species." Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 Bycatch in this fishery is a contributing factor to the decline of "threatened, endangered, or protected species" and no effective measures are being taken to reduce it. -0.25 Bycatch of targeted or non-targeted species (e.g., undersize individuals) in this fishery is high and no measures are being taken to reduce it. -0.25 Bycatch of this species (e.g., undersize individuals) in other fisheries is high OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, and no measures are being taken to reduce it. The Horned Octopus is sometimes caught in European lobster and crab fisheries (Quetglas 1998, Relini et al. 2006) and sold for export to Mediterranean countries (Relini et al. 2006). The Musky Octopus is caught in Gulf of Cadiz trawl fisheries and is usually thrown away because of its low commercial value (Silva 2004). The Giant Octopus is occasionally caught in the Alaska Pacific cod fishery (Bush and Brewer). Octopus are also caught as bycatch in the Bering Sea Crab pot fishery and the Hawaii and Pacific Islands lobster pot fisheries (PCFFA). -0.25 The continued removal of the bycatch species contributes to its decline. +0.25 Measures taken over a major portion of the species range have been shown to reduce bycatch of "threatened, endangered, or protected species" or bycatch rates are no longer deemed to affect the abundance of the "protected" bycatch species OR no measures needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear). +0.25 There is bycatch of targeted (e.g., undersize individuals) or non-targeted species in this fishery and measures (e.g., gear modifications) have been implemented that have been shown to reduce bycatch over a large portion of the species range OR no measures are needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear). +0.25 Bycatch of this species in other fisheries is low OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, but effective measures are being taken to reduce it over a large portion of the range. +0.25 The continued removal of the bycatch species in the targeted fishery has had or will likely have little or no impact on populations of the bycatch species OR there are no significant bycatch concerns because the fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear). 0.75 Points for Bycatch REFERENCES ADRIAMED 2008a. Eledone cirrhosa. Scientific Cooperation to Support Responsible Fisheries in the Adriatic Sea (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Italian Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Forestry Policies. Available at: http://www.faoadriamed.org/html/Species /EledoneCirrhosa.html ADRIAMED 2008b. Eledone moschata. Scientific Cooperation to Support Responsible Fisheries in the Adriatic Sea (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Italian Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Forestry Policies. Available at: http://www.faoadriamed.org/html/Species /EledoneMoschata.html ARKive 2008a. Common Octopus Octopus vulgaris. Available at: http://www.arkive.org/species species/ARK/invertebrates_marine/Octopus_vulgaris/more_info.html ARKive 2008b Curled Octopus Eledone cirrhosa Common Octopus Octopus vulgaris. Available at: http://www.arkive.org/species/ARK/invertebrates_marine/Eledone_cirrhosa/more_info.html Arreguín-Sánchez, F., M.J. Solís-Ramírez and M.E. González de la Rosa. 1999. Population dynamics and stock assessment for Octopus maya (Cephalopoda: Octopodidae) fishery in the Campeche Bank, Gulf of Mexico. Asada, Y. 1983. Licence limitation regulations: The Japanese system. Papers presented at the expert consultation on the regulation of fishing effort (fishing mortality). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Fisheries Department. Available at: http://www.fao.org/ docrep/005/AC750E/AC750E09.htm Belcari, P., Cuccu, D., Gonzalez, M., Srari, A., and Vidoris, P. 2002a. Distribution and abundance of Octopus vulgaris Cuvier, 1797 (Cephalopoda: Octopoda) in the Mediterranean Sea. Scientia Marina. 66 (Suppl. 2): 157-166. Belcari, P., Tserpes, G., Gonzalez, M., Lefkaditou, E., Marceta, B., Manfrin, G., and Souplet, A. 2002b. “Distribution and abundance of Eledone cirrhosa (Lamarck: 1798) and E. moschata (Lamarck, 1798) (Cephalopoda: Octopodidae) in the Mediterranean Sea. Scientia Marina. 66 (Suppl. 2): 143-155 Blue Ventures. 2006. New study shows how marine protected areas can increase productivity of fishing industry. Blue Ventures at: http://blueventures.blogspot.com/2006/12/new-study-showshow-marine-protected.html Blue Ventures 2. Madagascar‟s First Community Run, Self-Sustaining Marine Protected Area. Available at: http://www.globalgiving.com/pfil/1236/projdoc.pdf Bush, Karla L (Alaska Department of Fish and Game). and Brewer, Reid (University of Alaska Fairbanks). Octopus Gear Study. Available at: http://www.faculty.uaf.edu/ffrsb/research/gear. html Case, R.J. 1996 (online). Octopus vulgaris, Common octopus. Available at http://animaldiversity .ummz.umich.edu/accounts/octopus/o._vulgaris$narrative.html. Case, R. 1999. "Octopus vulgaris" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed August 01, 2007 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Octopus_vulgaris.html. Cephbase 2006. Database for cephalopods. Available at :http://www.cephbase.utmb.edu/ Conners, Elizabeth and Jorgensen, Elaina. 