Proceedings of the US and Canada Scallop Science

Proceedings of the US and Canada Scallop Science
Proceedings of the US and Canada Scallop Science
Summit: St. Andrews, New Brunswick, May 6–8, 2014
S.R. Bayer1, T. Cheney2, C. Guenther3, and J.A. Sameoto4
1
University of Maine
Darling Marine Center
193 Clark’s Cove Road
Walpole, ME, USA
04573
2
Maine Department of Marine Resources
21 State House Station
32 Blossom Lane
Augusta, ME, USA
04333-0021
3
Penobscot East Resource Center
PO Box 27
Stonington, ME, USA
04681
4
Bedford Institute of Oceanography
1 Challenger Drive
PO Box 1006
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y 4A2
2016
Canadian Technical Report of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3151
Canadian Technical Report of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
Technical reports contain scientific and technical information that contributes to existing
knowledge but which is not normally appropriate for primary literature. Technical reports are directed
primarily toward a worldwide audience and have an international distribution. No restriction is placed on
subject matter and the series reflects the broad interests and policies of the Department of Fisheries and
Oceans, namely, fisheries and aquatic sciences. Technical reports may be cited as full publications. The
correct citation appears above the abstract of each report. Each report is abstracted in Aquatic Sciences
and Fisheries Abstracts and indexed in the Department’s annual index to scientific and technical
publications. Numbers 1-456 in this series were issued as Technical Reports of the Fisheries Research
Board of Canada. Numbers 457-714 were issued as Department of the Environment, Fisheries and
Marine Service, Research and Development Directorate Technical Reports. Numbers 715–924 were
issued as Department of Fisheries and the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service Technical Reports.
The current series name was changed with report number 925.
Technical reports are produced regionally but are numbered nationally. Requests for individual
reports will be filled by the issuing establishment listed on the front cover and title page. Out-of-stock
reports will be supplied for a fee by commercial agents.
Rapport technique canadien des
sciences halieutiques et aquatiques
Les rapports techniques contiennent des renseignements scientifiques et techniques qui
constituent une contribution aux connaissances actuelles, mais qui ne sont pas normalement appropriés
pour la publication dans un journal scientifique. Les rapports techniques sont destinés essentiellement à
un public international et ils sont distribués à cet échelon. Il n’y a aucune restriction quant au sujet; de fait,
la série reflète la vaste gamme des intérêts et des politiques du ministère des Pêches et des Océans,
c’est-à-dire les sciences halieutiques et aquatiques. Les rapports techniques peuvent être cités comme
des publications complètes. Le titre exact parait au-dessus du résumé de chaque rapport. Les rapports
techniques sont résumés dans la revue Résumés des sciences aquatiques et halieutiques, et ils sont
classés dans l’index annuel des publications scientifiques et techniques du Ministère. Les numéros 1 à
456 de cette série ont été publiés à titre de rapports techniques de l’Office des recherches sur les
pêcheries du Canada. Les numéros 457 à 714 sont parus à titre de rapports techniques de la Direction
générale de la recherche et du développement, Service des pêches et de la mer, ministère de
l’Environnement. Les numéros 715 à 924 ont été publiés à titre de rapports techniques du Service des
pêches et de la mer, ministère des Pêches et de l’Environnement. Le nom actuel de la série a été établi
lors de la parution du numéro 925.
Les rapports techniques sont produits à l’échelon régional, mais numéroté à l’échelon national.
Les demandes de rapports seront satisfaites par l’établissement auteur dont le nom figure sur la
couverture et la page du titre. Les rapports épuisés seront fournis contre rétribution par des agents
commerciaux
i
Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3151
2016
PROCEEDINGS OF THE US AND CANADA SCALLOP SCIENCE SUMMIT: ST.
ANDREWS, NEW BRUNSWICK, MAY 6–8, 2014
by
S.R. Bayer1, T. Cheney2, C. Guenther3, and J.A. Sameoto4
1
University of Maine
Darling Marine Center
193 Clark’s Cove Road
Walpole, ME, USA
04573
2
Maine Department of Marine Resources
21 State House Station
32 Blossom Lane
Augusta, ME, USA
04333-0021
3
Penobscot East Resource Center
PO Box 27
Stonington, ME, USA
04681
4
Bedford Institute of Oceanography
1 Challenger Drive
PO Box 1006
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y 4A2
ii
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2016.
Cat. No. Fs97-6/3151E-PDF ISBN 978-0-660-04065-3 ISSN 1488-5379
Correct citation for this publication:
S.R. Bayer, T. Cheney, C. Guenther, and J.A. Sameoto. 2016. Proceedings of the US and
Canada Scallop Science Summit: St. Andrews, New Brunswick, May 6–8, 2014. Can.
Tech. Rep. Aquat. Sci. 3151: v + 48 p.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................iv
RÉSUME .........................................................................................................................iv
PREFACE ....................................................................................................................... 1
Goals of the summit: .................................................................................................... 1
Summit Format: ........................................................................................................... 1
Organizers: .................................................................................................................. 2
Funding:....................................................................................................................... 2
SUMMIT OPENING AND KEY NOTE TALKS................................................................. 3
SESSION 1: DISCUSSION ....................................................................................... 13
SESSION 2: FISHERY DEPENDENT DATA ................................................................ 15
SESSION 2: QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION .............................................................. 18
SESSION 3: AQUACULTURE, SEA RANCHING and ENHANCEMENT...................... 23
SESSION 3: QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION .............................................................. 29
SESSION 4: SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF THE SEA SCALLOP RESOURCE . 31
SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 36
Appendix 1. Letter of Invitation .................................................................................. 38
Appendix 2. Workshop Agenda ................................................................................. 39
Appendix 3. Attendee List .......................................................................................... 45
Appendix 4. Updates since May 2014 ....................................................................... 47
iv
ABSTRACT
S.R. Bayer, T. Cheney, C. Guenther, and J.A. Sameoto. 2016. Proceedings of the US and
Canada Scallop Science Summit: St. Andrews, New Brunswick, May 6–8, 2014. Can.
Tech. Rep. Aquat. Sci. 3151: v + 48 p.
A council of stakeholders ranging from fishermen, to scientists, and fisheries managers
from both Canada and the United States convened on May 6, 7, and 8, 2014 in St.
Andrews, New Brunswick to review and discuss the most recent scientific information
relevant to the sea scallop fisheries and aquaculture efforts in the US and Canada. The
US and Canada Scallop Summit aimed to strengthen and broaden the knowledge base
in the scallop fisheries, with a focus on the nearshore fisheries in the Gulf of Maine and
Bay of Fundy, as well as aquaculture efforts, and develop research priorities that aim to
assist in the goal of profitable, sustainable fisheries that support coastal communities.
More specifically, the overarching goals of this meeting were: i) to review and discuss
the most recent scientific information relevant to the sea scallop fisheries and
aquaculture efforts in the US and Canada among stakeholders – scientists, harvesters,
and managers, ii) to bring together relevant groups – including scientists, harvesters,
and managers, to increase coordination and collaboration on future scientific research
opportunities, and iii) to provide an inclusive and participative forum to engage industry
in scientific discussions and knowledge sharing.
The summit involved 41 participants (mainly from Atlantic Canada and New England)
and 14 presentations over four theme sessions. These proceedings provide an overall
summary of the meeting presentations, questions, and discussion sessions.
RÉSUME
S.R. Bayer, T. Cheney, C. Guenther, and J.A. Sameoto. 2016. Compte rendu du Sommet
canado-américain des recherches scientifiques sur le pétoncle, tenu du 6 au 8 mai 2014 à
Saint Andrews (Nouveau-Brunswick). Can. Tech. Rep. Aquat. Sci. 3151: v + 48 p.
Un conseil d’intervenants composé de pêcheurs, de scientifiques, et de gestionnaires
des pêches du Canada et des États-Unis s’est réuni les 6, 7 et 8 mai 2014 à Saint
Andrews, au Nouveau-Brunswick, afin d’examiner et de discuter les plus récents
renseignements scientifiques sur la pêche du pétoncle géant et les efforts en matière
d’aquaculture déployés aux États-Unis et au Canada. Le Sommet canado-américain
des recherches scientifiques sur le pétoncle visait à consolider et à élargir la base de
connaissances sur la pêche du pétoncle, en mettant l’accent sur les pêches semihauturières dans le golfe du Maine et la baie de Fundy, ainsi que sur les efforts en
v
matière d’aquaculture, et à établir les priorités de recherche dans le but d’aider à rendre
les pêches durables et rentables pour les collectivités côtières.
Voici plus précisément les grands objectifs de cette réunion : i) examiner et discuter les
plus récents renseignements scientifiques sur la pêche du pétoncle géant et les efforts
en matière d’aquaculture déployés par les intervenants aux États-Unis et au Canada –
scientifiques, pêcheurs et gestionnaires; ii) réunir les groupes concernés, dont les
scientifiques, les pêcheurs et les gestionnaires, afin d’améliorer la coordination et la
collaboration dans le cadre de futures possibilités de recherche scientifique; iii) offrir
une tribune inclusive et participative permettant aux acteurs de l’industrie de prendre
part aux discussions scientifiques et à l’échange de connaissances.
Le Sommet comptait 41 participants (principalement du Canada atlantique et de la
Nouvelle-Angleterre), et 14 présentations ont été offertes dans le cadre de quatre
séances thématiques. Ce compte rendu donne un aperçu général du contenu de la
réunion, notamment les présentations, les questions et les séances de discussion.
1
PREFACE
The sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) fishery is one of the most important
commercial species of shellfish in Canada and the United States of America (US). In the
Maritimes Region, Canada, scallop landings (combined Inshore and Offshore) in 2012
were 48,593 (t, live weight) and valued at $103.7 million (CDN) while the US scallop
landings in 2012 were 216,513 (t, live weight) valued at $559 million (USD). In the
Canadian Maritimes Region, the sea scallop fishery has been separated into the
Inshore and Offshore scallop fisheries since 1986. The major part of the inshore fishery
occurs in the Bay of Fundy and Approaches while the largest part of the offshore fishery
is on Georges Bank and Browns Bank. In the United States, the majority of the fishery is
conducted on Georges Bank and in the Mid Atlantic; however, there are also fisheries in
the federal Northern Gulf of Maine and nearshore waters of Maine’s state three mile
boundary.
Goals of the summit:
The overarching goals of this summit were:
i)
ii)
iii)
To review and discuss the most recent scientific information relevant to the
sea scallop fisheries and aquaculture efforts in the US and Canada among
stakeholders – scientists, harvesters, and managers.
Increase collaboration on potential future scientific research opportunities.
Provide an inclusive and participative forum to engage industry in scientific
discussions and knowledge sharing.
This would include identifying potential opportunities to strengthen and broaden the
knowledge base in the sea scallop fisheries, with a focus on the nearshore fisheries in
the Gulf of Maine and Bay of Fundy, as well as aquaculture efforts, and develop
research priorities that aim to assist in the goal of profitable, sustainable fisheries that
support coastal communities.
