Download Mexico - Seafood Watch

and
Common octopus, Red octopus
Octopus vulgaris, Octopus maya
Image ©Scandinavian Fishing Yearbook/www.scandfish.com
Mexico
Handline
February 19, 2015
The Safina Center Seafood Analysts
2
About The Safina Center
The Safina Center (formerly Blue Ocean Institute) translates scientific information into language people
can understand and serves as a unique voice of hope, guidance, and encouragement. The Safina Center
(TSC) works through science, art, and literature to inspire solutions and a deeper connection with
nature, especially the sea. Our mission is to inspire more people to actively engage as well-informed and
highly motivated constituents for conservation.
Led by conservation pioneer and MacArthur fellow, Dr. Carl Safina, we show how nature, community,
the economy and prospects for peace are all intertwined. Through Safina’s books, essays, public
speaking, PBS television series, our Fellows program and Sustainable Seafood program, we seek to
inspire people to make better choices.
The Safina Center was founded in 2003 by Dr. Carl Safina and was built on three decades of research,
writing and policy work by Dr. Safina.
The Safina Center’s Sustainable Seafood Program
The Center’s founders created the first seafood guide in 1998. Our online seafood guide now
encompasses over 160-wild-caught species. All peer-reviewed seafood reports are transparent,
authoritative, easy to understand and use. Seafood ratings and full reports are available on our website
under Seafood Choices. TSC’s Sustainable Seafood Program helps consumers, retailers, chefs and health
professionals discover the connection between human health, a healthy ocean, fishing and sustainable
seafood.
• Our online guide to sustainable seafood is based on scientific ratings for more than 160 wildcaught seafood species and provides simple guidelines. Through our expanded partnership with
the Monterey Bay Aquarium, our guide now includes seafood ratings from both The Safina
Center and the Seafood Watch® program.
• We partner with Whole Foods Market (WFM) to help educate their seafood suppliers and staff,
and provide our scientific seafood ratings for WFM stores in the US and UK.
• Through our partnership with Chefs Collaborative, we created Green Chefs/Blue Ocean, a free,
interactive, online sustainable seafood course for chefs and culinary professionals.
• Our website features tutorials, videos, blogs, links and discussions of the key issues such as
mercury in seafood, bycatch, overfishing, etc.
Check out our Fellows Program, learn more about our Sustainable Seafood Program and Carl Safina’s
current work at www.safinacenter.org .
The Safina Center is a 501 (c) (3) nonprofit organization based in the School of Marine & Atmospheric
Sciences at Stony Brook University, Long Island, NY. www.safinacenter.org [email protected] |
631.632.3763
3
About Seafood Watch®
Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wildcaught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch® defines
sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or
increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected
ecosystems. Seafood Watch® makes its science-based recommendations available to the public in the
form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from www.seafoodwatch.org. The program’s
goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservation issues and empower seafood consumers
and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans.
Each sustainability recommendation on the regional pocket guides is supported by a Seafood Report.
Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a
species, then evaluates this information against the program’s conservation ethic to arrive at a
recommendation of “Best Choices,” “Good Alternatives” or “Avoid.” The detailed evaluation
methodology is available upon request. In producing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch® seeks out
research published in academic, peer-reviewed journals whenever possible. Other sources of
information include government technical publications, fishery management plans and supporting
documents, and other scientific reviews of ecological sustainability. Seafood Watch® Research Analysts
also communicate regularly with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture scientists, and members of
industry and conservation organizations when evaluating fisheries and aquaculture practices. Capture
fisheries and aquaculture practices are highly dynamic; as the scientific information on each species
changes, Seafood Watch®’s sustainability recommendations and the underlying Seafood Reports will be
updated to reflect these changes.
Parties interested in capture fisheries, aquaculture practices and the sustainability of ocean ecosystems
are welcome to use Seafood Reports in any way they find useful. For more information about Seafood
Watch® and Seafood Reports, please contact the Seafood Watch® program at Monterey Bay Aquarium
by calling 1-877-229-9990.
Disclaimer
Seafood Watch and The Safina Center strive to ensure that all our Seafood Reports and recommendations
contained therein are accurate and reflect the most up-to-date evidence available at the time of publication. All
our reports are peer-reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology,
fisheries science or aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood
Watch program or of The Safina Center or their recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood
Watch and The Safina Center are solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. We always welcome
additional or updated data that can be used for the next revision. Seafood Watch and Seafood Reports are made
possible through a grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and other funders.
4
Guiding Principles
The Safina Center and Seafood Watch define sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether
fished 1 or farmed, that can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the
structure or function of affected ecosystems.
Based on this principle, Seafood Watch and the Safina Center have developed four sustainability criteria
for evaluating wild-catch fisheries for consumers and businesses. These criteria are:
• How does fishing affect the species under assessment?
• How does the fishing affect other, target and non-target species?
• How effective is the fishery’s management?
• How does the fishing affect habitats and the stability of the ecosystem?
Each criterion includes:
• Factors to evaluate and score
• Guidelines for integrating these factors to produce a numerical score and rating
Once a rating has been assigned to each criterion, we develop an overall recommendation. Criteria
ratings and the overall recommendation are color-coded to correspond to the categories on the Seafood
Watch pocket guide and the Safina Center’s online guide:
Best Choice/Green: Are well managed and caught in ways that cause little harm to habitats or
other wildlife.
Good Alternative/Yellow: Buy, but be aware there are concerns with how they’re caught.
Avoid/Red: Take a pass on these for now. These items are overfished or caught in ways that harm
other marine life or the environment.
1 “Fish” is used throughout this document to refer to finfish, shellfish and other invertebrates.
5
Summary
This report evaluates the sustainability of the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) and red octopus
(Octopus maya) fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, Mexico. In this fishery, red octopus accounts for around
two-thirds of the catch and common octopus one-third. The common octopus is globally distributed and
caught worldwide, while the red octopus is endemic to Mexico.
Octopuses are short-lived and fast-growing animals. Abundance of the red octopus has fluctuated and
most recently declined. Catches of red octopus have been above the established catch limits set for this
species for most years since the mid-2000s, so there is concern that fishing levels on this species are too
high. There have been no population assessments for common octopus, so abundance and fishing levels
are unknown.
In Mexico, fishermen catch common and red octopuses with baited lines that are attached to poles,
called “jimba.” This fishing method catches almost exclusively octopuses, so there are no bycatch
concerns. The impact on species used for bait in the fishery (e.g., crab) is unknown. The limiting species
in the fishery is the red octopus. The fishing method has very low impacts on bottom habitats.
Mexico has several management strategies in place to protect the common and red octopuses, such as
size limits, a closed season, and catch limits, but enforcement of regulations has been weak and some
illegal fishing is known to occur.
Due to concerns about high fishing levels on red octopus and the lack of enforcement of management
regulations, common octopus and red octopus from Mexico are rated “red” or “avoid.”
Table of Conservation Concerns and Overall Recommendations
Species / Fishery
Common octopus
Mexico Gulf of Mexico Handline
Red octopus
Mexico Gulf of Mexico Handline
Criterion 1
Criterion 2
Criterion 4
Impacts on
Criterion 3
Impacts on
Impacts on
Overall
the Species
Management
other
Habitat and Recommendation
Under
Effectiveness
Species
Ecosystem
Assessment
Red (2.00)
Green (3.57) Red/Avoid (2.361)
Red (1.73) Yellow (2.51) Red (2.00)
Green (3.57) Red/Avoid (2.361)
Yellow (2.64) Red (1.65)
6
Scoring Guide
Scores range from zero to five where zero indicates very poor performance and five indicates the fishing
operations have no significant impact.
Final Score = geometric mean of the four Scores (Criterion 1, Criterion 2, Criterion 3, Criterion 4).
•
Best Choice/Green = Final Score >3.2, and no Red Criteria, and no Critical scores
•
Good Alternative/Yellow = Final score >2.2, and neither Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) nor Bycatch
2
Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) are Very High Concern, and no more than one Red Criterion, and no
Critical scores, and does not meet the criteria for Best Choice (above)
•
Avoid/Red = Final Score <=2.2, or either Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy
(Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern,2 or two or more Red Criteria, or one or more Critical scores.