2006. “GOA Octopus Complex: Appendix D.” Alaska Fisheries Science Center, NPFMC Gulf of Alaska SAFE. Eisenberg, T. 1999. "Enteroctopus dofleini" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed August 01, 2007 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Enteroctopus_ dofleini.html. El Afia, C. 1991. Mauritania: Octopus and Cephalopod Production and Outlook. Pp. 125-128 in Proceedings of the 2nd World Cephalopod Conference: Squid 91 Madrid, Hotel Castellana, Madrid, Span, 11-13 November. European Commission: Fisheries. Fact Sheet: Summary of national and regional laws concerning both technical measures and special fisheries. at: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/publications/fact sheets/legal_texts/section_d.pdf Ezzeddine, Soufia and El Abed, Amor. Potential biological and environmental influences on the Octopus vulgaris population of the Gulf of Gabes (south-eastern Tunisian coast). MedSedMed Technical Documents No. 2 Institut National des Sciences et Technologies de la Mer. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2005. Fishery Country Profile. Available at: http://www.fao.org/fi/fcp/en/ITA/profile.htm Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (FAO). 2001. Bottom Otter Trawls. Available at : http://www.fao.org/fi/website/FIRetrieve Action.do?dom=geartype&fid=306 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (FAO2). Retrieval of Lost Gear. Available at : http://www.fao.org/fi/website/FIRetrieveAction. do?dom=topic&fid=14833 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (FAO3). Fishery and Aquaculture country profile - Greece. Available at : http://www.fao.org/fi/ website/FIRetrieveAction.do?dom=countrysector&xml=FI-CP_GR.xml〈=en Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 1997. Review of the state of world fishery resources: Marine Fisheries. UN/FAO, FAO Fish Cir. 920, FIRM/C920(En). Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 1997a (online). Review of the state of world fishery resources: Marine fisheries. UN/FAO, FAO Fish Cir. 920, FIRM/C920(En). Available at http:// www.fao.org/docrep/003/w4248e/w4248e00.htm. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Region. “Octopus Fishery - Pacific Region.” Fisheries Management. Available at: http://www.pac.dfo- mpo.gc.ca/ops/fm/shellfish/octopus/default_e. htm Golden, J. and J. McCrae. 1994. Oregon Developmental Species: Giant Octopus, Octopus dofleini. Guerra, A. 1991. Cephalopod Resources of the World: A Present Day View. Pp. 1-14 in Proceedings of the 2nd World Cephalopod Conference: Squid 91 Madrid, Hotel Castellana, Madrid, Span, 11-13 November. GWA Department of Fisheries 2005. “Cowarump Reef Protected Area.” Available at: http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/pub/RPACowaramup/index.php?0502 Heid, Elisabeth and Steets, Julia. 2006. Partnership for community-run marine protected areas in Madagascar in Case studies of the 2005 Seed Award Recipients. Hernandez-Garcia, V.; Hernandez-Lopez, J.L.; Castro, J.J. 1998. “The octopus (Octopus vulgaris) in the small-scale trap fishery off the Canary Islands (Central-East Atlantic). Fisheries Research. 35: 183-189. Humber, F., Harris, A., Raberinary, D., Nadon, M. 2006. Seasonal Closures of No-Take Zones to promote A Sustainable Fishery for Octopus Cyanea (Gray) in South West Madagascar. Blue Ventures Conservation Report. Available at: http://www.blueventures.org/research/BV%20 report%20Frans%20Octopus_web.pdf IUCN: The World Conservation Network. Octopus and Sea Cucumber fisheries. In: Managing Marine Protected Areas: A Toolkit for the Western Indian Ocean. Available at: http://www. wiomsa.org/mpatoolkit/Themesheets/I6_Octupus_and_sea_cucumber_fisheries.pdf Josupeit, Helga. 2007. “Octopus Market Report - June 2007.” FAO Globefish 2007. Available at: http://infofish.org/marketreports/octopus0607.html Katsanevakis, Stelios and Verriopoulos, George. 2004. “Abundance of Octopus vulgaris on soft sediment. Sientia Marina 68 (4): 553-560 Marine Life Information Network for Britain and Ireland (MarLIN). 2001a (online). Common octopus, Octopus vulgaris. Available online at http://www.marlin.ac.uk/demo/reprod_ Octvul.htm Marine Life Information Network for Britain and Ireland (MarLIN). 2001b (online). Curled octopus, Eledone cirrhosa. Available online at http://www.marlin.ac.uk/demo/adult_gen_Elecir. htm. MSAP (Marine Species with Aquaculture Potential). “Octopi.” Marine Resource Management, Oregon State University. Available at: http://hmsc.oregonstate.edu/projects/msap/PS/masterlist/ inverts/octopus.html Norman, M.D., F.G. Hochberg and K.M. Mangold. 