Summit Format:
The US and Canada Scallop Science Summit was held May 6–8, 2014, at the
Algonquin Hotel in St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada with four consecutive
sessions featuring contributions from academic and government scientists, resource
managers, fishermen, and non-governmental organizations. The format of the summit
was highly interactive for all participants and included addressing targeted questions,
clarifying concepts, and discussion groups. Themes for the sessions were:
1. Large-scale temporal and spatial patterns and connectivity;
2. Fishery-dependent data;
2
3. Aquaculture, sea ranching and enhancement; and
4. Sustainable management of the sea scallop resource.
Organizers:
The summit’s organizing committee was composed of:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf (Co-lead), Maine Department of Marine Resources
Stephen Smith (Co-lead), Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Bedford Institute of
Oceanography
Dr. Carla Guenther, Penobscot East Resource Center
Leslie-Anne Davidson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Moncton
Togue Brawn, Maine Dayboat Scallops
Dr. Shawn Robinson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, St. Andrews
Dana Morse, Maine Sea Grant
Alain d’Entremont, Full Bay Scallop Association
Funding:
Funding for the US and Canada Scallop Science Summit was primarily provided by the
Maine Community Foundation’s Broad Reach Fund to encourage cross-border
collaboration on issues that may increase the sustainability of Maine’s scallop fishery.
Toward this end, the Broad Reach Fund provided an additional $20,000 to support
collaborative research projects on scallops from research ideas that were generated
from this workshop. Additional funding was provided by the Canadian Aquaculture
Collaboration Development Research Program, Maine Sea Grant, and Penobscot East
Resource Center. Finally, scallops for each of the evening receptions were donated by
Togue Brawn of Maine Dayboat Scallops and Alain d’Entremont of O’Neil Fisheries
Limited.
3
SUMMIT OPENING AND KEY NOTE TALKS
Opening Remarks:
Trish Cheney
Department of Marine Resources, State of Maine
The idea for this workshop came from a conversation between Trish Cheney and
Stephen Smith in 2013 when both attended the Bay of Fundy scallop assessment at the
Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. It had been a long time
since stakeholders from both the US and Canada had come together to talk about
scallops and both sides have lots to learn.
Whether meeting attendees are fishermen, scientists, managers, Canadian or American
with a unique point of view, everyone attending the meeting has a common goal – which
is the long-term biological and socioeconomic sustainability of this industry. The scallop
industry is facing some very large challenges in a time of changing climate and
environment, as well as increased competition for the use of marine space from other
industrial sectors. At a United Kingdom scallop workshop in April 2014, the UK industry
described large scale wind projects, marine protected areas and some of the worst
weather on record that completely shut down almost all their fisheries for the winter
months. The overall goal of this workshop was to promote future cooperation and
collaboration between Canadian and American scallop fishing and aquaculture
industries for their mutual benefit.
High-level aims of this workshop are:
1. To review and discuss the most recent sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus)
scientific information, and report on fisheries and aquaculture efforts in the US
and Canada.
2. To bring together relevant groups - including scientists, harvesters, and
managers to increase coordination and collaboration on future scientific research
opportunities.
3. To provide an inclusive and participative forum to engage scientists and industry
in discussions of scallop research and fishermen’s direct observations.
Specifically, we aim to strengthen and broaden our collective knowledge of
inshore scallop fisheries in the Gulf of Maine and Bay of Fundy and aquaculture
efforts toward developing research priorities that will support our goal of
profitable, sustainable fisheries that support coastal communities.
4
Key Note: Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Overview
Canadian and US key note talks by Stephen Smith and Trish Cheney provided an
overview of the North Atlantic sea scallop fishery, highlighting factors, trends, and
management approaches.
Stephen Smith – Canadian North Atlantic Scallop Fishery Overview
Sea scallops are fished throughout the Atlantic Provinces of Canada with the majority of
landings coming from Nova Scotia and southern New Brunswick (collectively referred to
as the Maritimes region; Figure 1). In the Maritimes Region, the fishery is divided into
inshore and offshore components for management purposes. The inshore fleets are
limited to vessels < 19.8 m (65 ft) and minimum dredge ring size of 82 mm (3.23 inches)
inside diameter while the offshore fleet is limited to vessels ≥ 19.8 m (65 ft) and meat
count regulations are used instead of ring size restrictions. The majority of landings
come from Georges Bank for the offshore areas and the Bay of Fundy for the inshore
areas.
Figure 1. Atlantic Canada scallop landings in meat weight and value by Department of Fisheries and
Oceans Canada (DFO) management areas from 1976-2009, preliminary data for 2009 (Source: Mallet
2010).
Management for both fisheries is based on provisions in the Fisheries Act (1985), The
Atlantic Fishery Regulations (1985) and the Fishery Regulations Acts (1993). The
fisheries use Integrated Fishery Management Plans (IFMPs), a sustainable fisheries
framework and the precautionary approach (described in more detail in Session 4 talk
by S. Smith). The stock status advice compares current stock biomass with limit and
upper stock biomass reference points and compares the current exploitation rate with
limit/target exploitation rates. Healthy stocks have current biomass greater than the
5
upper reference point, stocks where current biomass is in between the lower reference
point and the upper reference point are considered to be in the cautious zone, and
stocks where current biomass is less than the lower reference point are considered to
be in the critical zone.
All of the major scallop fisheries in the Maritimes Region are managed using Total
Allowable Catches (TAC) that are set annually. Quotas are managed by Enterprise
Allocations (percentage share of a TAC that is allocated to an enterprise) for the
offshore fleets while two of the four inshore fleets have individual transferable quotas
(ITQ) and the other two participate in competitive quotas. The inshore management
measures include sharing arrangements between fleets in many areas. There are
seasonal closures and voluntary or regulated closed areas in many areas and limited
entry licensing. All fleets require satellite vessel monitoring systems (VMS) and
mandatory logbook completion (required to be filled out daily for the Inshore fishery and
every 6 hours for the Offshore fishery). Dockside monitoring is required in all areas with
partial or full coverage depending upon fleet and fishery. On-board observer coverage is
required in some of the areas. 100% hail in/hail out is also required for each fishing trip.
Meat count restrictions are used in all fisheries.
Figure 2. Canadian Maritimes Region inshore Scallop Production Areas (SPAs) and Scallop Fishing
Areas (SFAs).
6
Annual fishery independent surveys have been conducted in parts of the Bay of Fundy
since the early 1980s and the coverage expanded over time to include all fished areas
in the Bay by the late 1990s. The stock assessment includes population models for
Scallop Production Areas (SPA) SPA 1A, 1B, 3 and 4 (& 5) (Figure 2). Commercial
catch rate indicators are used for SPA 6 and a new habitat-based population model is
used for Scallop Fishing Area (SFA) 29 W. Assessments are conducted with peerreview meetings, with participants from industry, First Nations, management, science,
and other stakeholders; and the resulting reports are publically available on the DFO
Canadian Scientific Advisory Secretariat (CSAS) website. Stock status for each
managed area is assessed with respect to biomass reference points as part of DFO’s
implementation of the precautionary approach to fisheries management. All stocks in
the Bay of Fundy which have such reference points were assessed as being Healthy in
2013.
In the offshore fishery, fishery-independent surveys have been conducted since the
early 1980s. The stock assessment has population models for Georges Bank and
Browns Bank North and survey/commercial catch rate indicators are used for the other
areas. Stock assessments are periodic with peer-review meetings (industry,
management, and science participants) and annual updates occur in non-assessment
years. Stock status for Georges Bank and Browns Bank North were assessed as being
Healthy in 2013.
References:
Mallet, M. (2010) Commercial Scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) fishery profile in the Gulf
Region. Statistical and Economic Analysis Series. No.1-5.
Trisha Cheney – United States/Maine (focus on Maine) Fishery Overview
Sea scallops are the most valuable single-species fishery in the United States (US),
contributing $559 million (USD) in 2012 in revenue with the majority of the landings
coming from the Mid-Atlantic and Georges Banks areas (Figure 3). There is also a
small, primarily inshore fishery for sea scallops in the Gulf of Maine in the Northern Gulf
of Maine (NGOM) Management Area managed under a total allowable catch (TAC)
system (Figure 4). Management of the federal scallop fishery falls under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) with the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), a division of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), as the lead federal agency managing the fishery.
The New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) is an intergovernmental
agency that was established through the MSFCMA and is charged by the US Congress
7
to recommend to NMFS management measures which ensure the long term
sustainability of the scallop fishery.
GOM
GB
SNE
MAB
Total Value (M)
30,000
650
28,000
600
26,000
550
24,000
500
450
20,000
400
18,000
16,000
350
14,000
300
12,000
250
10,000
Value (2013 $M USD)
Volume (mt of meat)
22,000
200
8,000
150
6,000
100
4,000
50
2,000
0
0
1964
1969
1974
1979
1984
1989
1994
1999
2004
2009
Figure 3. US scallop landings (metric tonnes of meats) by region (Gulf of Maine (GOM) includes Maine
state landings; Georges Bank (GB), Southern New England (SNE), and Mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB)) and
total value (Millions (M); Modified from NFSC 2015).
The State of Maine also has a small fishery within its territorial waters, which extends
out to three miles from shore within the Gulf of Maine (Figure 5). It brings in significantly
less than both the Mid-Atlantic and Georges Bank Federal fisheries. The Maine Sea
Scallop Fishery is co-managed with an Advisory Council and has 438 active
participants. The fishery is a December-March fishery and is typically comprised of 40foot vessels. Harvesters often fish for lobster, sea urchin, clam, elver and halibut. The
majority (> 90%) of landings are caught by dredge with some hand harvest by divers. In
2005, the landed catch was at a low of 33,141 meat pounds (15 metric tonnes).
The Federal offshore fishery implemented closures in 1996 through 2000 and had a 14fold increase in scallop biomass. Not only were closures implemented, but there were
also additional effort restrictions, and increases in ring size. Using these techniques, the
8
size of a typical landed scallop meat (yield per recruit) doubled and the value of the
market has gone from 12 million meat pounds ($76 million) in 1998 to 58 million meat
pounds ($579 million) in 2011. It is the most valuable US single species fishery.
Figure 4. United States sea scallop fishing areas (NOAA 2014).
Encouraged by the success of the federal fishery, in 2009 Maine began to implement
conservation measures aimed at rebuilding its scallop fishery. Prior to 2005, Maine had
a 132 day season and a minimum of four inch shell and a 10 foot 6 inch drag size limit.