Because effective management is an essential component of sustainable fisheries, Seafood Watch issues an Avoid
recommendation for any fishery scored as a Very High Concern for either factor under Management (Criterion 3).
2
7
Table of Contents
About The Safina Center ............................................................................................................................... 2
About Seafood Watch® ................................................................................................................................. 3
Guiding Principles ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Assessment ................................................................................................................................................. 12
Criterion 1 Impacts on the Species Under Assessment………………………………………………………………………12
Criterion 2: Impacts on Other Species .................................................................................................... 21
Criterion 3: Management effectiveness ................................................................................................. 23
Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem................................................................................ 31
Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................................... 35
References .................................................................................................................................................. 36
8
Introduction
Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendation
This report evaluates the sustainability of the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) and red octopus
(Octopus maya) fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, Mexico.
Overview of the species and management bodies
The common and red octopuses live in similar benthic habitats, typically consisting of rocky bottoms,
seagrass, or coral reefs (Vaz-Pires et al. 2004) (Sweeting et al. 2006). The red octopus looks very similar
to the common octopus and wasn’t recognized as a separate species until the late 1960s. The common
octopus is globally distributed and can be found in depths up to 400 m, but is most abundant below 100
m (SAGARPA 2014a). The red octopus is endemic to the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico and prefers shallow
habitats from 0–60 m in depth (Voss and Solis Ramirez 1966) (Vaz-Pires et al. 2004).
During the day, octopuses are often burrowed in dens, and at night are mobile and hunting for food
(Mather and O'Dor 1991). Studies show that common octopus frequently (i.e., every few nights) move
short distances (10–100 km) for feeding or breeding (Semmens et al. 2007). Octopuses are not
migratory animals and home ranges for both species of octopuses are small. They have short life cycles.
Growth is contingent on food quantity, food quality, and environmental conditions. Environmental
conditions also play a role in catches (Perez Sanchez et al. 2010).
In Mexico, common and red octopuses are fished using “jimbas” or wooden poles that have several
hanging baited lines attached (typically six or seven). The lines are baited with crabs or fish. Commercial
fleets consist of two types of vessels: artisanal (5–9 m) and medium-sized (12–22 m) (Sweeting et al.
2006) (SAGARPA 2014a). The smaller artisanal vessels fish depths from 0–30 m and the medium sized
vessels fish deeper, predominately 18–60 m (SAGARPA 2014a). The artisanal fishery is larger and
primarily targets red octopus, while the medium-size fleet captures both common octopus and red
octopus (Salas et al. 2009). Fishing trips are restricted for artisanal vessels to 1–3 days and a storage
capacity of 0.5 tons (t), and to 15 days and 5–15 t for medium-sized vessels (SAGARPA 2014a).
The octopus fishery is managed by the Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development,
Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA) and the National Commission of Aquaculture and Fishing (CONAPESCA)
(FAO 2005) (OECD 2006). There are various other organizations and stakeholders that contribute to the
management of the octopus resource.
9
Figure 1: Schematic of the fishing method used to catch octopus in the Gulf of Mexico, Mexico. Graphic from
(SAGARPA 2014).
Production Statistics
The common and red octopuses are mainly fished off the Yucatan Peninsula, with the states of
Campeche and Yucatan dominating the fishery. Much smaller catches occur in the states of Quintana
Roo and Veracruz. Since the late 1990s, annual catches have ranged from 14,000 t to 25,000 metric tons
(28–50 million lbs) (SAGARPA 2014a). In recent years, red octopus has accounted for around two-thirds
of the catch and common octopus one-third (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008) (SAGARPA 2014b). The
octopus fishery is the ninth-largest fishery by production in Mexico and ranks fifth in commercial
value (Lasseter 2006) (SAGARPA 2007) (SAGARPA 2014a). Approximately 20,000 people are employed
through this fishery and 5,094 vessels participate (SAGARPA 2012a).
10
Figure 2: Catches of red octopus (O. maya) and common octopus (O. vulgaris) in the Gulf of Mexico, Mexico (1980–
2013)
Figure 3: Annual catches of octopus in Campeche and Yucatan. Figure from (SAGARPA 2014).
11
Figure 4: Annual catches of octopus in Veracruz and Quintana Roo. Figure from (SAGARPA 2014).
Importance to the U.S./North American market
The top five nations exporting octopus to the United States are Spain (23%), China (19%), Philippines
(18%), Indonesia (10%), and Thailand (7%) (NMFS 2014). Mexico ranks in the top 10 octopus exporters
to the United States, making up about 4% of the market (NMFS 2014). U.S. imports of octopus from
Mexico have been steadily increasing, with nearly 668 t (1.47 million lbs) imported in 2013 (NMFS
2014). The United States imports live, frozen, and dried/brined octopus from Mexico (NMFS 2014). The
database documenting U.S. imports does not differentiate between species or between frozen, dried, or
brined octopus, so it is difficult to determine how much of each species is imported. Six species of
octopus are fished in Mexico: O. vulgaris, O. maya, O. hubbsorum, O. macropus, O. bimaculatus, and O.
rubescens, with the red octopus and common octopus making up the overwhelming majority of the
catches (GBC group 2014).
Since red octopus is endemic to Mexico, all of that product available in the United States is imported
from Mexico. Common octopus are globally distributed and each year about 40,000 t (88,000,000 lbs)
are caught worldwide (Guerra et al. 2010) (FAO 2014a). Mexico and several European countries account
for the majority of the common octopus catches (FAO 2014b).
Common and market names
Octopus vulgaris: common octopus
Octopus maya: red octopus, Mexican four-eyed octopus
Primary product forms
Octopus is typically sold fresh or frozen and occasionally dried/cured. Fresh octopus has a very short
shelf life of approximately 1 week from catch, but frozen lasts longer (Vaz-Pires et al. 2004).
12
Assessment
This section assesses the sustainability of the fishery(s) relative to the Seafood Watch Criteria
for Fisheries, available at http://www.seafoodwatch.org.
Criterion 1: Impacts on the species under assessment
This criterion evaluates the impact of fishing mortality on the species, given its current
abundance. The inherent vulnerability to fishing rating influences how abundance is scored,
when abundance is unknown. The final Criterion 1 score is determined by taking the geometric
mean of the abundance and fishing mortality scores. The Criterion 1 rating is determined as
follows:
•
•
•
Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern
Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern
Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern
Rating is Critical if Factor 1.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical.
Criterion 1 Summary
COMMON OCTOPUS
Region / Method
Mexico Gulf of Mexico
Handline
RED OCTOPUS
Region / Method
Mexico Gulf of Mexico
Handline
Factor 1.1
Factor 1.2
Factor 1.3
Criteria 1 Score
Inherent
Abundance Fishing
Vulnerability
Mortality
Low
3.00:Moderate 2.33:Moderate Yellow (2.644)
Concern
Concern
Factor 1.1
Factor 1.2
Factor 1.3
Inherent
Abundance Fishing
Vulnerability
Mortality
Low
3.00:Moderate 1.00:High
Concern
Concern
Criteria 1 Score
Red (1.732)
13
Criterion 1 Assessment
COMMON OCTOPUS
Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
Low—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 0-35, OR species exhibits life history
characteristics that make it resilient to fishing, (e.g., early maturing (
Medium—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 36-55, OR species exhibits life
history characteristics that make it neither particularly vulnerable nor resilient to fishing,
(e.g., moderate age at sexual maturity (5-15 years), moderate maximum age (10-25 years),
moderate maximum size, and middle of food chain).
High—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 56-100, OR species exhibits life history
characteristics that make is particularly vulnerable to fishing, (e.g., long-lived (>25 years),
late maturing (>15 years), low reproduction rate, large body size, and top-predator).