1996 (online). Octopodidae. Available at http://phylogeny.arizona.edu/tree/eukaryotes/animals/mollusca/cephalopoda/coleoidea/octopodif ormes/octopoda/incirrata/octopodidae/octopodidae PCFFA (The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen‟s Associations). International Agreements Requiring or Recommending Observer Programs. Available at: http://www.pcffa.org/obs.htm Pierce, Melissa L. and Wood, James B. “The Common Octopus: Octopus vulgaris.” Bermuda Institute of Ocean Sciences. Available at: http://www.thecephalopodpage.org/MarineInvertebrate Zoology/Octopusvulgaris.html Quetglas, Antoni; Alemany, Francesc; Carbonell, Aina; Merella, Paolo; Sanchez, Pilar.1998. “Biology and fishery of Octopus vulgaris Cuvier, 1797, caught by trawlers in Mallorca (Baltic Sea, Western Mediterranean).” Fisheries Research. 36: 237-249. Relini, L. Orsi; Mannini, A. Fiorentino, F. Palandri, G., Relini, G. 2006. “Biology and fishery of Eledone cirrhosa in the Ligurian Sea. Fisheries Research. 78: 72-88 Reuters. 2005. “EU Fails to Tighten Rules for Mediterranean Fishing.” Available at: http://www. planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/32587/story.htm Russo, Julie Zeidner. 2004. “In the Octopus‟s Garden.” NOAA‟s Undersea Research Program. Available at: http://www.nurp.noaa.gov/Spotlight/Octopus.htm Salman, Alp; Katagan, Tuncer; and GuGu, Ali Cemal. 2000. The distribution and fishing of two Mediterranean Eledone spp. (Octopoda: Cephalopoda) in the Aegean Sea. Turk. J. Zool. 24: 165171. Sanchez, P.; Demestr, M.; Martin, P. 2003. Characterisation of the discards generated by bottom trawling in the northwestern Mediterranean. Fisheries Research. 67: 71-80. Scheel. 2001. Giant Octopus: Fact Sheet. Alaska Pacific University. Available at: http://marine. alaskapacific.edu/octopus/factsheet.html Sewell, J., Jefferson, R., & Oakley, J.A., 2006. Marine Life Topic Note. Commercial Fishing. Marine Life Information Network [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available from http://www.marlin.ac.uk/learningzone/ Silva, Luis; Ramos, Fernando; Sobrino, Ignacio. 2004. “Reproductive biology of Eledone moschata (Cephalopoda: Octopodidae) in the Gulf of Cadiz (south-western Spain, ICES Division IXa). J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 84, 1221-1226 Tsangridis, Alexis; Sanchez, Pilar; Ioannidou, Despina. 2002. Exploitation patterns of Octopus vulgaris in two Mediterranean areas. Scientia Marina. 66 (1): 59-68. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2002. “Well managed fisheries vital for environmentally friendly development in poor parts of the globe.” UNEP News Centre. Available at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=241& &ArticleID=3026 University of Malta. “The Maltese Fisheries Management Zone (FMZ).” University of Malta, Faculty of Science, Department of Biology. Available at: http://home.um.edu.mt/biology/11_ researchPJS4c.html USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species System (TESS). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/StartTESS.do Waikïkï Aquarium: “Hawaiian Octopus.” Marine Life Profiles. Available at: http://www. waquarium.org/MLP/root/html/MarineLife/Invertebrates/Molluscs/Octopus.html WDFW 2007. Marine Protected Areas within Puget Sound. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/ fish/mpa/puget_sound/restrict.htm Weber, M.L. 1998. A global assessment of major fisheries at risk, relevant management regimes, and non-governmental organizations. A report of the Pew Charitable Trusts. February. Weeber (2005) Best Fish Guide 05 - Part Two: Criteria for ecological rankings of New Zealand commercial fisheries. Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand, November 2005. Wilson, E., 2006. Octopus vulgaris. Common octopus. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 23/07/2007]. Available from http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/Octopusvulgaris.htm Norman, M.D., F.G. Hochberg and K.M. Mangold. 1996 (online). Octopodidae. Available at http://phylogeny.arizona.edu/tree/eukaryotes/animals/mollusca/cephalopoda/coleoidea/octopodif ormes/octopoda/incirrata/octopodidae/octopodidae.html. Roper, C.F.E., M.J. Sweeney and C.E. Nauen. 1984. FAO species catalogue. Vol. 3. Cephalopods of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of species of interest to fisheries. FAO Fish. Synop., (125) Vol. 3:277 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 1997a (online). Review of the state of world fishery resources: Marine fisheries. UN/FAO, FAO Fish Cir. 920, FIRM/C920(En). Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/w4248e/w4248e00.htm. Weber, M.L. 1998. A global assessment of major fisheries at risk, relevant management regimes, and non-governmental organizations. A report of the Pew Charitable Trusts.