In 2008 harvesters and dealers began reporting their catch and had a 200-pound daily
limit. In 2009, entry to the fishery became limited, the season was reduced to 70 days,
the minimum ring size increased to four inches, and 13 conservation closures
encompassing 20% of coastal waters were created for the following three fishing
seasons. In 2012, these closures were reopened as limited access areas, and three
management zones were established to allow for different rebuilding tools to be utilized
reflecting the diversity of the fleet and resources along the coast, with a 10-year rotation
management plan established for Zone 2 (eastern Maine; Figure 5) as well as in-season
targeted closures being implemented when areas were estimated to have exceeded
sustainable fishing levels.
9
Figure 5. Maine’s scallop management zones within three nautical miles. Insert: Zone 2’s rotational
management plan.
Targeted closures are either put in place pre-season through regular rulemaking or inseason via emergency rulemaking and are used to protect high concentrations of
sublegal or seed scallops, depleted areas, and broodstock/spat production areas. The
emergency in-season regulations are implemented through real time data surveys, port
sampling observations, Marine Patrol (enforcement) reports, and direct input from
industry members. The results were that the 2012–2013 season landings were the
highest (nearly doubled) since mandatory reporting was implemented in the fishery in
the 2008–2009 season. The 2013 landings were also the highest landings since 2000
and the highest value since 1998 when compared to historical data.
One of the greatest challenges to allowing a conservative fishery to occur whilst
rebuilding the scallop resource has been the increase in fishing effort. There has been a
high number of re-activated licenses over the past five years (631 commercial licenses
were issued in 2013). It is driven by reopening of Closure/Limited Access Areas, the
closure of the shrimp industry and the historically high price for scallops ($12.24/lbs in
2013). Some of the fleet is very mobile and is following a “roving bandits” model from
the ecology literature. Enforcement is difficult to maintain as well, and not all illegal
fishing activities can be documented or interrupted. The industry is currently undertaking
discussions to help inform the development of a fishery management plan which will
provide a vision for the future. The Fishery Management Plan is a document to guide
long-term thinking about the fishery and it should be a living document that is not static
10
and regularly updated. This will be developed with the Scallop Advisory Council and
defines the vision for the fishery and potential triggers for action.
References:
NFSC, 2015. Stock assessment for Atlantic Sea Scallops in 2014, updated through 2013. 59th
SAW Assessment Report. http://nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/crd/crd1409/partb.pdf
(accessed 5 February, 2016).
NOAA, 2014. GARFO Sustainable Fisheries Atlantic Sea Scallop.
http://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/scallop/ (accessed 5
February, 2016).
SESSION 1: TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL PATTERNS AND CONNECTIVITY
Moderator: Caitlin Cleaver, Hurricane Island Foundation
Targeted Questions:
i) What is the full story of temporal and spatial trends in recruitment, growth, and
condition?
ii) Can we identify ways to undertake cross-border collaboration and exchange that
may illuminate the underlying mechanism, and perhaps facilitate prediction?
iii) What challenges will sea scallop fisheries face in regards to ecological changes
such as temperature, salinity, predator community, bottom scouring/dragging,
ocean acidification, etc.?
Claudio DiBacco, Ian Bradbury and Mallory Van Wyngaarden – Investigating Sea
Scallop Population Connectivity
Larval connectivity describes the rate of larval exchange between disjunct source-sink
populations. These connections can vary dramatically; some populations are strongly
connected, while others vary between weak to no connection interannually. Still others
connections are effectively one way, while some populations in metapopulations are not
directly connected but indirectly connected via intermediate populations. Estimating
connectivity or isolation of populations can be measured at some level via a number of
tools, including passive drifters, tagging (dyes, electronic tags, elemental and isotopic
tags), genetic tools, and biophysical models.
Some examples of scallop population connectivity:
•
Kenchington et al. (2006) used microsatellites to show significant genetic
differentiation in Newfoundland, Gulf of St. Lawrence versus Gulf of Maine and
11
•
•
Scotian Shelf populations. There was evidence of local population connectivity
supported by prominent currents.
Owen and Rawson (2013) used Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms
(AFLPs) to show small scale population structure in the Gulf of Maine. They
showed both temporal (site-specific) and spatial (interannual) variation in local
genetic structure.
Bradbury, DiBacco and Van Wyngaarden used Restriction site Associated DNA
markers and measured population connectivity in the same regions as
Kenchington et al. (2006). They drilled down these results with Single Nucleotide
Polymorphisms and targeted regions of interest. They found that populations
sampled further north were more genetically distinct from those found further
south (Figure 6).
Figure 6. Bayesian clustering of samples of Placopecten magellanicus from eastern North America.
Bio-physical models show shorter ecological time scales relevant for many
management issues. The key processes that need to be understood are production
(reproductive timing, population size, individual size, relative abundance, distribution,
and physiological state), dispersal (behavior, growth, mortality, and transport of larvae),
settlement (habitat, larval behavior, settlement cues, mortality, and transport), and postsettlement survivorship (habitat, food, predation, and fishing). All of these processes
vary in time and space. The focus for this talk is on reproductive timing and first-order
mortality estimates.
We have been collaborating with colleagues on the relative importance of the bi-annual
spawning cycle of sea scallops on Georges Bank (Canadian side). One of the
overarching questions has been the relative importance of spring vs. fall spawning
periods. The spring spawn was initially described more than 20 years ago yet it’s never
been considered significant because of lower fecundity, colder spring (meaning longer
pelagic larval duration and higher natural mortality and predation). Further, FVCOM
oceanography modeling has showed that 94% of settlement happens in the fall.
However, when a temperature dependent mortality is included in this (in 23 taxa higher
mortality is associated with higher temperatures), there is much more settlement from
12
the spring spawn (Davies et al., 2014). Therefore, more empirical work is needed on
mortality rates of larvae in situ. The lesson learned is that biology is just as important as
the physics and may have management implications.
The questions that still remain are:
•
•
•
Are there similar temporal and spatial patterns on the US side?
Do these patterns reflect broad area environmental influences?
Given the impact of changing condition on TACs, commercial catch rates and
possibly on productivity, is it possible to model and predict these changes a year
ahead?
References:
Davies, K.T.A., Gentleman, W.C., DiBacco, C., and Johnson, C. (2014) Seasonal and spatial
variation in larval production and mortality affect modeled sea scallop (Placopecten
magellanicus) settlement and connectivity on Georges Bank. Marine Ecology Progress
Series 516: 209–227.
Kenchington, E.L., Patwary, M.U., Zouros, E., and Bird, C.J. (2006) Genetic differentiation in
relation to marine landscape in a broadcast-spawning bivalve mollusc (Placopecten
magellanicus). Molecular Ecology 15: 1781–1796.
Owen, E.F., Rawson, P.D. (2013) Small-scale spatial and temporal genetic structure of the
Atlantic sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) in the inshore Gulf of Maine revealed
using AFLPs. Marine Biology 160: 3015–3025.
Jon Grabowski – Using Genomics to Explore Large Scale Spatial Patterns and
Connectivity of Sea Scallops
RAD-seq provides a genome-level resolution of a species. This has been used for the
North Atlantic snail Nucella lapillus. This has been demonstrated in humans as well –
indicating how similar genetic backgrounds are from different continents. This method
helps identify the key source populations. Thanks to previous work, we have the
opportunity to examine persistent aggregations of scallop on Georges Bank and
elsewhere that may be larval sources. The goals of this project are:
•
•
Determine persistent aggregations of scallops in the Gulf of Maine, Southern
New England, and Mid Atlantic regions.
Examine source-sink dynamics and the degree of connectivity among scallop
populations located in each of the four regions of the U.S. Fishery.
The current sampling stations for this project are the closed areas of Georges Bank,
Montauk, Great South Bay, Elephant Trunk, Platt’s Bank, off the coast of Nova Scotia,
near Prince Edward Island, and in coastal Maine (spanning from the Mid Atlantic Bight
region to the Gulf of Maine and the maritime provinces of Canada).
13
The preliminary results from our genomic work suggest that scallop populations on
Georges Bank exhibit some structure, mostly that Closed Areas I and II seem to cluster
together away from Great South Channel and Nantucket Lightship, which is interesting
because Closed Area I is closest to Great South Channel and Nantucket Lightship. We
anticipate that samples from farther away will enhance our ability to detect population
structure and examine source-sink dynamics on Georges Bank.
Phil Yund – Bivalve Population Connectivity in Eastern Maine: Lessons from
Physical Oceanography and Mussels
Most work on connectivity of coastal invertebrate populations has focused on alongshelf larval transport. Understanding of across-shelf processes is not well integrated into
connectivity studies but for populations in coastal habitats, the journey both begins and
ends with an across-shelf journey. The Eastern Maine Coastal Current (EMCC) tends to
bypass the Maine coast from Machias to Frenchman Bay. We can use mussel larvae as
a tracer of across-shelf dispersal because Mytilus trossulus larvae can only enter the
region via the EMCC (Rawson et al. 2007). If limited across-shelf mixing affects larval
distributions then (1) Mytilus trossulus larvae will mainly be present on the offshore
portions of across-shelf transects and (2) Mytilus edulis larvae will be present on both
ends, but not homogenously distributed along the transects. Therefore, our results can
help predict which areas of scallop grounds in the Gulf of Maine may be seeded from
Canada (including the Bay of Fundy) and which grounds are self-seeding because of
the retention of larvae inshore of the coastal current. Further support for applying these
ideas to scallops comes from Owen and Rawson’s (2013) paper, which showed that the
Gouldsboro Bay scallop population (in the region bypassed by the EMCC) is genetically
distinct from all other sampled populations throughout Maine.
References:
Rawson, P.D., Yund, P.O., Lindsay, S.M. (2007) Comment on "Divergent induced responses to
an invasive predator in marine mussel populations". Science 316, 53.
(doi:10.1126/science.1135099)
Owen, E.F., Rawson, P.D. (2013) Small-scale spatial and temporal genetic structure of the
Atlantic sea scallop Placopecten magellanicus in the inshore Gulf of Maine revealed by
using AFLPs. Mar. Biol. 160, 3015-3025. (doi:10.1007/s00227-013-2291-8)
SESSION 1: DISCUSSION
The following captures the discussion in relation to session 1 and opinions captured
below are not necessarily indicative of consensus or suggestions made by the summit
as a whole.
14
•
This summit is a good first step to help foster collaboration and may have
management implications in terms of regional efforts. The industry may have to
support more science as government budgets get tightened and industry needs
to meet the needs for data costs. This is because we need to have a better
understanding of the potential threats and challenges to help prepare the industry
for the future (e.g. potential changes in water temperatures, and increasing
acidity).
•
Taking the precautionary approach described by S. Smith provides stability that
is important for members of the industry looking to gain what they invested in
their ITQ license (Canada). The spatial and temporal data collected for this
approach is good for telling one what not to do but not always what to do.