Note: The FishBase vulnerability scores is an index of the inherent vulnerability of marine
fishes to fishing based on life history parameters: maximum length, age at first maturity,
longevity, growth rate, natural mortality rate, fecundity, spatial behaviors (e.g., schooling,
aggregating for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or
reproduction) and geographic range.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Low
All octopuses are short-lived and fast-growing animals. Common octopus typically lives 2 years and it
reaches sexual maturity within the first year (Mather and O’Dor 1991). Males are larger than females,
and size (length and weight) can vary depending on environmental conditions (water temperature,
salinity, food availability, etc.) (Guerra et al. 2010). Males can grow to a maximum total length of 1.3 m
(51 in) and females to 1.2 m (47 in) (Gillespie et al. 1998)(FAO 2014a). Adult common octopus
frequently weigh 3 kg (6.6 lbs), but they can weigh up to 10 kg (22 lbs) (Gillespie et al. 1998) (Silva et al.
2002) (FAO 2014a). Female common octopus can lay 100,000 to 600,000 eggs (Silva et al. 2002) (VazPires et al. 2004) (FAO 2014a). Eggs are laid on the roof of caves, dens, or under structures (rocks, shells,
etc.) and protected by females (Gillespie et al. 1998). It is common for females to die shortly after
brooding; however, some females will lay more than one clutch of eggs. Given these life history
characteristics, common octopus is considered to have a “low” vulnerability to fishing.
Rationale:
14
Rationale:
Table 1: Results from Seafood Watch invertebrate vulnerability rubric for octopus (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).
Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes. Species
with average attribute scores between 2.46 and 3 are deemed to have a ‘low vulnerability'.
Factor 1.2 - Abundance
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern)—Strong evidence exists that the population is above target
abundance level (e.g., biomass at maximum sustainable yield, BMSY) or near virgin biomass.
4 (Low Concern)—Population may be below target abundance level, but it is considered not
overfished
3 (Moderate Concern) —Abundance level is unknown and the species has a low or medium
inherent vulnerability to fishing.
2 (High Concern)—Population is overfished, depleted, or a species of concern, OR abundance
is unknown and the species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing.
1 (Very High Concern)—Population is listed as threatened or endangered.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderate Concern
The abundance of common octopus in Mexico is unknown, but likely fluctuates annually, depending on
environmental conditions and offspring survival (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008). Currently, abundance
surveys are not conducted for common octopus, but in 2013 this was defined as a research priority,
along with additional research to better understand population dynamics of this species in Mexico
(SAGARPA 2014a). Since abundance of common octopus is unknown and the species has a low
vulnerability to fishing, this factor is scored as “moderate concern”.
15
Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern)—Highly likely that fishing mortality is below a sustainable level (e.g.,
below fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield, FMSY), OR fishery does not target
species and its contribution to the mortality of species is negligible (≤ 5% of a sustainable
level of fishing mortality).
3.67 (Low Concern)—Probable (>50%) chance that fishing mortality is at or below a
sustainable level, but some uncertainty exists, OR fishery does not target species and does
not adversely affect species, but its contribution to mortality is not negligible, OR fishing
mortality is unknown, but the population is healthy and the species has a low susceptibility
to the fishery (low chance of being caught).
2.33 (Moderate Concern)—Fishing mortality is fluctuating around sustainable levels, OR
fishing mortality is unknown and species has a moderate-high susceptibility to the fishery
and, if species is depleted, reasonable management is in place.
1 (High Concern)—Overfishing is occurring, but management is in place to curtail
overfishing, OR fishing mortality is unknown, species is depleted, and no management is in
place.
0 (Critical)—Overfishing is known to be occurring and no reasonable management is in place
to curtail overfishing.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderate Concern
The fishing mortality on common octopus is unknown because a population assessment has not been
performed on the species (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008). Annual assessments are undertaken to
determine sustainable catch quotas for the red octopus but not common octopus (CONAPESCASAGARPA 2008). Although red octopus previously dominated the catch, in recent years the catch of
common octopus has increased and accounted for a larger proportion of the total octopus
catch (Arreguin-Sanchez 2000) (Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 2000) (SAGARPA 2004) (Sweeting et al. 2006)
(CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008) (SAGARPA 2014b). Common octopus can be found in water exceeding 100
m but in Mexico it is only fished in depths up to 60 m. Some suggest that the species is under-exploited
because of the shallow fishing and that there is potential for increased exploitation in deeper
water (SAGARPA 2012a) (Salas et al. 2011). However, due to the lack of information on sustainable
fishing limits for this species, fishing mortality is scored as “moderate concern”.
16
RED OCTOPUS
Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
Low—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 0-35, OR species exhibits life history
characteristics that make it resilient to fishing, (e.g., early maturing (
Medium—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 36-55, OR species exhibits life
history characteristics that make it neither particularly vulnerable nor resilient to fishing,
(e.g., moderate age at sexual maturity (5-15 years), moderate maximum age (10-25 years),
moderate maximum size, and middle of food chain).
High—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 56-100, OR species exhibits life history
characteristics that make is particularly vulnerable to fishing, (e.g., long-lived (>25 years),
late maturing (>15 years), low reproduction rate, large body size, and top-predator).
Note: The FishBase vulnerability scores is an index of the inherent vulnerability of marine
fishes to fishing based on life history parameters: maximum length, age at first maturity,
longevity, growth rate, natural mortality rate, fecundity, spatial behaviors (e.g., schooling,
aggregating for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or
reproduction) and geographic range.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Low
Like most octopuses, red octopus is a fast-growing and short-lived animal. Its average lifespan is one
reproductive cycle, which generally does not exceed 1.5 years (Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 2000). It sexually
matures in 5–9 months and produces fewer (500–3,000) but larger eggs than many octopuses (Voss and
Solis Ramirez 1966) (Van Heukelem 1976) (Gillespie et al. 1998) (GBC group 2014)(SAGARPA 2014a).
Females lay and care for their eggs inside caves (Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 2000). Red octopus offspring
are unique in that they do not experience a larval phase, but instead hatch and immediately become
benthic predators (Voss and Solis Ramirez 1966). Red octopus can grow to maximum size of 3.2 kg, with
males growing larger than females (Van Heukelem 1976). Given these life-history characteristics, red
octopus is considered to have a “low” vulnerability to fishing.
Rationale:
Table 1: Results from Seafood Watch invertebrate vulnerability rubric for octopus (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).
Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes. Species
with average attribute scores between 2.46 and 3 are deemed to have a ‘low vulnerability'.
17
Factor 1.2 - Abundance
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern)—Strong evidence exists that the population is above target
abundance level (e.g., biomass at maximum sustainable yield, BMSY) or near virgin biomass.
4 (Low Concern)—Population may be below target abundance level, but it is considered not
overfished
3 (Moderate Concern) —Abundance level is unknown and the species has a low or medium
inherent vulnerability to fishing.
2 (High Concern)—Population is overfished, depleted, or a species of concern, OR abundance
is unknown and the species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing.
1 (Very High Concern)—Population is listed as threatened or endangered.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderate Concern
Data from scientific underwater surveys and catch data have been used to estimate the abundance of
red octopus since 2001. Abundance of red octopus varies annually and is largely driven by offspring
survival (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008). Abundance has fluctuated between 16,000 t and 27,000 t from
2001 to 2012 (SAGARPA 2013) (SAGARPA 2014a). In 2012, abundance was estimated to be just over
19,000 t (Santos Valencia et al. 2012). However, the abundance estimates after the end of the 2012
fishing season were the lowest in the analyzed period, which might be because catches in 2012 greatly
exceeded the established sustainable catch limit or quota (SAGARPA 2013). Abundance in 2013
remained below average (SAGARPA 2014b). Currently, the limit abundance reference point for red
octopus is an average density of 1,850 individuals per hectare at the beginning of the fishing season, and
abundance has varied around this level. Abundance conservation goals based on maximum sustainable
yield have not been determined (SAGARPA 2014a). It is currently unclear whether the red octopus is
overfished or depleted. Since the status of red octopus is uncertain, and the species has a low inherent
vulnerability to fishing, this factor is rated as “moderate concern”.
18
Rationale:
Estimates of red octopus biomass and number of recruits (new fish entering the population) are
important factors in describing the population and its sustainability.