•
The link between oceanography and population connectivity and temperature
may create particular spatial patterns and it is important to understand the
biology and oceanography that underlies the distribution of the resource. Then
stakeholders can build businesses around that information. For example, the
EMCC may not be contributing larvae or spat to a local area but may be
contributing spat to others. If this is true, stakeholders would need to develop
ways to ensure that their area has a sufficient supply of scallop larvae. Methods
of doing this, however, depend on localized physical characteristics, and
therefore local managers and possibly aquaculturists need to develop plans
based on oceanographic data for a particular area. Some areas might have
multiple sources of larvae and others might have high retention. This may
indicate a need for identifying broodstock and protecting them. This also brings
up the question of the carrying capacity of certain areas.
•
While genetics have shown interesting connectivity patterns (for example Maine
and western Georges Bank are highly connected) attendees are wondering what
the implications of genetic diversity are on aquaculture seed sourcing and local
wild populations. Larger connectivity questions need to be examined to see the
connection between the Bay of Fundy, the Gulf of Maine, and Georges Bank. So
far most of the studies have been focused on Georges Bank.
•
Many fishermen learned that the spring spawn does exist and there may be
implications for meats in terms of a) yield and b) condition. Should there be more
investigation into the spring spawn in both the US and Canada?
•
Canada seems to have more tools and data for biomass assessment versus
Maine but Maine only started in 2006. One of the big questions is do you set
regulations before the data are collected?
15
SESSION 2: FISHERY DEPENDENT DATA
Moderator: Carla Guenther, Penobscot East Resource Center
Targeted Questions:
i) What is the best way to determine the impact of a fishery on a population?
ii) How can this information be used to manage a fishery?
iii) How can we advance the use of fishery-dependent data in an environment of
dwindling resources?
iv) How are different fishery-dependent data types (fishermen’s observations, catch
per unit effort, logbooks, landings, life history, etc.) utilized in real-time decisionmaking?
v) What are the most meaningful in-season data collection methods?
vi) How are fishermen’s knowledge incorporated into survey design?
vii) Could in-season data be sufficient to manage a fishery (without pre-season
estimates)?
viii) Is it more cost-effective to undertake in-season data collection vs. formal fisheryindependent surveys?
Diana Fillion (presented by Leslie-Anne Davidson) – Commercial Scallop Fishery:
Eastern New Brunswick, Canada, Scallop Fishing Area (SFA) 21A
For fishery management purposes, the east coast of Canada is divided into Maritimes,
Gulf, Québec, and Newfoundland and Labrador Regions. Most of the southern Gulf of
St. Lawrence is found in the Gulf Region where there are 6 Scallop Fishing Areas
(SFAs) (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Gulf Region’s Scallop Fishing Areas (SFAs): 21A, 21B, 21C, 22, 23 and 24.
16
Scallop fishery management plans vary from one SFA to another. In SFA 21A, there
are 28 license holders. For conservation reasons, the scallop fishing industry requested
that the fishery be closed for three years (2010–2012) in that fishing area. When the
fishery re-opened, the SFA 21A fishermen accepted the most stringent management
measurements in the Gulf Region. Mandatory Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS)
started in 2014. The fishing season is four weeks and in 2014 it was from July 7 to
August 1. The meat count is a maximum of 37 scallop meats per 500 g. In 2015, the
count was decreased to 35 scallop meats per 500 g. Mandatory logbooks must be
mailed to Fisheries and Oceans Canada within two weeks of the end of the fishing
season. The ring size of the buckets is 82.6 mm (3 ¼ inches) with the exception of the
first row of the buckets where 76.2 mm (3 inches) may be used. A maximum of 2 steel
washers may be used to join two bucket rings together. A rubber washer may also be
used to join bucket rings; however, it can only be placed in the vertical position. The
maximum width of the outside measurement of the drag is 6.09 m (20 feet). Scallops
must be shucked prior to entering the port and only the adductor muscle can be landed.
Water less than 18 m (60 feet) in depth is closed to scallop draggers to protect lobster
fishing habitat. The catch per unit effort (CPUE) is evaluated at the end of each fishing
season. The fishing season is only open the next year if the average CPUE for the
entire SFA 21A is equal to or greater than 0.5 kg of scallop meat/hour/meter of drag.
Trisha Cheney – Using Fishery Dependent Data for Real Time Management
An integral part of Maine’s rebuilding plan has been the use of in-season management
measures implemented through a “trigger mechanism”. The trigger mechanism is a
clarification of the Department of Marine Resources (DMR) Commissioner’s existing
emergency authority allowing for an in-season action that will address “unusual
damage” or “imminent depletion” of the resource. After three years of rebuilding using
closed areas, the industry did not wish to immediately deplete the rebuilt resource within
those areas, but preferred to have a more lasting benefit. Therefore, the closed areas
were re-opened as Limited Access Areas governed by a trigger set to when 30–40% of
the estimated harvestable resource was removed from the area, it was closed for the
remainder of the season. This authority only allows the DMR to take away opportunities
mid-season, not provide additional opportunity. Therefore, a season is set up through
normal rulemaking that provides ample opportunity to the fleet up-front, and measures
are taken in-season to address any areas experiencing overfishing. The DMR collects
survey data before the season starts, and then utilizes data collected in real time
through the port and sea sampling programs, as well as Marine Patrol observations to
help make decisions. In addition, one of the most important pieces of data comes
directly from industry members who voluntarily communicate observations and
concerns to the DMR. By utilizing all these data sources, DMR has been able to
17
effectively close down Limited Access Areas mid-season so as to allow the resource to
not only replenish itself, but also continue to rebuild. This has been so effective that the
DMR is considering expanding the trigger mechanism to the entire state scallop fishery
for the following 2014–15 season.
Jessica Sameoto – Fishery Dependent Data: Experience from the Maritimes
Region, Canada
The stock assessment is meant to assess the impact of a fishery on a population and
provide fishery managers and industry with information to make decisions. To do this
we need to determine the stock status (e.g. biomass, stock density) and the removal
rate (e.g. exploitation). Assessments use available data to make the best estimates
possible. The data types that are available can be defined as fishery dependent or
fishery independent data. Fishery dependent data is derived from the fishing process
whereas fishery independent data is derived from activities not associated with the
commercial harvest. For stock assessment, fishery dependent and independent data
complement each other. If we only have one data source, we may be missing part of the
picture. The Maritimes Inshore scallop fishery has fishery dependent data from
landings, logbooks, VMS, observers (SFA 29 West only), and fishermen’s knowledge.
The fishery independent data is from surveys (catch rate, condition, size/age
composition), multibeam data (bathymetry, backscatter) and imagery data (video, digital
stills).
The key findings from these data are:
•
•
•
Spatial patterns in fishing effort aligns with scallop habitat.
Survey catch rate and commercial catch rate can track population biomass.
Annual commercial effort can be a good proxy for annual exploitation trends.
SFA 29 West is data rich in both fishery dependent and independent data (survey,
logbooks, observers, VMS, multi-beam and benthic imagery). We developed a scallop
habitat suitability map for this area using multi-beam bathymetry, backscatter,
associated derived layers, and images of the seafloor. VMS data shows that effort is
highest in areas that have the highest habitat suitability.
SPA 3 has no multi-beam or habitat data. The survey was initially stratified randomly in
three strata. However there are spatial differences in scallop condition, abundance, and
growth, which reflect habitat suitability. The spatial extent of the area fished decreased
over time and there was concern whether the survey of the whole area was adequately
detecting the impact when only part of the area was fished.
18
Scallop productivity is closely tied to habitat suitability. In the absence of habitat
information, fishing effort can map habitat. We can use VMS in SPA 3 to delineate
habitat. The suitable habitat area is significantly smaller than the survey area. We
needed to redesign the survey to concentrate higher sampling effort in the more suitable
habitat areas. We can then use the separate survey indices for inside and outside of the
suitable habitat areas.
Survey estimates can line up with commercial catch rate estimates in the following year
and we can track population biomass this way. In some areas, last year’s survey can
predict this year’s average commercial catch rate. This gives confidence in the use of
either catch rate index (commercial or survey) to track population changes. We can also
estimate exploitation through population assessment models. However, models aren’t
always available. We have found that annual fishing effort shows a strong linear
relationship with annual exploitation from our models. In the absence of a model, annual
effort can be a good proxy for annual exploitation trends.
SESSION 2: QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
The following captures the discussion from questions posed in relation to session 2 and
opinions captured below are not necessarily indicative of consensus or suggestions
made by the summit as a whole.
Q1. What are the summary points/take home messages from these
presentations?
•
Management advice can be obtained in the absence of models using adaptive
methods and real-time fishery dependent data coupled with fishery independent
surveys. Advice and strategies should be place-based and might not be
universally appropriate across a fishery.
•
Both fishery dependent and independent data are useful and it is ideal to have
both. The Maine fishery has fishery dependent data and it is important compared
to the fishery independent data. Stock assessments rely on landings data and
accuracy in landings is important for assessments. Long-term data from
fishermen’s observations is important and gonad indices are helpful for
determining the spawning season. However, there needs to be recognition of the
limitations of different kinds of data and you have to know why you want to collect
different kinds of data.
•
It is important to take fishermen on board survey vessels and/or do side by side
tows along survey vessels so that there is a better understanding of how to
interpret survey data and what they represent, and to foster greater support and
19
trust in the estimations of harvestable biomass Maine is using to calculate an
area’s trigger. Furthermore, the more fishermen providing in-season fishery
dependent catch data the better because the information will be more
representative, which should more closely reflect what more fishermen in an area
are experiencing and should therefore not only improve management decisions,
but also increase industry support for in-season closures when they occur.
•
Stocks are connected and a sustainable resource is the goal. Spatial
management is necessary for scallops; however, this can require real-time
information from fishery dependent data such as logbooks. These data (from
logbooks) need to be available for use in a timely manner. Directing effort to less
suitable habitat may lessen fishing impacts on biomass.
•
Habitat suitability maps are useful, but are they useful for quota management?
Habitat maps can be important in regards to meat quality and provide information
on where “good” scallops are.
•
Maine fishermen are impressed by the ability to predict commercial catch rates
by survey indices (as shown in the Bay of Fundy). This could have implications
for “triggers” in Limited Access Areas in Maine. These collaborative workshops
are important for information sharing.
•
Willingness to share data impacts the management system. The more industry is
invested in the management system, the more willing they may be to share
information.
•
Scallops have been shown to grow faster and better in shallow water and slower
in deeper colder water. Fishermen should start fishing deep and keep shallow
areas closed longer to improve yield-per-recruit. This is important because
condition (yield) does seem to matter for profit.
•
Programs should be fit to the funds available and there needs to be new options
for research funding like the research set aside (RSA) program in the US federal
fishery.
Q2. What are some fisheries dependent data types, variables, and/or methods
that you currently use in your fishery? How do you use them?
•
For the inshore scallop fishery in the Maritimes Region, Canada, data available
includes effort data from the number of tows per day and tow time, bottom type,
gear size, license number, crew size, bycatch (only in SFA 29W), latitude and
20
longitude, CPUE, catch (in logbooks), and VMS data. There is also dockside
monitoring. Industry panel meetings for certain areas are also important for
exchanging information on the fishery. All of these data (fishermen’s
observations, seed locations, habitat and meat/gonad condition) are used to help
manage the fishery.