Figure 5: Temporal red octopus biomass trends for ages fully recruited to the fishery (a) and number of recruits
(=new fish entering the population) (b) over seven fishing seasons. The thick dashed horizontal lines represent the
average biomass or recruitment and the thinner dashed lines the 95% confidence intervals. Figure is moderately
adapted from SAGARPA 2014b.
19
Figure 6: Observed red octopus biomass and estimated biomass using a mathematical model for 2002-2012. Figure
is moderately adapted from SAGARPA 2013.
Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern)—Highly likely that fishing mortality is below a sustainable level (e.g.,
below fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield, FMSY), OR fishery does not target
species and its contribution to the mortality of species is negligible (≤ 5% of a sustainable
level of fishing mortality).
3.67 (Low Concern)—Probable (>50%) chance that fishing mortality is at or below a
sustainable level, but some uncertainty exists, OR fishery does not target species and does
not adversely affect species, but its contribution to mortality is not negligible, OR fishing
mortality is unknown, but the population is healthy and the species has a low susceptibility
to the fishery (low chance of being caught).
2.33 (Moderate Concern)—Fishing mortality is fluctuating around sustainable levels, OR
fishing mortality is unknown and species has a moderate-high susceptibility to the fishery
and, if species is depleted, reasonable management is in place.
1 (High Concern)—Overfishing is occurring, but management is in place to curtail
overfishing, OR fishing mortality is unknown, species is depleted, and no management is in
place.
0 (Critical)—Overfishing is known to be occurring and no reasonable management is in place
to curtail overfishing.
20
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
High Concern
Each year a catch limit or quota is determined for red octopus based on adult abundance, recruitment
(new animals entering the population), and growth data estimates (SAGARPA 2007) (CONAPESCASAGARPA 2008) (Santos Valencia et al. 2012) (SAGARPA 2014a). Catch quotas are typically set at the
maximum sustainable yield (MSY), a level of fishing that allows the population to persist. The goal is to
allow 50% of the population to escape the fishery and survive to reproduce (SAGARPA 2014a).
Managers and some research studies have indicated that fishing on red octopus is occurring near MSY
or that the fishery is fully exploited (SAGARPA 2012a) (Hernández-Sánchez and Jesús-Navarrete 2010).
However, other research has suggested that fishing levels may be above MSY and the fishery overexploited (Arreguin-Sanchez et al. 2000) (Perez Sanchez et al. 2010) (SAGARPA 2013). Since the red
octopus is endemic to the Yucatan Peninsula and prefers shallow habitats, it is likely to be much more
vulnerable to over-exploitation than the common octopus. Since 2006, the catch quotas for red octopus
have been exceeded in all years except 2008. In 2012 the catch quota was exceeded by 68% and in 2013
by 30% (SAGARPA 2014b). Another issue is that the small-scale fleet catches high numbers of undersized
red octopus, which may be negatively affecting the population (Salas et al. 2009) (Abunader et al. 2013).
Due to concern about the status of red octopus, scientists have recommended setting catch quotas
below the maximum sustainable yield/catch and monitoring catches to ensure they do not exceed the
quota (SAGARPA 2013). Currently, the estimated maximum sustainable yield/catch is 12,000 t, but the
recommended catch level is 10,000 t (SAGARPA 2014b). Because catches in recent years have exceeded
sustainable catch limits, we have awarded a “high concern” score.
Rationale:
Table 2: Annual catch quotas and reported catches for red octopus in Mexico for fishing seasons 2002-2013. Table
is moderately adapted from SAGARPA 2014b.
21
Criterion 2: Impacts on Other Species
All main retained and bycatch species in the fishery are evaluated in the same way as the
species under assessment were evaluated in Criterion 1. Seafood Watch® defines bycatch as all
fisheries-related mortality or injury to species other than the retained catch. Examples include
discards, endangered or threatened species catch, and ghost fishing. To determine the final
Criterion 2 score, the score for the lowest scoring retained/bycatch species is multiplied by the
discard rate score (ranges from 0-1), which evaluates the amount of non-retained catch
(discards) and bait use relative to the retained catch. The Criterion 2 rating is determined as
follows:
•
•
•
Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern
Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern
Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern
Rating is Critical if Factor 2.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical.
Criterion 2 Summary
Common octopus
Region / Method
Mexico Gulf of Mexico,
Handline
Red octopus
Region / Method
Mexico Gulf of Mexico,
Handline
Factors 2.1-2.3
Lowest Scoring of
Other Species
Red Octopus
Factors 2.1-2.3
Lowest Scoring of
Other Species
Common Octopus
Factor 2.4 Discard
Criterion 2 Score
Lowest Rate Modifying Score
Species ((Discards+
Subscore Bait)/Retained Catch)
1.732
0.95 (20-40%)
Red (1.645)
Factor 2.4 Discard
Criterion 2 Score
Lowest Rate Modifying Score
Species ((Discards+
Subscore Bait)/Retained Catch)
2.644
0.95 (20-40%)
Yellow (2.512)
The fishing method for octopus is reported to catch octopus almost exclusively (SAGARPA 2014a).
Therefore, no other species are assessed under Criterion 2. However, fishermen do use live crabs
(primarily blue crab, Callinectes sp.; spider crab, Libinia sp.; or stone crab, Menippe mercenaria) and fish
heads (perch and grunts) to bait their fishing lines (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008) (Salas et al. 2008)
(SAGARPA 2014a). Bait is sourced frozen or caught directly via diving; in some cases, the woman’s
22
fishing cooperative is responsible for catching the crab (Lasseter 2006) (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008). It
is unclear how much bait is used in this fishery, and the potential impact on these bait species is also
unclear (SAGARPA 2014). There is a human-consumption fishery for blue crab (Callinectes sp.) and the
Mexican government lists these species as fully exploited (SAGARPA 2012).
The limiting species in the octopus fishery is the red octopus due to concerns about high fishing levels on
this species (see Criterion 1 evaluations).
Criterion 2 Assessment
See Criterion 1 for assessments of common octopus and red octopus.
ALL SPECIES
Factor 2.4 – Modifying Factor: Discards and Bait Use
Scoring Guidelines
The discard rate is the sum of all dead discards (i.e. non-retained catch) plus bait use divided by
the total retained catch.
Ratio of bait + discards/landings
<20%
20-40%
40-60%
60-80%
80-100%
>100%
Factor 2.4 score
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
Mexico/Gulf of Mexico, Handline
20-40%
Information on discards (non-retained catches) is not available for the octopus fishery, but the fishery
catches octopus almost exclusively (SAGARPA 2014a). Some discards of undersized octopus likely occur.
The catch of undersized octopus is most common early in the fishing season (August) and in shallow
waters where the small artisanal boats operate (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008). Given the fishing method,
it is expected that many undersized octopus that are discarded back to the sea survive (Morgan and
Chuenpagdee 2003).
Fishermen use live crabs and fish heads to bait their fishing lines (Arreguin-Sanchez 1992) (ArreguinSanchez et al. 2000) (Lasseter 2006) (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008) (SAGARPA 2014a). Bait is sourced
frozen or caught directly via diving; in some cases, the woman’s fishing cooperative is responsible for
23
catching the crab (Lasseter 2006) (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008). It is unclear how much bait is used in
this fishery.
Although dead discards are likely <20% of the retained catch, discards plus bait use is scored as 20%–
40% of the retained catch to account for an unknown amount of bait use.
Criterion 3: Management effectiveness
Management is separated into management of retained species (harvest strategy) and
management of non-retained species (bycatch strategy).
The final score for this criterion is the geometric mean of the two scores. The Criterion 3 rating is
determined as follows:
•
•
•
Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern
Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern
Score <=2.2 or either the Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy
(Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern = Red or High Concern
Rating is Critical if either or both of Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) and Bycatch Management
Strategy (Factor 3.2) ratings are Critical.
Criterion 3 Summary
Region / Method
Factor 3.1
Harvest
Strategy
Factor 3.1
Bycatch
Strategy
Criteria 3
Score
Mexico Gulf of Mexico
Handline
2.000
All Species
Retained
Red(2.000)
Mexico is working to improve management of the octopus fishery, but management remains relatively
poor. Though several regulations have been established to protect octopus, enforcement of regulations
is weak, and non-compliance by fishers is known to be a problem. Bycatch management was not
evaluated because the fishery is reported to exclusively catch octopus.
24
Factor 3.1: Harvest Strategy
Scoring Guidelines
Seven subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy, Recovery of Species of Concern,
Scientific Research/Monitoring, Following of Scientific Advice, Enforcement of Regulations,
Management Track Record, and Inclusion of Stakeholders. Each is rated as ‘ineffective,’
‘moderately effective,’ or ‘highly effective.’
•
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern)—Rated as ‘highly effective’ for all seven subfactors considered.
4 (Low Concern)—Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern rated ‘highly
effective’ and all other subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective.’
3 (Moderate Concern)—All subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective.’
2 (High Concern)—At minimum, meets standards for ‘moderately effective’ for Management
Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern, but at least one other subfactor rated
‘ineffective.’
1 (Very High Concern)—Management exists, but Management Strategy and/or Recovery of
Species of Concern rated ‘ineffective.’
0 (Critical)—No management exists when there is a clear need for management (i.e., fishery
catches threatened, endangered, or high concern species), OR there is a high level of Illegal,
unregulated, and unreported fishing occurring.
Factor 3.1 Summary
Factor 3.1: Harvest Strategy
Region / Management Recovery
Method Strategy and of Species
Impl.
of
Concern
Mexico Moderately N/A
Gulf of Effective
Mexico
Handline
Scientific Record of Enforcement
Research & Following of Regs.
Monitoring Scientific
Advice
Moderately Moderately Ineffective
Effective Effective
Track
Record
Stakeholder Factor
Inclusion
3.1
Score
Moderately Moderately 2:00 High
Effective Effective
Concern
Factor 3.1 Assessment
Subfactor 3.1.1 – Management Strategy and Implementation
Considerations: What type of management measures are in place? Are there appropriate
management goals, and is there evidence that management goals are being met? To achieve a
25
highly effective rating, there must be appropriate management goals, and evidence that the
measures in place have been successful at maintaining/rebuilding species.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderately Effective
Management strategies in place for the octopus fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, Mexico are
primarily based on scientific information collected on the red octopus resource. Little scientific
information is collected on the common octopus. Regulations in place include fishing licenses, a
minimum size limit of 110 cm (to allow most octopus to breed or reproduce before they are caught), a
closed season from December 16–July 31, a prohibition on catching octopus by diving, and yearly catch
limits or quotas for red octopus (OECD 2006) (SAGARPA 2007) (Perez Sanchez et al. 2010) (SAGARPA
2014a). Catch quotas for red octopus are set each year based on population assessments of the species
and are designed to allow 50% of the reproductive population to survive (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008)
(Santos Valencia et al. 2012) (SAGARPA 2014a). There have been no population assessments of
the common octopus, and no catch quotas are set for this species.
Although several regulations are in place for this fishery, non-compliance by fishers is known to be a
problem. For instance, there are reports of fishers catching octopus with prohibited gears, catching
octopus below the legal minimum size limit, fishing during the closed season, as well as fishing by nonlicensed vessels (Salas et al. 2009) (Cabrera et al. 2012) (SAGARPA 2014a). Also, the established catch
quotas for red octopus are often exceeded. In multiple years, management has extended the fishing
season because fishermen reported low catches and declared economic hardship midway through the
season. Extending the fishing season has often resulted in the fishery exceeding the annual quota by
22%–86% (CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008) (Salas et al. 2009) (SAGARPA 2013). This had led to concerns
about the sustainability of current fishing levels on the red octopus population.
Recently, a new management plan for the octopus fishery was proposed to improve the sustainability of
the fishery. The plan outlines a variety of management goals and actions, including maintaining octopus
populations at the maximum sustainable yield, estimating the abundance of common octopus,
researching more effective ways to monitor the catch quotas during the fishing season,
improving enforcement and compliance with regulations, deterring illegal fishing, improving the
economic stability of the fishery, and involving fishermen in the management process (SAGARPA
2014a).
Several appropriate management strategies are in place to protect the red and common octopuses, but
because regulations have not always been adequately enforced, their effectiveness is uncertain. We
have therefore scored management strategy and implementation as “moderately effective.”
26
Subfactor 3.1.2 – Recovery of Species of Concern
Considerations: When needed, are recovery strategies/management measures in place to
rebuild overfished/threatened/ endangered species or to limit fishery’s impact on these species
and what is their likelihood of success? To achieve a rating of Highly Effective, rebuilding
strategies that have a high likelihood of success in an appropriate timeframe must be in place
when needed, as well as measures to minimize mortality for any overfished/threatened/
endangered species.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
N/A
Neither the red octopus nor the common octopus is listed as overfished or depleted, so this factor is
rated N/A. However, it should be noted that catches of red octopus have been above the established
catch limits in several years and there are some concerns that high fishing levels on this species have led
to abundance declines (SAGARPA 2013).
Subfactor 3.1.3 – Scientific Research and Monitoring
Considerations: How much and what types of data are collected to evaluate the health of the
population and the fishery’s impact on the species? To achieve a Highly Effective rating,
population assessments must be conducted regularly and they must be robust enough to
reliably determine the population status.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderately Effective
The National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO) and the National
Fisheries Institute (INAPESCA) are responsible for conducting research and providing advice on the
development, preservation, and use of aquatic species (FAO 2005). Annual octopus catches are reported
by fishers and density data is collected by scientists using underwater surveys. This information is used
in annual population assessments to estimate abundance and determine yearly catch quotas for red
octopus (Santos Valencia et al. 2012). However, there are some concerns about the monitoring of red
octopus catches during the season in relation to the quota and concerns that the species may be overexploited. Scientists have recommended monthly monitoring of red octopus catches and abundance
during the fishing season to ensure the sustainability of the resource (SAGARPA 2007) (Perez Sanchez et
al. 2010) (Salas et al. 2011). No population assessments are currently conducted for the common
octopus and there are no estimates of abundance for this species. In 2013, 19 research priorities were
identified in the new octopus fishery management plan (SAGARPA 2014a). These research priorities
include assessing red and common octopus populations, determining biomass estimates for common
27
octopus, estimating illegal fishing practices, establishing methods to monitor weekly catches to comply
with quotas, and evaluating environmental effects on the octopus populations (SAGARPA 2014a). There
is regular monitoring and assessment of the red octopus, but because there is limited monitoring of the
common octopus, this factor is rated as “moderately effective.”
Subfactor 3.1.4 – Management Record of Following Scientific Advice
Considerations: How often (always, sometimes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow
scientific recommendations/advice (e.g. do they set catch limits at recommended levels)? A
Highly Effective rating is given if managers nearly always follow scientific advice.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderately Effective
The National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO) and the National
Fisheries Institute (INAPESCA) provide scientific advice on the management of fisheries (FAO 2005).
Recommendations are offered by other stakeholders including private sector, government, and
community interests (Ponce-Diaz et al. 2009). The Secretariat of the Agriculture, Livestock, Rural
Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGRAPA) and the National Commission of Aquaculture and Fishing
(CONAPESCA) utilize scientific advice in the management of fisheries, but some decisions are not based
on science (OECD 2006).
In the octopus fishery, scientists make recommendations on the yearly catch quota or limit for the red
octopus, and managers seem to set the quota according to the scientific advice. However, management
has sometimes extended the fishing season for economic reasons and allowed the quota to be exceeded
(CONAPESCA-SAGARPA 2008) (SAGARPA 2013). Due to concerns about the sustainability of the red
octopus population, scientists have recommended that managers set more precautionary catch limits
for red octopus (SAGARPA 2013), that catches be monitored monthly, and that catch limits be set for
specific locations to minimize pressure in certain areas (Arreguin-Sanchez 2000) (SAGARPA 2004)
(SAGARPA 2007) (SAGARPA 2014). Managers have identified improved monitoring of the octopus
catches and compliance with the quota as priorities in the new octopus management plan. Since
managers only sometimes follow scientific advice, this results in a score of “moderately effective.”