•
Landings data available in Maine include port sampling, meat counts, number of
tows to get the catch limit, time fished, latitude and longitude, real time phone
surveys, and pounds landed.
•
In the US Federal fishery at sea observations, meat weight, shell height, CPUE,
bycatch, VMS, and log books are used to estimate biomass and implement
management policies. The US has observer data as well.
•
One take home message is that the Maine fishery needs reliable and timely
landings data.
Q3. What are some of the challenges to using fisheries dependent data, generally,
and in your fishery?
•
There needs to be buy-in from the industry to improve the quality of data but
there also needs to be an understanding of which questions the data will be used
to address.
•
Some of the challenges of fisheries dependent data include the issue with
logbooks – positional data is not always accurately reported and it is not always
possible to record the latitude and longitude.
•
There are places where there is little to no fishing, thereby reducing the quality of
fishermen dependent data.
•
There is a lot of industry concern about data sharing because fishermen do not
want to share their favorite fishing spots.
•
There is a difference in collecting data versus actually being able to use it.
Knowing what data are to be used for is helpful before collecting it. Data can also
be lost or useless without complete records. There is also the issue of actually
processing the data (gathering and interpreting data can be quite time
consuming). These kinds of data can sometimes be very area specific and can’t
be applied to the whole stock.
21
•
In Maine, there are technical issues with VMS reports with many reporting fishing
in locations on land.
•
Maine’s system for logbook reporting is currently paper-based and could be more
modernized or electronic so that there is more direct, and accurate, selfreporting.
•
When interpreting fishery dependent data for use in Maine’s trigger, other
information that may be important to consider are the physical conditions and
weather since these can influence fishing behavior and affect fishery data such
as CPUE. Additionally, not all fishermen are created equal and their age,
experience, vessel and motivation will also factor into changes in CPUE.
•
In a rebuilding fishery, historical trends are important; however, what if something
has changed? Having shifting baselines can be a real problem for interpreting
how a stock is actually doing and determining what kind of baseline the fishery
really should be aiming for.
Q4. How can the capacity for broader use of fisheries dependent data be built?
Specifically, how could collaborative research contribute?
•
In Maine, an association to build/raise funds would be ideal and there needs to
be more coordinated volunteer efforts. Possibly differentiating a portion of Maine
scallop funds to go to collaborative research would be ideal for developing
cooperative research programs and increased fishery dependent data collection.
•
Collaborative research should be the first step and should have scientists,
managers, and fishermen do research together and broaden the use of fishery
dependent data. Using collaborative research as a test-case of buy-in will help
industries buy-in to management and the science. It helps if industry can see that
more accurate data impacts catch advice.
•
These potential programs should have regular meetings between science,
industry and management to guide priorities. Using these kinds of programs we
could develop standard operating procedures (SOPs) for data collection of report
and logbook data. This kind of collaboration can improve fishermen’s profitability
and help meet management measures by defining a common goal with
increased dialogue. This approach has to be collaborative with mutual benefits
for all stakeholders. These programs should also have data gathered that is used
and not discarded. Determining which data to collect can help develop better
ways of collecting these data. These data must also be more accessible and be
22
valuable to fishermen without betraying confidentiality. These programs can
determine things like the kind of capacity an area has, identifying sampling sites
reliably, and determine meat conditions by area and season. These kinds of
programs can develop trust among fishermen and between fishermen,
managers, and scientists. There needs be more money to fund these projects.
23
SESSION 3: AQUACULTURE, SEA RANCHING and ENHANCEMENT
Moderator: Leslie-Anne Davidson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Targeted Questions:
i) What are the challenges facing better integration of aquaculture into the overall
management?
ii) Could stock enhancement and sea ranching provide a natural connection that will
help reduce potential skepticism and reluctance among wild fishery harvesters?
iii) Where is sea scallop aquaculture being conducted and what are the challenges?
iv) Could grow-out sites serve as potential broodstock sanctuaries?
v) Are there ways to use growth and other information to inform management?
Leslie-Anne Davidson – Scallop enhancement projects conducted in Canada and
the need to integrate it with the scallop fishery management plan
In the Gulf region of Atlantic Canada, scallop fishermen and aquaculturists seem to
operate as two separate entities. Both harvest sea scallops as a way to make their
living but they appear to be doing so in a competitive manner rather than a collaborative
one. Landings from the scallop fishery far exceed those of the aquaculture industry so
aquaculturists seem to have made a conscious effort to avoid direct competition with the
scallop fishing industry. It is my belief that both would benefit if they were more
collaborative in the conduct of their activities.
In the late 1960s, the scallop fishery had nearly collapsed in Japan (Figure 8). After
various studies, scallop aquaculture was initiated and by the mid 1970’s scallop
aquaculturists and fishermen were able to work together. By 2000 the landings from the
fishery were more than 10 times greater than the best historic landings and the harvest
from aquaculture also had a 10 fold increase from its humble beginnings. As I see it,
the partnership was the vehicle that contributed to this phenomenal increase.
Enhancement and aquaculture allowed the scallop landings to reach levels that were
greater than nature itself could have ever provided.
24
Figure 8. Japanese scallop, Patinopectten (Mizuhopecten) yessoensis Jay, landings in Japan, 19552000. (Source: Kosaka, Y. and Ito, H. 2006. Japan. In Scallops: Biology, Ecology and Aquacutlure S.E.
Shumway and G. J. Parsons (Editors) 2006 Elsevier (original Source: Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries, Government of Japan, “Annual report on statistics of fishery and aquaculture production”)
Impressed by the Japanese success, various scallop enhancement/aquaculture projects
were launched throughout the world. In Atlantic Canada, the Research on Pectinid
Restocking (REPERE) project was conducted in the Québec Region from 1990 to 1997
(Figure 9a) and the Pecten I (2001–2007) and Pecten II (2004–2008) projects were
piloted in the Gulf Region (Figure 9b).
Figure 9 a) Québec Region project and b) Gulf Region projects (modified from Davidson and Mullen
(2005) and Davidson and Légère (2007)).
The primary goal of our research was to establish if scallop aquaculture and
enhancement could be done in our waters. The biological and technical aspects of the
Japanese technology were successfully transferred to Canada. However, we did not
25
effectively integrate this technology within an appropriate management scheme.
Restocking and stock enhancement of the coastal fisheries has been attempted for
many species in many different parts of the world. Upon review of the potential, the
problems, and the progress of these activities, Bell et al. (2006) informs us that one of
the essential steps to ensure their success is to integrate the activities within an
appropriate management plan. The Maritime Fishermen Union (MFU) had conducted
the Pecten I and Pecten II project and Martin Mallet from the MFU had suggested a
management approach (Figure 10). Mr Mallet agreed to share his concept for
discussion purposes; however, the management strategy was not implemented.
Figure 10. Proposed management strategy for integrating scallop aquaculture and fishery (Martin Mallet).
References:
Bell, J.D., Bartley, D.M., Lorenzen, K. and Loneragan, N.R. (2006) Restocking and stock
enhancement of coastal fisheries: Potential, problems and progress. Fish. Res. 80, 1-8.
Davidson, L.A., Niles, M., and Légère, L. (2007) Proceedings of the Southern Gulf Scallop
Fishery Workshop: Moncton, New Brunswick, March 30-31, 2006. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 2785: vii + 87p.
Davidson, L.A., and Mullen, J. (2005) Proceedings of the Scallop Aquaculture Workshop:
Halifax, Nova Scotia, January 24, 2004. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci 2610: iv + 37p.
Dana Morse – The 50-Second Dash: Six Observations about scallop aquaculture
and enhancements in Maine. In Five Minutes.
Maine has benefited from knowledge, expertise and willingness to share by Canadian
colleagues including Leslie-Anne Davidson, Shawn Robinson, Melanie Bourgeois,
Steve Backman, Blair Cooper, Duncan Bates, Cyr Couturier, Madeleine Nadeau, Mike
Dadswell, Monique Niles, Sylvain Vigneau, Caroline Durand, Ron Boudreau, Rodney
26
Fougere, Julien Gaudet, Michelle Theirault, Charles Purdy, Jay Parsons, Andre Mallet,
Claire Carver, Peter Darnell, Andrew Bagnall, and Paul-Aime Joncas.
Spat bags are an incredibly important tool to help develop useful research questions
and collaboration. Spat bags have changed the way Maine fishermen and researchers
think about scallops. Some questions spat bags can help address include:
•
•
•
•
•
Where are the parents?
Where do the larvae go?
What are impacts of predators/where/how bad?
What are the influences of large/small scale currents, tides, etc.?
How do we ensure a good larval supply?
Maine has demonstrated excellent capability in spat collection with catches mostly
between 1,000-3,000 individuals/bag, sometimes 4,000-5,000 individuals/bag. The
success in re-seeding is much less obvious. We need to intensify our observation on reseeded bottoms at 24 h, 48 h, 1 week, 2 week, and 4 week intervals. Following
movements and predation in the short term may shed light on post-settlement
processes.
There are a lot of opportunities for aquaculture, both for its own use and overlapping
with the fishery and wild resources. Several important discoveries from spat bags and
examining adult scallops include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Very strong growth – up to 0.19 mm/day, first market size within 6-10 months.
Roe is present much of the year in several sites.
State support in the regulatory aspects, strong regime for minimizing public
health risks from biotoxins. Present help is toward sales of live/roe-on.
Product development and diversification.
Passive collectors could assist with re-seeding wild beds.
Oceanography could benefit larval retention.
Diversification for fishermen is possible – won't be for everyone, but many
positive qualities exist for fishermen who also act as farmers.
In 2014, there were some sales of live product and of seed (and concurrently the
testing and MOU-signing that had to precede those live sales).
The risks and needs are: public health and safety, integration of fishing and farming will
be imperfect, US market development, allocation of waters into private use through
leasing, biosecurity (pests and disease), it will be awhile before competition with wild
production occurs (but bears attention), and profitability is suspected but unproven yet.
27
Nate Perry – Maine SeaGrant/Commercial trials for Sea Scallop grow-out in
Southern Maine
I primarily work on oysters at my aquaculture site, but would like to diversify the farm
and my income. In 2014, I got involved with the aforementioned scallop project and here
are two things that I am currently experimenting with:
1) Growing all scallop stages in containers and balancing this with gear. From a
labor standpoint, there is more gear to work with, but there is less labor per piece
of gear than labor required for container care. For commercial profitability, details
and data must be compiled by site to better determine a sequence of phasing
between bag culture, cage/stack culture, and ear-hanging. In addition to best
operational and successful growing methods, this will help provide a template for
determining what variety products (e.g. seed, whole, roe-on, meat, etc.) will help
diversify profit and for that matter, risk.