Subfactor 3.1.5 – Enforcement of Management Regulations
Considerations: Do fishermen comply with regulations, and how is this monitored? To achieve a
Highly Effective rating, there must be regular enforcement of regulations and verification of
compliance.
28
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Ineffective
The managing agencies—the Secretariat of the Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and
Food (SAGRAPA) and National Commission for Aquaculture and Fishing (CONAPESCA)—have clear
descriptions of octopus fishery regulations, including permits needed, gear that can be used, size
restrictions, catch quotas, fishing boundaries, and seasonal closures (FAO 2005) (Lasseter 2006) (Perez
Sanchez et al. 2010). Unfortunately, many of the regulations (gear, catch quotas, size limit, fishing
season) are ignored by fishermen or not properly enforced by management (Chuenpagdee et al. 2002)
(Lasseter 2006) (Ponce-Diaz et al. 2009) (Salas et al. 2011) (SAGARPA 2014a). For instance, it has been
reported that as much as 30%–40% of the catch may consist of undersized octopus in some areas (this is
particularly a problem in the small artisanal fishery directed at red octopus) (Salas et al. 2009) (Cabrera
et al. 2012). Additionally, the catch quota for red octopus has been exceeded in 8 out of the last 10
years (SAGARPA 2014b). There are also reports of fishing by non-licensed vessels (SAGARPA 2014a). A
shortage of enforcing officers and poverty among fishermen are two possible reasons why illegal fishing
is occurring (Ponce-Diaz et al. 2009). In 2013, new plans were developed to reduce illegal fishing
practices. These plans include estimating illegal fishing, developing new trap technologies to reduce
illegal diving, improving efforts to monitor and comply with quotas, providing specific training for
stakeholders (fishermen, surveillance, businessmen, etc.) and designating CONAPESCA and the Navy
Department as responsible for checking and enforcing compliance (SAGARPA 2014a). Though new
enforcement plans are in place, it is too soon to evaluate their effectiveness. Because enforcement,
monitoring, and compliance have been poor in the past and recent years, this factor is rated
“ineffective.”
Subfactor 3.1.6 – Management Track Record
Considerations: Does management have a history of successfully maintaining populations at
sustainable levels or a history of failing to maintain populations at sustainable levels? A Highly
Effective rating is given if measures enacted by management have been shown to result in the
long-term maintenance of species overtime.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderately Effective
The octopus fishery has been an established commercial fishery since the 1970s, but most of the
regulations protecting and managing the species were not implemented until the 1990s (SAGARPA
1993) (SAGARPA 1994) (Oosthuizen 2003) (SAGARPA 2004). In the past, fisheries in Mexico were
marketed as a resource in hopes of obtaining broad participation. However, changes were made to the
Fisheries Law in 2007 with the creation of the General Law of Sustainable Fishing and Aquaculture
(Ponce-Diaz et al. 2009). This law’s goal is to manage fisheries for sustainability. Current regulations for
29
the octopus fishery include a minimum size limit, a closed season, and catch limits or quotas. Most of
the management strategies in place are based on scientific information collected on red octopus; thus,
these are primarily designed to protect this species. The effectiveness of current management strategies
remains uncertain. Red octopus is considered fully utilized or potentially over-utilized (Arreguin-Sanchez
et al. 2000) (Perez Sanchez et al. 2010) (SAGARPA 2013). Catches of red octopus have been above
established catch quotas in recent years because fishery regulations have not been adequately
enforced, and there have been issues with illegal fishing (SAGARPA 2013) (SAGARPA 2014a). Little
scientific information is collected on the common octopus and the status of this species is
unknown. Recently, a new fishery management plan for the octopus fishery was proposed, and actions
were identified to improve the sustainability of the fishery, improve compliance with management
regulations, and deter illegal fishing (SAGARPA 2014a). Since the current management track record is
uncertain and a new management plan for the octopus fishery was only recently put in place, this factor
is rated “moderately effective.”
Subfactor 3.1.7 – Stakeholder Inclusion
Considerations: Are stakeholders involved/included in the decision-making process?
Stakeholders are individuals/groups/organizations that have an interest in the fishery or that
may be affected by the management of the fishery (e.g., fishermen, conservation groups, etc.).
A Highly Effective rating is given if the management process is transparent and includes
stakeholder input.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Moderately Effective
Historically, the Mexican government made most regulatory decisions for fisheries and conservation
with little regard to scientific and stakeholder input. Recent changes in management goals and process
now invite and promote community and stakeholder involvement. Recently, stakeholders have
contributed to current management decisions (Ponce-Diaz et al. 2009) (SAGARPA 2014a). Since
involvement of stakeholders has been minimal in the past but an effort is being made to improve
inclusion, this factor is scored as “moderately effective.”
Factor 3.2: Bycatch Management Strategy
Scoring Guidelines
Four subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy and Implementation, Scientific Research and
Monitoring, Record of Following Scientific Advice, and Enforcement of Regulations. Each is rated as
‘ineffective,’ ‘moderately effective,’ or ‘highly effective.’ Unless reason exists to rate Scientific Research
30
and Monitoring, Record of Following Scientific Advice, and Enforcement of Regulations differently, these
ratings are the same as in 3.1.
•
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern) —Rated as ‘highly effective’ for all four subfactors considered.
4 (Low Concern) —Management Strategy rated ‘highly effective’ and all other subfactors rated at
least ‘moderately effective.’
3 (Moderate Concern) — All subfactors rates at least ‘moderately effective.’
2 (High Concern) — At minimum, meets standards for ‘moderately effective’ for Management
Strategy but some other factors rated ‘ineffective.’
1 (Very High Concern) —Management exists, but Management Strategy rated ‘ineffective.’
0 (Critical)— No bycatch management even when overfished, depleted, endangered or threatened
species are known to be regular components of bycatch and are substantially impacted by the
fishery.
Factor 3.2 Summary
Factor 3.2: Management of fishing impacts on bycatch species
Region / Method
All Kept Critical Management Scientific Record of Enforcement
Strategy and Research Following of Regs.
Impl.
&
Scientific
Monitoring Advice
Mexico Gulf of Mexico
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Handline
31
Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem
This Criterion assesses the impact of the fishery on seafloor habitats, and increases that base
score if there are measures in place to mitigate any impacts. The fishery’s overall impact on the
ecosystem and food web and the use of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM)
principles is also evaluated. Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management aims to consider the
interconnections among species and all natural and human stressors on the environment.
The final score is the geometric mean of the impact of fishing gear on habitat score (plus the
mitigation of gear impacts score) and the Ecosystem Based Fishery Management score. The
Criterion 2 rating is determined as follows:
•
•
•
Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern
Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern
Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern
Rating cannot be Critical for Criterion 4.
Criterion 4 Summary
Region / Method
Factor 4.1 Impact Factor 4.2
of Gear on
Mitigation of
Habitat Score
Gear Impacts
Modifier
Mexico Gulf of Mexico 4.00:Very Low
Handline
Concern
0.25:Minimal
Mitigation
Factor 4.3
Ecosystem
Based Fisheries
Management
Score
3.00:Moderate
Concern
Criterion 4 Score
Green (3.571)
Criterion 4 Assessment
Factor 4.1 – Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
5 (None)—Fishing gear does not contact the bottom
4 (Very Low)—Vertical line gear
3 (Low)—Gears that contacts the bottom, but is not dragged along the bottom (e.g. gillnet,
bottom longline, trap) and is not fished on sensitive habitats. Bottom seine on resilient
mud/sand habitats. Midwater trawl that is known to contact bottom occasionally (
32
•
•
•
2 (Moderate)—Bottom dragging gears (dredge, trawl) fished on resilient mud/sand habitats.
Gillnet, trap, or bottom longline fished on sensitive boulder or coral reef habitat. Bottom
seine except on mud/sand
1 (High)—Hydraulic clam dredge. Dredge or trawl gear fished on moderately sensitive
habitats (e.g., cobble or boulder)
0 (Very High)—Dredge or trawl fished on biogenic habitat, (e.g., deep-sea corals, eelgrass
and maerl)
Note: When multiple habitat types are commonly encountered, and/or the habitat classification
is uncertain, the score will be based on the most sensitive, plausible habitat type.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Very Low Concern
In Mexico, common and red octopuses are fished using baited lines that are attached to a wooden or
bamboo pole, called a “jimba.” The jimba are attached to the boat, and typically there are six or seven
baited lines attached to each jimba (Oosthuizen 2003) (Lasseter 2006) (Sweeting et al. 2006) (SAGARPA
2014a). The lines are pulled in by hand. The baited lines are intended to reach the ocean floor to attract
octopus. Octopuses prefer seagrass, rocky, and coral reef habitats, so fishing may occur over these areas
(SAGARPA 2014a). Compared to other fishing methods, handline fishing is among the least damaging to
ocean habitats, but may cause minor damage to bottom substrates or to coral and sponges when fishing
on reefs (Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003). This factor is scored as “very low concern”.
Factor 4.2 – Mitigation of Gear Impacts
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
•
+1 (Strong Mitigation)—Examples include large proportion of habitat protected from fishing
(>50%) with gear, fishing intensity low/limited, gear specifically modified to reduce damage
to seafloor and modifications shown to be effective at reducing damage, or an effective
combination of ‘moderate’ mitigation measures.
+0.5 (Moderate Mitigation)—20% of habitat protected from fishing with gear or other
measures in place to limit fishing effort, fishing intensity, and spatial footprint of damage
caused from fishing.
+0.25 (Low Mitigation)—A few measures are in place (e.g., vulnerable habitats protected
but other habitats not protected); there are some limits on fishing effort/intensity, but not
actively being reduced.
0 (No Mitigation)—No effective measures are in place to limit gear impacts on habitats.
33
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Minimal Mitigation
Mexico has an impressive array of protected areas throughout the Mexican coastline, including several
along the Yucatan Peninsula where the octopus fishery operates, but management and enforcement is
limited (Bezaury-Creel 2005) (Ponce-Diaz et al. 2009) (Salas et al. 2011). The reserves along the Yucatan
are managed for the general protection of flora and fauna (Sweeting et al. 2006). In some reserves,
fishing practices are prohibited, including handline fishing (Sweeting et al. 2006). There are no other
restrictions in place for the octopus fishery to limit total fishing effort or the spatial footprint. This
results in a score of “minimal mitigation.”
Factor 4.3 – Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management
Scoring Guidelines
•
•
•
•
•
5 (Very Low Concern)—Substantial efforts have been made to protect species’ ecological
roles and ensure fishing practices do not have negative ecological effects (e.g., large
proportion of fishery area is protected with marine reserves, and abundance is maintained
at sufficient levels to provide food to predators).
4 (Low Concern)—Studies are underway to assess the ecological role of species and
measures are in place to protect the ecological role of any species that plays an
exceptionally large role in the ecosystem. Measures are in place to minimize potentially
negative ecological effect if hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs)
are used.
3 (Moderate Concern)—Fishery does not catch species that play an exceptionally large role
in the ecosystem, or if it does, studies are underway to determine how to protect the
ecological role of these species, OR negative ecological effects from hatchery
supplementation or FADs are possible and management is not place to mitigate these
impacts.
2 (High Concern)—Fishery catches species that play an exceptionally large role in the
ecosystem and no efforts are being made to incorporate their ecological role into
management.
1 (Very High Concern)—Use of hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs)
in the fishery is having serious negative ecological or genetic consequences, OR fishery has
resulted in trophic cascades or other detrimental impacts to the food web.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
34
Moderate Concern
The common and red octopuses are active predators, primarily feeding on crustaceans (crabs and
lobsters), molluscs (snails and clams), and fish. They are in turn a food source for many species,
including groupers, snappers, other fish, and sometimes marine mammals (Lasseter 2006) (ArreguinSanchez 2000) (SAGARPA 2014a). Commercially important spiny lobster and red grouper share habitat
with octopus, and these species are all connected through the food web. Octopus is an important prey
item for red grouper, and both red grouper and octopus are predators of spiny lobster. Thus fishing and
management regulations for any of these species will likely have some effect on the others (Lasseter
2006) (Arreguin-Sanchez 2000). Unfortunately, the damages and pressures that the octopus fishery has
on the ecosystem and food web are not well studied. There has also been no assessment of the fishery’s
effects on resources commonly used for bait (e.g., crabs). Since there is no management or assessment
of ecosystem impacts, but octopuses are not considered to play an exceptionally large role in the
ecosystem, this factor is rated as “moderate concern.”
35
Acknowledgements
Scientific review does not constitute an endorsement of The Safina Center or Seafood Watch®
program, or its seafood recommendations, on the part of the reviewing scientists. The Safina
Center and Seafood Watch® are solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report.
The Safina Center and Seafood Watch® would like to thank Juan Vilata and one other anonymous
reviewer for graciously reviewing this report for scientific accuracy and clarity.
36
References
Abunader, I.V., S. Salas, and M. A. Cabrera. 2013. Differential Catchability by Zone, Fleet, and Size: The
Case of the Red Octopus (Octopus maya) and Common Octopus (Octopus vulgaris) Fishery in Yucatan,
Mexico. Journal of Shellfish Research 32:845-854.
Arreguin-Sanchez F. 2000. Octopus-red grouper interaction in the exploited ecosystem of the northern
continental shelf of Yucatan, Mexico. Ecological Modelling 129: 119-129.
Arreguin-Sanchez F. 1992. Growth and seasonal recruitment of octopus maya on campeche bank,
Mexico. NAGA, The ICLARM Quarterly. 31-34.
Arreguín-Sánchez F., M.J. Solís-Ramírez, M.E. González de la Rosa. 2000. Population dynamics and stock
assessment for Octopus maya (Cephalopoda: Octopodidae) fishery in the Campeche Bank, Gulf of
Mexico. Revista de Biología Tropical 48: 323-31. Available at:
http://www.scielo.sa.cr/scielo.php?script=sci_arttextpid=S0034-77442000000200005lng=es.
Arroyo A.M., S.M. Naim, J.Z. Hidalgo. 2011. Vulnerability to climate change of marine and coastal
fisheries in Mexico. Atmosfera 1:103-23.
Auster P.J., R.W. Langton. 1999. The effects of fishing on fish habitat. American Fisheries Society
symposium. 37pp.
Bezaury-Creel, J.E. 2005. Protected areas and coastal and ocean management in Mexico. Ocean Coastal
Management 48:1016-1046.
Boyle P.R., S.V. Boletzky. 1996. Cephalopod populations: definitions and dynamics. Philosophical
transactions: biological sciences 351: 981-1002.
Cabrera, M.A., J. Ramos-Miranda, S. Salas, D. Flores-Hernandez, A. Sosa-Lopez. 2012. Population
Structure Analysis of Red Octopus (Octopus maya) in the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Proceedings of the
64th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute October 31 - November 5, 2011.
Chenpagdee, R., J. Fraga, J.I. Euan-Avila. 2002. Community perspectives toward a marine reserve: A case
study of San Felipe, Yucatan, Mexico. Coastal Management 30:183-191.
CONAPESCA-SAGARPA. 2008. Plan de maejo y operacion de comite de administracion pesquera de
escama y pulpo. 174pp.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2005. National Aquaculture Legislation
Overview: Mexico. Fact Sheets. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/fishery/legalframework/nalo_mexico/en.
37
FAO. 2008. Status of the stocks of the western central Atlantic FAO statistical area 31. Western central
Atlantic Fisheries Commission (WECAFC) XIII. 15pp.
FAO. 2014a. Species Fact Sheets Octopus vulgaris (Lamarck, 1798). Available at:
http://www.fao.org/fishery/species/3571/en
FAO. 2014b. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Statistics. FishStatJ. http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/en
Global Biotech Consulting Group (GBC group). 2014.
http://www.gbcbiotech.com/genomicaypesca/en/especies/moluscos/pulpo.html Accessed on: April 6,
2014.
Gillespie, G.E., G. Parker, J. Morrison. A review of octopus fisheries biology and british columbia octopus
fisheries. Canadian stock assessment secretariat research document 98/87. 67pp.
Guerra A., L. Allcock, J. Pereira. 2010. Cephalopod life history, ecology and fisheries: An introduction.
Fisheries Research 106:117-24.
Hernández-Sánchez, A. and A. Jesús-Navarrete. 2010. Growth parameters, mortality and exploitation
rate of Octopus maya, at Holbox, Quintana Roo, Mexico. Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía Vol.
45: 415-421,
Juarez O.E., C. Rosas, L. Arena. 2010. Heterologous microsatellites reveal moderate genetic structure in
the octopus maya population. Fisheries research 106:209-13.
Kelleher, K. 2005. Discards in the world’s marine fisheries: An update. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No.
470. Rome, FAO. 1-131.
Lasseter A. 2006. Lobsters are like gold: perceptions of resource access and management in a Mexican
common property fishery. Masters thesis. 180pp.
Macfadyen G., T. Huntington, R. Cappell. 2009. Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear.
UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies No.185. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper, No.
523. 115pp.
Mather J.A., R.K. O'Dor. 1991. Foraging strategies and predation risk shape the natural history of juvenile
octopus vulgaris. Bulletin of marine science 49:256-259.
Morgan, L.E., R. Chuenpagdee. 2003. Shifting gears: addressing the collateral impacts of fishing methods
in U.S. waters. PEW Science Series. 142pp.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2014. Fisheries statistics division: commercial fisheries and
foreign trade information. National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed March 31, 2014. Available at:
http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/commercial-fisheries/index
Northeast Region Essential Fish Habitat Steering Committee (NREFHSC). 2002. Workshop on the Effects
of Fishing Gear on Marine Habitats off the Northeastern United States, October 23-25, 2001, Boston,
38
Massachusetts. Northeast Fishery Science Center Reference Document 02-01. 86 pp. Available at
http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/crd/crd0201/crd0201.pdf. Accessed April 26, 2013
Organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD). 2006. Agricultural and fisheries
policies in Mexico - recent achievements, continuing the reform agenda. 332pp.
Oosthuizen A. 2003. A development and management framework for a new octopus vulgaris fishery in
South Africa. Doctoral dissertation. 203pp.
Perez Sanchez M.I., J. Ramos Miranda, F. Gomez Criollo, D. Flores Hernandez, A. Sosa Lopez, N. Ferraez
Campos, S. Cinco, J. Santos Valencia, L.A. Ayala Perez. 2010. Red octopus' (octopus maya Voss Solis,
1967) landings from the littoral of campeche: time series analysis. 6pp.
Ponce-Diaz, G., F. Arregin-Sanchez, A. Diaz-de Leon, P. Alvarez Torres. 2009. Promotion and
management of marine fisheries in mexico. In: Winter G. 2009. Towards a sustainable fisheries law: a
comparative analysis. IUCN environmental policy and law paper no. 74. 340pp.
Secretaria de agricultura, ganaderia, desarrollo rural, pesca y alimentacion (SAGARPA). 1993. NORMA
Oficial Mexicana 008-PESC-1993, para ordenar el aprovechamiento de las especies de pulpo en las aguas
de jurisdicción federal del Golfo de México y mar Caribe. 2pp.
SAGARPA. 1994. NORMA Oficial Mexicana NOM-009-PESC-1993, que establece el procedimiento para
determinar las épocas y zonas de veda para la captura de las diferentes especies de la flora y fauna
acuáticas, en aguas de jurisdicción federal de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. 3pp.
SAGARPA. 2004. Evaluacion de la poblacion de pulpo (octopus maya) en peninsula de yucatan 2004.
13pp.
SAGARPA. 2006. Pulpo - region IV: Yucatan, Campeche y Quintana Roo. 22pp.
SAGARPA. 2007. Evaluacion de la poblacion de pulpo (octopus maya) en peninsula de yucatan 2007.
11pp. Available at:
http://www.gbcbiotech.com/genomicaypesca/documentos/moluscos/pulpo/Evaluacion%20de%20la%2
0poblacion%20de%20pulpo%20Octopus%20maya%20en%20la%20peninsula%20de%20Yucatan.pdf
SAGARPA. 2012a. 2012 season Octopus in the Yucatan
http://www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx/wb/cona/01_agosto_de_2012_mazatlan_sinaloa
SAGARPA. 2012b. National Fisheries Report 2012. Available at
http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/publicaciones/carta-nacional-pesquera
SAGARPA. 2013. Dictamen tecnico: Para el establecimiento de cutoa de captura de pulpo octopus maya
para la temporada de pesca 2013. 13 pp. Available at
http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/publicaciones/dictamenes/cat_view/15-pulpo
39
SAGARPA 2014a. ACUERDO por el que se da a conocer el Plan de Manejo Pesquero de pulpo (O. Maya y
O. Vulgaris) del Golfo de México y Mar Caribe. 48pp. Available at:
http://sagarpa.gob.mx/normateca/Normateca/ACUERDO%20por%20el%20que%20se%20da%20a%20co
nocer%20el%20Plan%20de%20Manejo%20Pesquero%20de%20pulpo%20del%20Golfo%20de%20M%C3
%A9xico%20y%20Mar%20Caribe.pdf
SAGARPA. 2014b. Dictamen tecnico: Establecimiento de cutoa de captura de pulpo octopus maya para
la temporada de pesca 2014. 12 pp. Available at
http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/publicaciones/dictamenes/cat_view/15-pulpo
Salas S., R. Chuenpagdee, A. Charles, J.C. Seijo. 2011. Coastal fisheries of Latin America and the
Caribbean. FAO technical paper no. 544. 444pp.
Salas, S., M.A. Cabrera, L. Palomo, E. Torres-Irineo. 2009. Using Indicators to Assess Regulatory
Measures on Octopus Fishery Interaction Yucatán given the Fleet. Proceedings of the 61st Gulf and
Caribbean Fisheries Institute November 10 - 14, 2008.
Santos Valencia, J., J.C. Espinoza Mendez, G. Galindo Cortez. 2012. Dictamen tecnico: PARA EL
ESTABLECIMIENTO DE CUOTA DE CAPTURA DE PULPO Octopus maya PARA LA TEMPORADA DE PESCA
2012. 8pp.
Semmens J.M., G.T. Pecl, B.M. Gillanders, C.M. Waluda, E.K. Shea, D. Jouffre, T. Ichii, K. Zumholz, O.N.
Katugin, S.C. Leporati, P.W.Shaw. 2007. Reviews in fish biology and fisheries 17: 401-23.
Silva, L., I. Sobrino, F. Ramos. 2002. Reproductive biology of the common octopus, Octopus vulgaris
cuvier, 1797 (cephalopoda:octopodidae) in the Gulf of Cadiz (SW Spain). Bulletin of marine science
71:837-850.
Sweeting C.J., W.J.F. Le Quesne, N.V.C. Polunin, H. Xu, H. Ding, J. Wu, F. Arreguin-Sanchez, D. Lercari,
M.J. Zetina-Rejon. 2006. A review of the similarities and differences of planning, operation, stakeholder
involvement and effectiveness of selected MPAs. INCOFISH Deliverable 5.1 MPA Report. 145pp.
Van Heukelem W.F. 1976. Growth, biogenergetics and life-span of octopus cyanea and octopus maya.
PhD dissertation: University of Hawaii. 232pp.
Vaz-Pires P., P. Seixas, A. Barbosa. 2004. Aquaculture potential of the common octopus (octopus vulgaris
cuvier, 1797): a review. Aquculture 238:221-38.
Voss G.L., M. Solis Ramirez. 1966. Octopus maya, a new species from the bay of campeche, Mexico.
Bulletin of marine science 16: 615-25.
40
Appendix A: Main Species Considered in the Assessment
Summary of all main species considered in the assessment
Mexico Gulf of Mexico, Handline
Species
RED OCTOPUS
COMMON OCTOPUS
Factor 1.1
Factor 1.2
Inherent
Abundance
Vulnerability
Low
3.00:
Moderate
Concern
Low
3.00:
Moderate
Concern
Factor 1.3
Fishing
Mortality
1.00: High
Concern
Subscore
2.33:
Moderate
Concern
2.644
1.732