2) Seeding or enhancement with container grown scallops is an area of interest for
me – particularly seeding around the area of my aquaculture lease. We agree
there needs to be a way to measure the retention rate of seeding and that the
site (on relatively small scale) may significantly influence retention rates.
Michelle Thériault – Sea Scallop Aquaculture in Nova Scotia
Seed collection for growing spat is predominantly in Chedabucto Bay (northeast Atlantic
coast of Nova Scotia). There are existing growers in Lunenburg and potential new
growers in Shelburne, all along the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia. Seed supply has been
collected by Université Sainte-Anne starting in 2012. The goal is to provide a stable and
consistent supply of high quality seed for the scallop aquaculture industry. The
collection site is in cold, deep waters and has consistently produced good yields, high
quality seed.
Mechanical sorting and grading is used to harvest the seed. This sorting technique
helps sort out good, large seed from mostly other organisms. The maintenance and
preparation of spat bag gear is labor intensive and benefits from partnerships with
industry and the Nova Scotia government to assist with labor. Culture methods of the
collected spat include large arrays of hanging lantern nets. The interest in scallop
aquaculture is growing of both a mix of new and existing growers. Scallop culture
provides good options for diversifying incomes on existing farms or areas affected by
invasive tunicate species. The University will continue to work to support the
development of the industry through seed supply.
28
Pierre Poitevin – Research and Development to develop Scallop Aquaculture and
Sea Ranching in Saint-Pierre and Miquelon Archipelago
Miquelon and Saint-Pierre are two French islands off the southeastern coast of
Newfoundland, with an area totalling 242 km² and a population of 6,200. The annual
average temperature is 5.5°C with an oceanic climate showing pronounced seasonality
and a strong seasonal thermocline.
A joint research and development (R&D) effort has been developed since 2007 by a
private company (Exploitation des Coquilles (E.D.C.)) and a scientific research team
(Association de Recherche et de Développement pour l’Aquaculture (ARDA) and the
Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer (Ifremer)) to enhance giant
sea scallop, Placopecten magellanicus, breeding techniques and assess its
environmental requirements. The R&D strategic plan is based upon a 3 year project
also taking into account the E.D.C. requirements.
The global strategy is based either on a local spat settlement supply or spat imports
from the Canadian Maritimes. Spat collectors are deployed for 9 months to maximize
spat settlement in areas selected from a hydrodynamic model simulation. The pregrowing stage lasts 9 months until a size of 35 mm shell diameter. Scallops are then
deployed in lantern nets using the “longline aquaculture” grow-out technique for three
years or seeded directly on the seafloor for five years, also known as “sea ranching".
The site selection process has been developed using geomatics and a hydrodynamic
model.
Additional aspects of this project include genetic characterization of the spat collection
and potential effect of spat imports on local population, modelling the hydrodynamic
structure and thermocline patterns, multi-site monitoring of natural spawning and spat
collection, habitat mapping for site selection, evaluating various husbandry methods
(considering by way of example optimal scallop densities), studying dredge efficiency
and bottom impacts and developing the annual in situ video monitoring for stock
assessment and quantifying fishing effort. Meanwhile, environmental conditions and
carrying capacity is assessed through in-situ continuous monitoring using multiparameter probes and phytoplankton samples (quantitative and qualitative surveys).
29
SESSION 3: QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
The following captures the discussion from questions posed in relation to session 3 and
options captured below are not necessarily indicative of consensus or suggestions
made by the summit as a whole.
Q1. What are the threats that aquaculture presents to the wild fishery?
•
The threats that aquaculture poses to wild fisheries include genetic monocultures
that make local stocks more vulnerable to disease and the potential cross
contamination (disease/parasite) from high-density stocks. The use of chemicals
in aquaculture may have an influence on genetics, disease, and production. Spat
collection could also negatively affect recruitment to wild scallop beds.
•
There could also be competition for bottom habitat and food between wild and
cultured stocks. Culturing could bring forth space and gear conflicts with the wild
fishery resulting in the loss of fishing grounds and brings the potential to
introduce more predators and threats of invasive species. There could be a shift
in fishing seasons and timing of spat collection. If only one portion of the fishery
(aquaculture and wild) invests in seeding, how would they ensure that they
benefit from it?
•
There is also competition for markets between aquaculture and the wild fishery
and this may result in changes to the value of product in wild versus aquaculture
raised scallops. There could be competition for labor and a conflict between
mindsets and approaches. There could also be a shift in markets due to the
consumer perception of aquaculture versus wild caught scallops. All of this could
result in shifts of local political power, and potential changes to the character of
the waterfront.
Q2. What are the opportunities between scallop aquaculture and fishing?
•
The opportunities presented between these two industries are resource
enhancement, product stability, data sharing and collaboration, reduced conflict
between aquaculture and fishing, global market presence, economic stability,
increased awareness, tourism and education, increased waterfront infrastructure,
income diversification, youth employment, community support, and the potential
to reduce the stress on wild populations and the environment by reducing dredge
activity.
30
Q3. What are the weaknesses of integrating aquaculture and enhancement in wild
fishery management plan?
•
The weaknesses of integrating aquaculture and enhancement in wild fishery
management includes the lack of buy in from both industry and management,
confusing multiple management authorities, differences between enhancement
and aquaculture, potential conflict and competition for space, potential
competition for the same markets and preferential treatment, seeding methods
are still in the development stage, propriety/ownership conflict, potential genetic
issues, quantifying impact of enhancement, a history of mistrust between the two
groups, the lack of understanding of impacts on wild resources, potential
negative social impact, and increasing the complexity of an already complex
fishery.
Q4. What are strengths of integrating scallop fishing and aquaculture?
•
Some of the strengths of integrating scallop fishing and aquaculture include
developing a stronger market (and control over that market), rounding out the
scallop supply and increasing product. This will stabilize income; increase job
opportunities and diversify the industry. This could lead to overall resilience of
coastal communities and decrease the conflicts of combining wild and
aquaculture sectors. This could also lead to simplifying management and
integration across aquaculture and wild fisheries and potentially strengthen
fishery management overall.
•
Integration may increase participation in research from both sectors. Knowledge
sharing will increase. This collaboration will increase the ownership and
responsibility of fishermen of the resource and may help to maximize their profit
by increasing catch rates and decreasing costs. The value of your enterprise
could increase along with increases in the available resource.
•
Cultured stock can increase the natural stock (broodstock and seed) by capturing
larval stages where natural settlement would not occur. These raised larvae that
are seeded into natural beds may help bring back those populations again. This
could help maximize the resource yield in those areas.
31
SESSION 4: SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF THE SEA SCALLOP RESOURCE
Moderator: Alain d’Entremont, Full Bay Scallop Association
Targeted Questions:
i) What are the components of a well-managed fishery?
ii) What is each sea scallop fishery’s approach to defining reference points?
iii) How do you define reference points (or should you even try) when a fishery does
not have a formal assessment?
iv) What broader indicators can be used in a data poor situation (biological,
economic, management)?
v) How do you pragmatically scale management to match resources?
vi) What does sustainability mean in the context of a drag and dive based fishery?
vii) How is sustainability defined?
viii) What are each fishery’s goals (maximizing the number of participants or yield)?
ix) How is success defined?
Stephen Smith – Sustainable Management of the Sea Scallop Resource in Canada
The Precautionary Approach (PA) means being cautious when scientific information is
uncertain, unreliable or inadequate and not using the absence of adequate scientific
information as a reason to postpone or fail to take action to avoid serious harm to the
resource. In 2001, the United Nations Agreement on Straddling and High Migratory Fish
Stocks (UNFA) committed Canada to use the PA approach. In 2004 the Atlantic
Fisheries Policy Review (AFPR) led by DFO called for a comprehensive risk
management framework for decision-making, which incorporated the PA.
Elements of Sustainability:
1. Stock Status: The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a
low probability of recruitment over-fishing
2. Reference Points: Limit and target reference points that are appropriate for the
stock
3. Stock Rebuilding: Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock
rebuilding
4. Harvest Strategy: There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place
5. Harvest control rules and tools: There are well defined and effective harvest
control rules in place
6. Information / monitoring: Relevant information is collected to support the harvest
strategy
32
7. Assessment of stock status: There is an adequate assessment of the stock
status
Two Conditions of Sustainability:
Surplus production = growth + recruitment – mortality
1. At any level of biomass, catch is less than surplus production
2. There is a level of biomass where the stock is most productive and provides the
maximum sustainable catch
DFO developed reference points and decision rules to maintain the stock biomass near
maximum productivity. The limit reference point (LRP) represents the stock status below
which serious harm in terms of reproductive capacity is occurring to the stock. This can
be a very difficult point to determine accurately and guidance from published case
studies suggest 40% of biomass at maximum sustainable yield (BMSY) as a proxy. In
Canada, the LRP is set at 30% BMSY for the offshore scallop populations and at the
lowest biomass in the time series from which a sustained recovery occurred for inshore
populations. The upper stock reference (USR) point is the threshold below which
removals are reduced to promote recovery and is usually set at 80% BMSY for Canadian
fisheries. In Canada this 80% is applied to the mean biomass over a set period of years
for offshore scallop populations while the USR is defined as the BMSY for inshore
populations calculated from the population model used for stock assessments. The
exploitation target in Canada is the average exploitation rate for offshore populations
(1981 to 2009) and the exploitation rate resulting in BMSY for inshore populations. The
removal reference is the maximum acceptable removal rate for the stock. The decision
rules have to do with the state of the stock. If a stock is above the USR it is designated
as being in the healthy zone (e.g., Figure 11). Fishing plans for healthy stocks can be
quite flexible as long as there is a low probability of the stock dropping below the USR.
Once a stock drops below the USR, it is in the cautious zone and exploitation is reduced
to promote biomass growth so that the biomass is greater than the USR over a set
period of years. More restrictive management actions such as minimal or no fishing may
be warranted when the stock drops below the LRP and is considered to be in the critical
zone.
33
Figure 11. Biomass estimates for fully-recruited scallops (kt) from the assessment model fit to the survey
and commercial data for scallop fisheries in the Bay of Fundy and approaches. Dashed lines are the
upper and lower 95% credible limits on the estimates. The predicted biomass for 2014 in each area,
assuming the 2013/2014 initial TAC, are displayed as a box plot with median, 50% credible limits (box)
and 80% credible limits (whiskers). Green-shaded area represents the healthy zone (based on a Upper
Stock Reference (USR) point, yellow area represents the cautious zone (based on Lower Reference
Point (LRP) ) and red is the critical zone (< LRP).
Spatial patterns are important for measuring and evaluating sustainability of scallop
fisheries. Stock productivity is a function of habitat and density as opposed to the
traditional MSY used for fish stocks, which depends only on biomass and assumes a
constant exploitation rate over the whole population. The stock-recruitment relationship
is not obvious for scallops and recruitment is to specific areas. Density dependence is
important at settlement and later on in life. Fishing mortality of scallops should only be
applied to fished areas and not to the entire population. Habitat suitability has been
assessed extensively by DFO in Canada, and is the basis for new models being
developed for scallop fisheries off of southwest Nova Scotia where there has been
extensive multi-beam sonar coverage (Figure 12). Biomass trends, density trends, and
catch trends indicate that habitat significantly impacts density and therefore catch rates.
34
Figure 12. Scallop habitat suitability map from the Maxent Species Distribution Model (Brown et al., 2012)
binned by Low [0, 0.3), Medium [0.3, 0.6) and High [0.6, 1.0) categories of habitat suitability probabilities
for SFA 29 West.
References:
Brown, C., Sameoto, J. A., and Smith, S. J. (2012). Multiple methods, maps, and management
applications: purpose made seafloor maps in support of ocean management. J. Sea Res.,
72: 1–13.
Deirdre Boelke – Sustainable Management of the US Sea Scallop Resource
In 1976 the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act was
established and NOAA established a 200-mile EEZ and created regional councils to
monitor fish stocks. Decisions made are based on input from the industry, scientists,
and regional managers. Councils forward proposals to NOAA’s National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS). The New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC)
monitors multi-species (groundfish), herring, red crab, sea scallop, skate, monkfish,
dogfish, Atlantic Salmon, and Halibut.
For the sea scallop, the US fishery started in the mid-1900s and had sporadic booms
and busts. The Scallop Fishery Management Plan (FMP) was established in 1982 and
at first was managed by minimum shell sizes and meat count limits. In 1994 there were
major changes implemented including a limit on the number of boats, maximum number
of days, and crew and gear limits.
35
In 1994 three large areas were closed to fishing on Georges Bank to help reduce
mortality on groundfish. In the 1990s there was a sharp decline in the scallop fishery. In
1999, the scallop fishery was granted limited access in part of one of the closures on
Georges Bank and following the success of that access the Council developed a largescale area rotation program. The current program surveys the resource annually and
beds of small scallops are closed for 2-3 years. Vessels are then allocated controlled
access in reopened areas to reduce bycatch and mortality.
The way that the US fishery has updated guidelines and definitions for the scallop plan
is that Optimal Yield (OY) is defined as the amount of fish that will provide greatest
benefit to the Nation based on social, economic, and ecological factors. The Annual
Catch Limit (ACL) is the optimal yield instead of the maximum sustainable yield (MSY;
old management model).
The scallop assessment is a very data rich assessment. The overall biomass and
recruitment information are based on results from several surveys. First, the Northeast
Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) has had a dedicated dredge survey since 1977 that
has sampled the resource using a stratified random design. More recently, the NEFSC
scallop survey has evolved into a combined dredge and optical survey. Dredge tows are
still completed in each stratum, and a digital camera (Habcam Version 4 or “Seahorse”)
is towed behind the survey vessel on all three legs of the survey. In addition, the
University of Massachusetts School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST)
completes a video survey with a drop camera in all or portions of the scallop resource
area depending on funding. The Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) conducts an
intensive grid design survey towing two dredges in several areas that vary year to year
based on funding. Finally, Habcam Group, an scallop industry based organization, has
completed very intensive optical surveys of discrete areas that also change each year
using a towed camera similar to the one used by NEFSC (Habcam Version 2). Staff
from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute have been involved in many of the towed
camera surveys with both Habcam Group and NEFSC. The Scallop Plan Development
Team (PDT), the technical body advising the Council, combines the results from all
available surveys to estimate sea scallop biomass and recruitment on an annual basis.
Summary on sustainable management:
•
•
•
•
•
Goals of program need to drive the system
High quality survey data – broad-brush index may not be enough –
dedicated Research Set-aside (RSA) program developed to provide
funding for more detailed surveys of the resource
Strong effort controls – so target catch can be closer to catch limit
Ability to adjust measures quickly if needed
Direct measures to address bycatch and other environmental issues - to
help keep OY closer to MSY
36
SUMMARY
This summit has offered the opportunity for scientists, fisheries managers, industry, and
environmental organizations to come together, learn and exchange information in a
collaborative setting. These opportunities are relatively uncommon but welcomed.
Increasing these opportunities for scientists, managers, and stakeholders to get
together can only benefit the industry and its future because the relationships between
harvesters, science, and management are an important component to a successful
industry.
Discussions included breaking down the science discussion, especially what
connectivity really means and what the overall implications of population connectivity
are to scallop stocks. If we can take what we have learned, get the money, the industry
buy-in, then we can be successful in achieving our collaborative research goals. It was
noted that the managers and the fishermen in Canada have a lot of confidence in their
survey system.
Many of the conference attendees found that the new information discussed at this
meeting was informative but might take a while to integrate. For example, connectivity
between populations is an interesting issue, but there is no management structure in
place to use it yet, and it may be difficult as connectivity of populations crosses both
county and country lines. In terms of scallops, there are a lot of gaps in our pre- and
post-settlement knowledge of processes affecting their lifecycle. But all attendees
agreed that good data leads to good management of a resource.
Maine fishermen were impressed with how Canada’s fishery is doing, however it can
take years for a change to an ITQ system to settle out. There is an upfront social cost to
transition to ITQ that takes commitment. Changing to limited entry programs (e.g., ITQ)
may be difficult but may need to happen to maintain stocks long-term. This relates back
to a concern about whether or not there will be 200 struggling businesses in the scallop
industry versus 20 successful ones. Choices will need to be made in the industry based
on multiple factors.
The idea of sustainability came up as something that needs to be defined by the
cultural, conservation, economic, and social goals.
In regards to the industry, a number of issues are similar across countries,
governments, and locations. Challenges the Maine fishery faces include dealing with
effort and capacity of the fishery. In the end, it was agreed that without knowing for
whom you are saving the resource for, it will be difficult to promote sustainability. It was
agreed that there needs to be long-term management plans to maintain the resource
that takes into account the ecology of the species and our changing climate.
37
Questions expressed at the end of the summit included:
•
•
•
•
•
.
How can we apply this new information about connectivity to the Maine inshore
fishery?
What does sustainability really mean?
Should collaborative research be a condition of access?
What are the professional opportunities?
How can the US and Canada improve their stock assessments?
38
Appendix 1. Letter of Invitation
Hello Mr/Ms,
On behalf of its steering committee, I would like to invite you to participate in the
US/Canada Scallop Science Summit that will take place from May 6-8 at the Algonquin
Resort in Saint Andrews, New Brunswick.
The goal of this workshop is to increase collaboration and knowledge sharing between
scallop fishermen, researchers, managers and aquaculturists in the United States and
Canada. We are limiting the workshop to 40 attendees to facilitate active contributions
from all participants.
This workshop was funded by the Maine Community Foundation with a specific goal in
mind, which is to enable cross-border collaboration on issues that may increase the
sustainability of Maine’s scallop fishery. As a result, discussions at this workshop will
focus on inshore scallop fisheries in the Gulf of Maine (including the Bay of
Fundy). Discussions will be divided into four general topics: large scale temporal
changes and connectivity; strategies for fishery-dependent data collection; aquaculture,
sea ranching and enhancement; and long-term sustainability of the Sea Scallop
resource. In addition, funding is also being sought through the Canadian Aquaculture
Collaboration Development Research Program to support this workshop.
We expect to have roughly equal participation from US and Canadian scientists,
fishermen, aquaculturists and managers. On the US side, industry participation will be
limited to those who fish Maine state waters or in the Federal General Category fishery
in keeping with the inshore focus of the workshop.
We have identified you as someone with knowledge and experience that will enhance
discussions and contribute to meaningful results. We also feel that your ability to share
those results with stakeholders in your field will help increase the impact of this
workshop. A copy of the latest version of the summit outline is attached for your
consideration. We hope you are able to attend, and would be grateful for a prompt reply
regarding your availability as soon as possible so we may extend the invitation to
someone else in your field if you are unavailable.
If you have any questions regarding the summit please don’t hesitate to contact me. To
RSVP, contact Lynn Wardwell at wardwell@maine.edu. Hotel reservations at the
Algonquin resort must be made by April 14, 2014; reference the “Scallop Summit” to get
the discounted room rate.
We look forward to seeing you in May!
Regards, Trish
39
Appendix 2. Workshop Agenda
US & Canada Scallop Science Summit Agenda
May 6-8, 2014 – The Algonquin Resort, St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada
High level aims of the workshop
1. To review and discuss the most recent scientific information relevant to the Sea
scallop (Placopecten magellanicus) fisheries and aquaculture efforts in the US and
Canada.
2. To bring together relevant groups - including scientist, harvesters, and managers to
increase coordination and collaboration on potential future scientific research
opportunities.
3. To provide an inclusive and participative forum to engage industry in scientific
discussions and knowledge sharing. This would include identifying potential
opportunities to strengthen and broaden the knowledge base in the scallop fisheries in
the Gulf of Maine and Bay of Fundy, as well as aquaculture efforts, and develop
research priorities that aim to assist in the goal of profitable, sustainable fisheries that
support coastal communities.
This workshop was funded by the Maine Community Foundation with a specific goal in
mind, which is to enable cross-border collaboration on issues that may increase the
sustainability of Maine’s scallop fishery. As a result, discussions at this workshop will
focus on inshore scallop fisheries in the Gulf of Maine, including the Bay of Fundy and
well as aquaculture efforts in the region. Discussions will be divided into four general
topics:
•
•
•
•
large scale temporal changes and connectivity;
strategies for fishery-dependent data collection;
aquaculture, sea ranching and enhancement; and
long-term sustainability of the Sea Scallop resource.
In addition, funding has also been secured from the Canadian Aquaculture
Collaboration Development Research Program to support this workshop.
40
Day One: Tuesday, May 6, 2014
5:00 – 7:00 Welcome Reception
Day Two: Wednesday, May 7, 2014
8:00 – 9:00 Breakfast & Registration
9:00 – 9:30 Welcome, Introductions of Participants, and Review of Workshop Goals
•
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf, Maine Department of Marine Resources
9:30 – 10:15 Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Overview
•
•
Stephen Smith – Canadian Key Note
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf – US Key Note
An overview of the North Atlantic sea scallop fishery, highlighting factors, trends, and
management approaches.
10:15 – 10:30 Coffee Break
SESSION 1: Large-scale Temporal and Spatial Patterns and Connectivity
10:30 – 12:30
MODERATOR: Caitlin Cleaver, Hurricane Island Foundation
PANELISTS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Claudio DiBacco 12 minute presentation
Jon Grabowski 12 minute presentation
Phil Yund 12 minute presentation
20 minute discussion
45 minute breakout discussion
15 minute session summary
Answering the questions:
What is the full story of temporal and spatial trends in recruitment, growth, and
condition? Can we identify ways to undertake cross-border collaboration and exchange
that may illuminate the underlying mechanism, and perhaps facilitate prediction? How
would we go about assessing both the level of connectivity between inshore and
offshore as well as Canadian and US populations and the potential fishery impact? How
do we assess where the broodstock are contributing to the fishery - basically, where are
the larvae coming from and where are they going? Are broodstock sanctuaries
41
effective? What challenges will sea scallop fisheries face in regards to ecological
changes such as temperature, salinity, predator community, bottom scouring/dragging,
ocean acidification, etc.?
12:30 – 1:30 Lunch
SESSION 2: Fishery-Dependent Data
1:30 – 3:30
MODERATOR: Carla Guenther, Penobscot East Resource Center
PANELISTS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Leslie-Anne Davidson 6 minute presentation
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf 6 minute presentation
Jessica Sameoto 24 minute presentation
20 minute discussion
45 minute breakout discussion
15 minute session summary
Answering the questions:
What is the best way to determine the impact of a fishery on a population? How can this
information be used to manage a fishery? How can we advance the use of fisherydependent data in an environment of dwindling resources? How are different fisherydependent data types (fishermen’s observations, Catch Per Unit Effort, logbooks,
landings, life history, etc.) utilized in real-time decision making? What are the most
meaningful in-season data collection methods? How are fishermen’s knowledge
incorporated into survey design? Could in-season data be sufficient to manage a fishery
(without pre-season estimates)? Is it more cost-effective to undertake in-season data
collection vs. formal fishery-independent surveys?
3:30 –3:45 Coffee Break
3:45 – 4:45 Clarifying Concepts
Small group break-out session:
Large-scale temporal and spatial patterns and connectivity
Fishery-Dependent Data
What questions do you still have? What is still not clear? What would you like more
information on? What are the next steps?
42
4:45 – 5:00 Report Back from Small Groups
6:00 – 8:00 Evening Dinner Reception
Day Three: Thursday, May 8, 2014
8:00 - 9:00 Breakfast
9:00 – 9:20 Synthesis of First Day’s Discussions
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf, Maine Department of Marine Resources
SESSION 3: Aquaculture, Sea Ranching & Enhancement
9:20 – 10:30
MODERATOR: Leslie-Anne Davidson, Fisheries & Oceans Canada
PANELISTS:
•
•
•
•
Dana Morse 5 minute presentation
Nate Perry 5 minute presentation
Michelle Theriault 5 minute presentation
Pierre Poitevin 12 minute presentation
20 minute discussion (Step 1)
10:50 – 11:00 Coffee Break
11:00 - 12:00 Aquaculture, Sea Ranching & Enhancement (continued)
45 minute Interview matrix (Step 2 – Appendix 3)
15 minute session summary (Step 3)
Answering the questions:
What are the challenges facing better integration of aquaculture into the overall
management? Could stock enhancement and sea ranching provide a natural
connection that will help reduce potential skepticism and reluctance among wild fishery
harvesters? Where is sea scallop aquaculture being conducted and what are the
challenges? Could grow-out sites serve as potential broodstock sanctuaries? Are there
ways to use growth and other information to inform management?
12:00 – 1:00 Lunch
43
Working lunch to bring together all suggestions on research questions and group into
themes.
SESSION 4: Sustainable Management of the Sea Scallop Resource
1:00 – 2:45
MODERATOR: Alain d’Entremont
PANELISTS:
•
•
•
•
•
Stephen Smith 12 minute presentation
Deirdre Boelke 12 minute presentation
20 minute discussion
45 minute breakout discussion
15 minute session summary
Answering the questions:
What are the components of a well-managed fishery? What is each sea scallop
fisheries approach to defining reference points? How do you define reference points (or
should you even try) when a fishery does not have a formal assessment? What broader
indicators can be used in a data poor situation (biological, economic, management)?
How do you pragmatically scale management to match resources? What does
sustainability mean in the context of a drag and dive based fishery? How is
sustainability defined? What are each fisheries goals (maximizing the number of
participants or yield)? How is success defined?
2:45 - 3:00 Coffee Break
3:00 - 4:00 Clarifying Concepts
MODERATOR: Carla Guenther, Penobscot East Resource Center
Small group break-out session with themes that evolve at the workshop. What
questions do you still have? What is still not clear? What would you like more
information on? What are the next steps?
4:00 - 4:20 Report Back from Small Groups
4:20 - 4:50 Open Discussion Identifying Next Steps
•
Carla Guenther, Penobscot East Resource Center
Discussion regarding identifying potential research collaborations and priorities.
44
4:50 - 5:00 Concluding Remarks
•
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf, Maine Department of Marine Resources
45
Appendix 3. Attendee List
Canadian Attendees:
Stephen Smith, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Bedford Institute of Oceanography
Dr. Shawn Robinson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, St. Andrews
Leslie-Anne Davidson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Moncton
Alain d’Entremont, Full Bay Scallop Association
Jessica Sameoto, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Bedford Institute of Oceanography
Pierre Poitevin, St. Pierre and Miquelon Aquaculturist
Maureen Butler, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth
Mallory Van Wyngaarden, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Doug Bertram, Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia
Carmen Burnie, Full Bay Scallop Association Fisherman
Melanie Sonnenberg, Grand Manan Fishermen’s Association
Tom Robarts, Upper Bay Scallop Association Fisherman
Vance Hazelton, Full Bay Scallop Association Fisherman
Greg Thompson, Fundy North Fishermen’s Association Fisherman
Harvey Matthews, Fundy North Fishermen’s Association Fisherman
Robert Hines, East of Bacarro Fisherman
Dr. Andrew Cooper, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, St. Andrews
Dr. Michelle Thériault, Université Sainte-Anne
Dr. Vicki Swan, Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia
*Dr. Claudio DiBacco, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Bedford Institute of
Oceanography (*May 7 only)
*Monique Niles, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Moncton (*May 8 only)
American Attendees:
Trisha (Cheney) De Graaf, Maine Department of Marine Resources
Dr. Carla Guenther, Penobscot East Resource Center
Dana Morse, Maine Sea Grant
Togue Brawn, Maine Dayboat Scallops
Kevin Kelly, Maine Department of Marine Resources
Dr. Kevin Stokesbury, School of Marine Science and Technology, University of
Massachusetts Dartmouth
Deidre Boelke, New England Fishery Management Council
Dr. Phil Yund, Downeast Institute
Alex Todd, Maine State Scallop Drag and US Federal Scallop Fisherman (NGOM)
Mike Murphy II, Maine State Scallop Drag Fisherman
Paul Cox, Maine State Scallop Dive Fisherman
Tad Miller, Maine State Scallop Drag and US Federal Scallop Fisherman (NGOM)
Curtis Haycock, Maine State Scallop Drag Fisherman
Dr. Dvora Hart, New England Fisheries Science Center
Nate Perry, Pine Point Oysters
Dr. Rick Wahle, University of Maine
Dr. Jon Grabowski, Northeastern University
46
Caitlin Cleaver, Hurricane Island Foundation
Bob Keese, Federal General Category IFQ Scallop Fishermen
Kristan Porter, Maine State Scallop Drag and US Federal Scallop Fisherman (NGOM)
Workshop Support Staff:
Skylar Bayer, University of Maine PhD Student [Rapporteur]
Lynn Wardell, Maine Sea Grant [Workshop Support]
47
Appendix 4. Updates since May 2014
(1) Mallory Van Wyngaarden; Paul V.R. Snelgrove; Lorraine C. Hamilton; Naiara
Rodríguez-Ezpeleta; Claudio DiBacco; Ian R. Bradbury
Population structure in the sea scallop, Placopecten magellanicus, determined
using RADseq
Since May 2014
Following quality control on the previously identified SNP loci we selected 7163 SNPs
for further analysis, including identifying loci potentially under selection. Examination of
adaptive markers such as SNPs for signatures of selection can provide more detailed
and fine-scale information about population structure and differentiation than markers
from neutral regions of the genome (i.e., non-coding regions and those not under
selection). Loci identified as potentially under selection can also elucidate possible
drivers of selection by comparing variation in environmental parameters and genetic
differentiation between sample sites.
Using a Bayesian method implemented in the program BayeScan (Foll and Gaggiotti,
2008), we identified 112 loci as potentially under selection (outlier loci). Population
structure analysis was completed using three datasets (all 7163 loci, 112 outlier loci,
and 7051 neutral loci (non-outlier)) whereas environmental correlations were examined
using only the outlier loci.
We used several methods to identify population differentiation and structure among all
samples 1. Analyses revealed a major split between the 4 northern-most (Newfoundland
and the Gulf of St. Lawrence) and the 8 southern-most populations, however this split
was much more pronounced in outlier loci than in neutral loci. Further analysis of the 4
northern-most populations that examined the outlier and neutral datasets showed
different patterns of population structure, indicating that different processes may
influence levels of population structuring within the region.
Preliminary results indicate a significant relationship between genetic variation in the
outlier loci and environmental variation between sample sites (revealed through
principal components analysis on both environmental and genetic variation), and that
1
Population differentiation was determined using isolation-by-distance (comparison of pairwise geographic and
genetic distances) and measures of GST and FST. Bayesian clustering using the program Structure (Pritchard et al.,
2000), k-means clustering using Principal Components Analysis implemented in the R package adegenet (Jombart,
2008), neighbour joining trees based on the Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards chord distance calculated in the program
Populations (Langella, 1999), and analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) were all used to detect population
structure.
48
ocean productivity and temperature may influence genetic variation (revealed through
redundancy analysis that contrasted 66 environmental variables with genetic variability).
References:
Foll, M., & Gaggiotti, O. (2008) A Genome-Scan Method to Identify Selected Loci Appropriate
for Both Dominant and Codominant Markers: A Bayesian Perspective. Genetics, 180(2),
977-993. doi: 10.1534/genetics.108.092221
Jombart, T. (2008) Adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers.
[Article]. Bioinformatics (Oxford), 24(11), 1403-1405. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn129
Langella, O. (1999) Populations 1.2. 30. CNRS UPR9034.
Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M., and Donnelly, P. (2000) Inference of population structure using
multilocus genotype data. Genetics, 155(2), 945-959.
(2) Pierre Poitevin
Research and Development to develop Scallop Aquaculture and Sea Ranching in
Saint-Pierre and Miquelon Archipelago
Since May 2014
Scientific actions have been implemented to optimize scallop spat settlement.
Moreover, one of the R & D priorities has focused on the characterization of the
phytoplanktonic community by species and relative abundance. Regular fluorimetric
profiles (within the full water column) and phytoplankton samples have been conducted
between June and October, when the water is most stratified. Those measurements will
provide additional information to assess carrying capacity in areas nearest to scallop
culture sites as well as scallops' diet to establish relationship with overall growth.
Upgrading of the video monitoring system was initiated in 2014 aiming to convert to a
fully digital system. Further environmental (using sclerochronology and sclerochimistry
tools) and behavioral research on areas seeded with scallops are likely to be developed
over the next few years.
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertising