Last updated on 4 February 2019

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Penaeus vannamei

SPECIES NAME(s)

Whiteleg shrimp, Camarón blanco

COMMON NAMES

Camarón blanco (Spanish)

The genetic structure of whiteleg shrimp in the Eastern Pacific is not fully understood, but the information available suggests that this species forms several genetically differentiated populations along the Central American coastline, one of which in the Gulf of California (Valles-Jimenez et al., 2005). Whinin it, the whiteleg shrimp is only commercially important in the Sinaloa-Nayarit area which is one of the assessment areas defined by INAPESCA. (INAPESCA 2016). Another assessment area is defined in the Gulf of Tehuantepec (INAPESCA 2016)


ANALYSIS

Strengths
  • Shrimp species captured in the mexican Pacific are short-lived species, with high fecundity and highly resilient to fishing mortality.
  • The fishery is regulated by a Mexican Official Standard since 1993 which has been updated in 2013.
  • There is a temporal fishing ban every year aimed at protecting the reproduction and growth of the species. 
  • Turtle excluder devices and Bycatch reduction devices are mandatory for all industrial vessels.
  • Relative abundance indices are provided in an annual basis by SAGARPA and INAPESCA.
  • It has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: control documents in place and policy changes to increase transparency.
Weaknesses
  • A Total Allowable Catch system is not in place yet. 
  • A recent stock assessment for this resource has not been recently conducted.
  • A management plan was developed was has not been formally implemented yet.
  • Relative abundance has been decreasing in the last four years (2014-2017) and it is now below the long-term median.
  • High levels of bycatch, including of ETP species have been reported (e.g., pacific seahorse Hippocampus ingens and totoaba Totoaba macdonaldi).
  • Illegal fishing has been officially recognized as a problem for Sinaloa fisheries.
Options
  • Develop useful reference points and harvest control rule, taking into account regularly available scientific indicators (e.g. CPUE limit, target, egg-bearing female proportion reference points, etc.) if stock assessments will not likely be feasible in a regular base.
  • Improve enforcement to avoid illegal fishing, as it has been recognized as a major problem for Sinaloa fisheries.
  • Improve understanding of the environmental impact of trawls in the areas where this fisheries operates

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

≥ 6

Managers Compliance:

≥ 6

Fishers Compliance:

< 6

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

< 6

Future Health:

≥ 6


RECOMMENDATIONS

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN
  • Ensure the use of BRDs during all of the fishing season and organize meetings among skippers to analyze the BRDs functioning.
  • Encourage vessels to cooperate with the government mandated observer program to generate the information required to evaluate the bycatch-related performance indicators in the MSC Principle II; ensure the government publishes the bycatch information.
  • Establish third-party auditable control documents between producers and importers to verify compliance with the fishery regulations.
  • Encourage the adoption of traceability programs to document fishing operations and increase accountability and transparency to the control documents.
  • Request that your supply chain joins SFP’s Gulf of California Shrimp Supplier Roundtable (www.sustainablefish.org/fisheries-improvement/shrimp-and-lobster/goc-shrimp-supplier-roundtable).
  • Encourage the National Commission for Aquaculture and Fisheries (CONAPESCA) to finalize and publish the fishery management plan.

    FIPS

    • Mexican Pacific shrimp - bottom trawl:

      Stage 5, Progress Rating B

    CERTIFICATIONS

    No related MSC fisheries

    Fisheries

    Within FishSource, the term "fishery" is used to indicate each unique combination of a flag country with a fishing gear, operating within a particular management unit, upon a resource. That resource may have a known biological stock structure and/or may be assessed at another level for practical or jurisdictional reasons. A fishery is the finest scale of resolution captured in FishSource profiles, as it is generally the scale at which sustainability can most fairly and practically be evaluated.

    ASSESSMENT UNIT MANAGEMENT UNIT FLAG COUNTRY FISHING GEAR
    Sinaloa-Nayarit Mexico Pacific industrial Mexico Single boat bottom otter trawls

    Analysis

    OVERVIEW

    Last updated on 4 February 2019

    Strengths
    • Shrimp species captured in the mexican Pacific are short-lived species, with high fecundity and highly resilient to fishing mortality.
    • The fishery is regulated by a Mexican Official Standard since 1993 which has been updated in 2013.
    • There is a temporal fishing ban every year aimed at protecting the reproduction and growth of the species. 
    • Turtle excluder devices and Bycatch reduction devices are mandatory for all industrial vessels.
    • Relative abundance indices are provided in an annual basis by SAGARPA and INAPESCA.
    • It has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: control documents in place and policy changes to increase transparency.
    Weaknesses
    • A Total Allowable Catch system is not in place yet. 
    • A recent stock assessment for this resource has not been recently conducted.
    • A management plan was developed was has not been formally implemented yet.
    • Relative abundance has been decreasing in the last four years (2014-2017) and it is now below the long-term median.
    • High levels of bycatch, including of ETP species have been reported (e.g., pacific seahorse Hippocampus ingens and totoaba Totoaba macdonaldi).
    • Illegal fishing has been officially recognized as a problem for Sinaloa fisheries.
    Options
    • Develop useful reference points and harvest control rule, taking into account regularly available scientific indicators (e.g. CPUE limit, target, egg-bearing female proportion reference points, etc.) if stock assessments will not likely be feasible in a regular base.
    • Improve enforcement to avoid illegal fishing, as it has been recognized as a major problem for Sinaloa fisheries.
    • Improve understanding of the environmental impact of trawls in the areas where this fisheries operates
    RECOMMENDATIONS

    Last updated on 1 February 2017

    Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
    • Ensure the use of BRDs during all of the fishing season and organize meetings among skippers to analyze the BRDs functioning.
    • Encourage vessels to cooperate with the government mandated observer program to generate the information required to evaluate the bycatch-related performance indicators in the MSC Principle II; ensure the government publishes the bycatch information.
    • Establish third-party auditable control documents between producers and importers to verify compliance with the fishery regulations.
    • Encourage the adoption of traceability programs to document fishing operations and increase accountability and transparency to the control documents.
    • Request that your supply chain joins SFP’s Gulf of California Shrimp Supplier Roundtable (www.sustainablefish.org/fisheries-improvement/shrimp-and-lobster/goc-shrimp-supplier-roundtable).
    • Encourage the National Commission for Aquaculture and Fisheries (CONAPESCA) to finalize and publish the fishery management plan.

      1.STOCK STATUS

      STOCK ASSESSMENT

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      The National Fisheries Institute (INAPESCA) uses, as a first approach, a dynamic version of the Schafer model (1954) proposed by Hilborn and Walters (1992). The second option is an age-structured model with delay in the recruitment (Deriso, 1980). The last update on the shrimp fisheries was published in 2012 (SAGARPA, 2012a), but no details were provided in terms of specific shrimp species or stocks. In 2012, the status of this Whiteleg shrimp fishery in the Southeastern Gulf of California was assessed via stochastic models and by a graphic approach for the surplus biomass, and using samples data and commercial landings from the Sinaloa shrimp trawl fleet from 1992-2010) (Madrid-Vera et al., 2012). In Sinaloa-Nayarit region, the Whiteleg shrimp fishery comprises the Zones 30, 40 and 60. Relative abundance indices from annual surveys are available for this stock (SAGARPA 2017).

      SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      There are many fisheries scientists collaborating with INAPESCA. Headquartered in Mexico City, INAPESCA is the Mexican government’s primary scientific and technological advisor on fisheries development and assessment. There is, however, a lack of environmental experts participating.

      There are continuous evaluations on the stock reproduction and recruitment. Advice to the shrimp fisheries in 2012 was to not increase fishing effort, in terms of number of gear in operation, and to decrease fishing mortality (SAGARPA, 2012). A recent study on Whiteleg shrimp from Sinaloa recommended that additional measures should be taken to allow the recovery of the stock (Madrid-Vera et al., 2012).

      The limit starting date for the 2017-2018 fishing season in offshore waters of Sinaloa was set at 5th October 2017 following the results of the 2017 survey of abundance (SAGARPA 2017).

      INAPESCA does not regularly estimate any reference point for shrimp fisheries in Mexico as it is thought that the stock-recruitment relationship is driven by environmental conditions rather than the fishery itself (Monterey Bay Aquarium 2017). Managers therefore rely on relative abundance indices from the ban season as indicators of the stock status (SAGARPA 2017). For this specific stock, however, a recent study estimated the MSY at 3,675 tonnes live weight (Madrid-Vera et al., 2012). Other reference points (e.g., Blrp, Ftrp) were not yet estimated or made available.

      At the beginning of the season, proportion of mature females and population sizes that maximize the yield per recruit the end of each season are considered (DOF 2012)(SAGARPA 2017). A minimum spawning stock biomass (Bescapment) is reported as a key reference point for this stock(DOF 2012), but this has not been defined.

      CURRENT STATUS

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      According to (INAPESCA 2016) whiteleg shrimp in Sinaloa-Nayarit can be considered as "fully exploited". 

      Average long-term (1997-1998 to 2014-2015) catches of whiteleg shrimp in Sinaloa-Nayarit are 6,400 tons. After several seasons of low catches in the late 1990's and early 2000's, catches increased and reached 8700 tons in season 2006-2007, but dropped to 4,300 tons in 2009-2010. Record high catches were reported in 2011-2012 (9600 tons) followed by a new drastic decline in the next season (5,100 tons in 2012-2013). Catches in the last three seasons have shown an increasing trend from those 5,100 tons in 2012-2013 to 5,600 tons in 2014-2015 (INAPESCA 2016)

      Relative abundance has been fluctuating between 1 and 8 kg/h in the 2000's, but peaked in 2011 to reach record high values (23 kg/h). After a drop in 2012 (2.5 kg/h), relative abundance increased again in 2013 and 2014 (13.4 kg/h), and has shown a negative trend since then to reach 2.3 kg/h in 2017, which is  below the long-term median (3.7 kg/h; 2001-2017) (SAGARPA 2017).

      2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

      MANAGEMENT

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      The Mexican Government, through the Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA), has implemented several actions to promote sustainable fisheries, including the Sustainability Law for Fisheries enacted in 2007. The NOM 002 SAG/PESC 2013 (DOF 2013) is the norm that regulates particular aspects of the shrimp industrial and artisanal fishing activities in the whole country. Shrimp fisheries in Mexico are managed based on the research and advise from INAPESCA. INAPESCA’s recommendations are implemented and enforced through CONAPESCA that issues fishing permits and updates the NOM 002 SAG/PESC 2013.

      Shrimp fishery is not regulated through qoutas. Instead, various regulations are designed to reduce fishing effort, including spatial and temporal fishing closures and regulation of fishing gears in agreement with the NOM-002-SAG/PESC-2013 (DOF 2013). A fishing closure is established every year between March and September, with two main objectives: 1) protect the reprodutive period of the species and 2) make sure that part of the stock complete the migration from bays and inshore waters to the offshore areas (INAPESCA 2016) . As part of a strategy to reduce the fishing pressure, since 2005 Mexico has implemented a buy-out program for the industrial fleet (CONAPESCA, 2012), resulting on the diminishing of 50% of the fleet (1422 vessels in 2005, 711 in 2011). Trawling is only allowed in areas deeper than 9,14 meters and trawl vessels must use turtle exclusion devices (TED) and bycatch reduction devices (DOF 2013)

      The development of a fishery management plan (FMP) for the Mexican Pacific Coast shrimp fishery was started in 2004, when a first draft management plan was produced (INAPESCA, 2004), but the process was interrupted. During 2012 fall, the National Fisheries Institute (INAPESCA) implemented a participatory process to resume the development of the FMP, which calls for measures to improve sustainability and economic viability (INAPESCA, 2012). However, the FMP has not been implemented or evaluated as precautionary yet (INAPESCA 2018).

      This fishery is under a Fishery Improvement Plan and fishing practices have been changed. Main objectives are:

      • Promote the use of gear that diminish environmental impacts.
      • Promote full compliance with fishery regulations.
      • Implement traceability programs to Increase the producers’ transparency and accountability.

      There are no recovery plans known for this fishery, other that the 2012 management plan, calling for measures to improve sustainability and economic viability of the shrimp fishery (INAPESCA, 2012).

      COMPLIANCE

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      There are no Set TACs or quotas for this stock. In recent years has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: Turtle Exclusion Devises (TEDs) and Bycatch Reduction Devices (BRDs) are mandatory on shrimp trawlers, satellite vessel monitoring system (VMS) covers 100% of the industrial fleet and spatial and temporal closed areas are in place. Observer program is also in place (Ocean Trust, 2011). Control documents are in place covering about 25% of the industrial fleet (FIP report). In addition pre-departure inspections are conducted to corroborate that fishing gear are complying with the specifications of the official norm, and that TEDs are in place and working properly and random water enforcement activities to revise correct use of the TEDs while fishing. In the 2013-2014 season, it was detected only 1 serious infraction in more than 230 inspections to TED devices.

      There are some illegal fishing practices, including participation of non-authorized vessels, use of illegal fishing gear, and illegal fishing within marine reserves. According with IMCO and EDF (2013) report, IUU fisheries in Mexican waters represents in average 44.5% of the total national production. However, this situation seems to be more associated with the artisanal component. Illegal fishing (including shrimp) has been recently recognized as a problem by the fisheries authorities in Sinaloa (link).

      In Mexico, official catches are obtained through catch logs provided by fishermen and buyers (with fishing licenses) to the local fisheries offices (Stiles et al. 2014). However, there is no validation for such reported catches, so estimates of unreported catches are not available.

      3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

      BYCATCH
      ETP Species

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      There is a total of 90 marine species protected by law in Mexico (DOF 2010), including 18 invertebrates, 44 mammals, 17 fish (including five species of elasmobranchs), 7 reptiles and four plant species. The Gulf of California is home for more than thirty species of marine mammals, at least five species of sea turtles and hundreds of seabird species (WWF, 2011).

      Bycatch levels are regarded as high in the industrial sector, and include ETP species (e.g., Pacific seahorse, Hippocampus ingens and T. macdonaldi(Baum and Vincent 2005) (Bobadilla et al. 2011) (DOF 2012) although the mortality of those species relative to a sustainable level is unknown. Thanks to the mandatory use of turtle excluder devices, the capture of turtles by shrimp trawlers is considered almost negligible (INAPESCA 2016)(INAPESCA 2016) although the INAPESCA observer program documented catches of olive ridley, green, loggerhead and hawksbill turtles in the past (Monterey Bay Aquarium 2017).

      Shrimp trawls have been a source of fishing mortality for various elasmobranch species in Mexico, but the most recent analysis of the onboard observer data reported minimal presence of these species in the bycatch concluding that shrimp fisheries do not represent a risk to these species (INAPESCA 2016)(Monterey Bay Aquarium 2017).

      Other Species

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      Main target species of the shrimp fishery in Sinaloa and Nayarit are blue shrimp (Litopenaeus stylirostris), whiteleg shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) and yellowleg shrimp (Farfantepenaeus californiensis) (INAPESCA 2016).

      A recent investigation of the levels of bycatch in the industrial Mexican Pacific shrimp fishery based on on-board observers between 2007 and 2015 (INAPESCA 2017) revealed that the median of the ratio shrimp:bycatch was 1:6.5 for the whole Mexican Pacific. The ratio is expected to decrease in the coming years as the use of bycatch reduction devices is mandatory from the season 2016-2017. Retained bycatch for the same period (2007-2015) was on average 4% of the catch, and included mostly fish (88%), rays, sharks, mollusks and crustaceans. 

      More specific data for Sinaloa is a shrimp:bycatch ratio between 1:3.76 (Grande-Vidal,1996 in Gillette, 2008) and 1:6 (Amezcua et al. 2006) (INAPESCA 2017), with bycatch being mostly comprised of undersized individuals and low valued species (Amezcua et al. 2006), but to date there are no estimates of the overall bycatch volumes. According to MSC pre-assessment, the volume of retained species in both the industrial and artisanal fleets is low, although absolute volume and status of the main species has not been assessed directly (MRAG Americas, 2013). However, illegal fishing is occurring, thus bycatch estimates are probably underestimated.

      HABITAT

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      Bottom trawling is known to negatively impact the seafloor, both by altering the physical structure of the substrate and by causing great damage on the benthic communities. However, fishermen avoid rocky reefs, operating in soft areas rather (MRAG Americas, 2013). Wells et al. (2008) studied the effect of shrimp trawling on fish and invertebrate communities on the Gulf of California and found differences in communities between trawled and non-trawled areas, suggesting a negative impact of trawling on this benthic ecosystem.

      Seasonal and spatial closures are used and defined based on the average size of individual shrimp, in order to optimize the catch of market-size shrimp. A temporal fishing ban in established each year between March and September to protect the reproduction of the species and to allow the migration to offshore waters (INAPESCA 2016). The are several marine reserves in the region (see the interactive map), where fishing activities are more strictly regulated:

      • Island of the Gulf of California, that includes several islands on the coasts of Sinaloa
      • Reserve of the Biosphere of "Islas Marias"
      • Reserve of the Biosphere "Marismas Nacionales de Nayarit"

      Only the 0-5 fathoms depth strip and a 5 nautical miles buffer around coastal lagoons, bays and river mouths are restricted to bottom trawling (NOM-002-PESC-2013) (DOF 2013)

      ECOSYSTEM

      Last updated on 4 February 2019

      Eco-trophic models have been developed for the Gulf of California (Díaz-Uribe et al. 2012) and specifically for Sinaloa (Salcido Guevara 2006)(Zetina-Rejon et al. 2003)(Zetina-Rejón et al. 2004). Main topographic features have been identified and mapped (http://www.conabio.gob.mx/informacion/gis/) and the main oceanopraphic features of the whole country have been identified and  characterized (CONABIO-CONANP-TNC-PRONATURA. 2007) (INAPESCA 2016).

      (Salcido Guevara 2006) evaluated the impact of the industrial shrimp fishery of Sinaloa on the different components and functional groups of the ecosystem and concluded that in spite of the industrial shrimp fishery being responsible for most of the trophic cascade effects on the ecosystem, its negative impact is smaller than the trophic impact among the different biological groups.

      Some policies are in place to protect ecosystem functioning (restricted areas, ban of certain practices,  TEDs and bycatch reduction devices, etc.). Lack of compliance with some of those measures has been detected (link). There are some marine reserve in the waters of Sinaloa and Nayarit that however does not include any traditional area of shrimp trawling, therefore offering no protection from trawling to the bottom habitats (Bourillón and Torre 2012).

      FishSource Scores

      Last updated on 23 March 2018

      MANAGEMENT QUALITY

      As calculated for 2017 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      During 2012 fall, The National Fisheries Institute (INAPESCA) implemented a participatory process for the development of the Mexican Pacific Coast shrimp fishery management plan which calls for measures to improve sustainability and economic viability (INAPESCA, 2012); but it has not been implemented, or evaluated as precautionary yet.

      As calculated for 2017 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      This fishery is not regulated through TACs of fish qoutas. Since 1992, access to this fishery is managed through commercial fishing permits. Among other management measures, there are spatial and temporal fishing closures, effort limitation and regulation of fishing gears in agreement with the NOM-002-SAG/PESC-2013 (DOF 2013).

      As calculated for 2017 data.

      The score is < 6.

      There are no Set TACs or quotas for this stock. There are some illegal fishing practices, including participation of non-authorized vessels, use of illegal fishing gear, and illegal fishing within marine reserves (e.g. http://www.nayaritenlinea.mx/2015/07/07/reportan-pesca-ilegal-en-islas-marias?vid=77110). Illegal fishing (including shrimp) has been recognized as a problem in Sinaloa by the Fisheries Authority of Sinaloa (https://www.debate.com.mx/sinaloa/pesca-ilegal-un-problema-que-preocupa-a-las-autoridades-en-sinaloa-buscan-acabarlo-20180302-0154.html)

      STOCK HEALTH:

      As calculated for 2017 data.

      The score is < 6.

      Relative abundance indices have been decreasing since 2015 and last available data (2017) is below the long-term median (SAGARPA, 2017). Catches in the last three seasons for which data is available (2012-2013 to 2014-2015) have shown a modest increase but are still below the long-term average levels (INAPESCA, 2016)

      As calculated for 2014 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      Recent catches values seems to indicate a rapid stock recovery. Additionally, the 2014 offshore (“Alta Mar”) surveys results indicated an increasing trend of the relative abundance indices of the Whiteleg shrimp in Sinaloa- Nayarit (Zones 30, 40 and 60) (INAPESCA, 2014).

      To see data for biomass, please view this site on a desktop.
      To see data for catch and tac, please view this site on a desktop.
      No data available for fishing mortality
      No data available for fishing mortality
      No data available for recruitment
      No data available for recruitment
      To see data for management quality, please view this site on a desktop.
      To see data for stock status, please view this site on a desktop.
      DATA NOTES
      • In Sinaloa-Nayarit region, the Whiteleg shrimp fishery comprises the Zones 30, 40 and 60. 
      • As no fishing or biomass reference points are known, neither advised or set quotas were found, the quantitative scores (e.g., precaution of the management strategy and the future health of the fish stock) cannot be calculated; thus partial qualitative scores have been attributed.
      • Score about future health of the stock is based on data from 2014, as no information is available to provide a more recent score.
      • There are relative abundance surveys indices available for the Zones 30, 40 and 60 for offshore waters (“Alta Mar”) for the period 2001-2017 (SAGARPA 2017).
      • Catch data from season 1997-1998 to season 2014-2015 is available from (INAPESCA 2016).

      Download Source Data

      Registered users can download the original data file for calculating the scores after logging in. If you wish, you can Register now.

      Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs)

      SELECT FIP

      Access FIP Public Report

      Progress Rating: B
      Evaluation Start Date: 15 Oct 2017
      Type: Comprehensive

      Comments:

      FIP rating is B with last stage 4 achievement >12 months and last stage result <12 months. 

      1.
      FIP Development
      Oct 18
      2.
      FIP Launch
      Oct 17
      Jun 18
      3.
      FIP Implementation
      Mar 18
      4.
      Improvements in Fishing Practices and Fishery Management
      Aug 17
      5.
      Improvements on the Water
      Feb 16
      6.
      MSC certification (optional)
      MSC certificate made public

      Certifications

      Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)

      No related MSC certifications

      Sources

      Credits
      1. Aguilar-Ramirez, D., González-Ania L. V., Ganelon-León S. L., 2013. Evaluación Biotecnológica de Dos Redes de Arrastre Selectivas para la Captura de Camarón en Embarcaciones Menores de la Flota Ribereña de Bahía Magdalena, B.C.S. 15p. SAGARPA. INAPESCA, México http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/images/pdf/POA_MAGDALENA_v02_final.pdf
      2. Baum, Julia K and Vincent, Amanda CJ, 2005. Magnitude and inferred impacts of the seahorse trade in Latin America. Environmental Conservation, 32, 4: 305-319.http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=439819
      3. Bourillón, L. and Torre, J., 2012. Áreas marinas protegidas del Golfo de California para mitigar los efectos de la pesca de arrastre en la biodiversidad: Limitaciones y propuesta de nuevo enfoque. Ch. Chapter 1A. In: Juana López Martínez & Enrique Morales Bojórquez (eds.) Efectos de la Pesca de Arrastre en el Golfo de California. Mexico: Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, S.C. y Fundación Produce Sonora. p. 399-412. (In Spanish.)http://www.cibnor.gob.mx/es/component/content/article/986-libro-dr-enrique-morales-2012
      4. Carrillo, F.M., Galindo, S.P.P. and Navarro, J.T.N., 2012. Aplicación y evaluación del sistema de pesca de arrastre selectivo, por popa en embarcaciones menores, para la captura de camarón y protección a la vaquita marina en el Alto Golfo de California. Ch. Chapter 1A. In: Juana López Martínez & Enrique Morales Bojórquez (eds.) Efectos de la Pesca de Arrastre en el Golfo de California. Mexico: Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, S.C. y Fundación Produce Sonora. p. 315-339. (In Spanish.)http://www.cibnor.gob.mx/es/component/content/article/986-libro-dr-enrique-morales-2012
      5. CONAPESCA, 2012. Brindó Conapesca apoyo permanente por medio del sistema de localización y monitoreo satelital de embarcaciones pesqueras en 2011. Published online at 3rd January 2012. http://conapesca.gob.mx/wb/cona/03_de_enero_de_2012_mazatlan_sin
      6. CONAPESCA, 2012. Programa de retiro voluntario de embarcaciones camaroneras. [Buy-out program for the reduction of the industrial shrimp fishing fleet]. Comisión Nacional de Acuacultura y Pesca (CONAPESCA) website. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación (SAGARPA). (In Spanish.) Last updated 2 October 2012.http://www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx/wb/cona/programa_de_retiro_voluntario_de_embarcaciones_cam
      7. CONAPESCA, 2014. Permanente monitoreo satelital de CONAPESCA a dos mil embarcaciones pesqueras con dispositivo GPS. Published online at 28 December 2014. http://conapesca.gob.mx/wb/cona/28_de_diciembre_de_2014_mexico_df
      8. Deriso, R.B., 1980. Harvesting strategies and parameter estimation for an age-structured model. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 37: 268-282.http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f80-034#.Ub-81JyNDfl
      9. García-Caudillo, Juan Manuel, Cisneros-Mata, Miguel Angeland Balmori-Ramírez, Alejandro, 2000. Performance of a bycatch reduction device in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of California, México. Biological Conservation, 92: 199-205.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320799000531
      10. Gillet, R., 2008. Global study of shrimp fisheries. Shrimp fishing in Mexico (pp: 235-246). FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 475, Rome ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0300e/i0300e02b.pdf
      11. INAPESCA, 2004. Plan de Manejo para la Pesquería de Camarón en el Litoral del Océano Pacífico Mexicano. [Management Plan for the shrimp fisheries of the Mexican Pacific Ocean- 2004 version]. Instituto Nacional de Pesca (INAPESCA). Comisión Nacional de Acuacultura y Pesca (CONAPESCA). 76 pp. (In Spanish.)http://www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx/work/sites/cona/resources/PDFContent/4365/Plan_manejo_camaron.pdf
      12. INAPESCA, 2012. Plan de Manejo de la Pesquería de Camarón del Pacífico Mexicano. [Management Plan for the shrimp fisheries of the Mexican Pacific Ocean]. Instituto Nacional de Pesca (INAPESCA). Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación (SAGARPA). 144 pp. (In Spanish.)PM_Camar__...pdf
      13. INAPESCA, 2013. Análisis de los Muestreos de Camarón del Pacífico Mexicano durante la Veda de 2013. Dirección General Adjunta de Investigación Pesquera en el Pacífico. Programa camáron.http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/component/docman/cat_view/16-camaron
      14. INAPESCA, 2014. Dictámen de fin de Veda. Evaluación biológica de las poblaciones de Camarón durante la veda en el Litoral del Pacífico Mexicano. Agosto 2014. 100pp http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/publicaciones/dictamenes/doc_view/187-dictamen-de-apertura-de-la-temporada-de-captura-de-camaron-en-el-pacifico-mexicano?tmpl=component&format=raw
      15. Instituto Mexicano para la Competitividad (IMCO) and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), 2013. LA pesca ilegal e irregular em México. Uma Barreira a la competitividad. 80 pphttp://cobi.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Pesca_Ilegal-web.pdf
      16. IUCN, 2012. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. Downloaded on 31 May 2013.http://www.iucnredlist.org/
      17. López-González, L.C., Liedo-Galindo, A., Arenas-Alvarado, M.E., Beléndez-Moreno, L.F.J., 2012. Análisis del esfuerzo pesquero.Programa de observadores científicos de la flota camaronera de altamar en el océano Pacífico mexicano (temporadas 2004-2005 a 2009-2010). Instituto Nacional de Pesca, México, D.F. 196p. ISBN 978-607-8274-01-7 http://inapesca.gob.mx/portal/documentos/publicaciones/LIBROS/librosdivulgacion/Analisis_del_esfuerzo_web.pdf
      18. López-Martínez, J., E. Herrera-Valdivia, Hernández-Saavedra, N., E. Serviere-Zaragoza, Rodríguez-Romero, J., Rábago-Quiroz, C.H., Padilla-Arredondo, G., Burrola-Sánchez, S., Urias-Laborín, D., Morales-Azpeitia, R., Pedrín-Aviles, S., Enríquez-Ocaña, L.F., Nevárez-Martínez, M.O., Acevedo-Cervantes, A., E. Morales-Bojórquez, López-Tapia, M. del R. and Padilla-Serrato, J., 2012. Efectos de la pesca de arrastre del camarón en el Golfo de California. Síntesis de las investigaciones desarrolladas por el Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste S. C. Ch. Chapter 2. In: Juana López Martínez & Enrique Morales Bojórquez (eds.) Efectos de la Pesca de Arrastre en el Golfo de California. Mexico: Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, S.C. y Fundación Produce Sonora. p. 15-26. (In Spanish.)http://www.cibnor.gob.mx/es/component/content/article/986-libro-dr-enrique-morales-2012
      19. López-Martínez, J., Herrera-Valdivia, E., Rodríguez-Romero, J.and Hernández-Vázquez, S., 2010. Bycatch fish species from shrimp industrial fishery in the Gulf of California, Mexico. Revista De Biologia Tropical, 58: 925-942.http://www.scielo.sa.cr/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0034-77442010000300010&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=en
      20. Madrid-Vera, Juan, Herrera, Darío Chávez, Aragón, Juan Melchor, Meraz-Sánchez, Ricardo and Rodríguez-Preciado, José Alberto, 2012. Management for the White Shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) from the Southeastern Gulf of California through Biomass Models Analysis. Open Journal of Marine Science, 2, 1: 8-15.http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=17063
      21. MRAG Americas, 2013. 2013 Update to the 2009 Pre-Assessment of the Shrimp Fishery of the Northern Gulf of California. November 2013. 89pp http://cmsdevelopment.sustainablefish.org.s3.amazonaws.com/2014/01/02/Gulf_of_California_Shrimp_Fishery_Pre-assessment_2013-7d912419.pdf
      22. NOAA, 2011. "Totoaba (Totoaba macdonaldi)". NOAA Fisheries Office of Protected Resources website. [Accessed on 15 March 2011].http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/totoaba.htm
      23. NOM-002-PESC-1993. “ordena el aprovechamiento de las especies de camarón en aguas de jurisdicción federal de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos”. Norma Oficial Mexicana (NOM). Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación (SAGARPA). December 1993. 21 pp. (In Spanish.)http://www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx/work/sites/cona/resources/LocalContent/8739/9/002pesc1993CAMARON.pdf
      24. PROFEPA, 2014. Tortugas Marinas. Available online at 26 November 2014. http://www.profepa.gob.mx/innovaportal/v/1381/1/mx/tortugas_marinas.html
      25. SAGARPA, 2014. Acuerdo por el que se da a conocer que se levanta la veda temporal para la pesca de todas las especies de camarón en las aguas marinas de jurisdicción federal del Océano Pacífico, incluyendo el Golfo de California, así como de los sistemas lagunarios estuarinos, marismas y bahías de los estados de Baja California Sur, Sonora, Sinaloa, Nayarit, Jalisco y Colima.http://www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx/wb/cona/acuerdo_camaron_2014
      26. Schaefer, M.B. 1954. Some aspects of the dynamics of populations important to the management of the commercial marine fisheries. Bulletin of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, 1: 25-56.http://aquaticcommons.org/3530/
      27. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación (SAGARPA), 2012a. Carta Nacional Pesquera [National Fisheries Annual Report]. last updated 24 August 2012. 236 pp. (In Spanish.)http://www.inapesca.gob.mx/portal/documentos/publicaciones/CARTA%20NACIONAL%20PESQUERA/24082012%20SAGARPA.pdf
      28. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación (SAGARPA), 2012b. “PROYECTO de Modificación a la Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-002-PESC-1993, Para ordenar el aprovechamiento de las especies de camarón en aguas de jurisdicción federal de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, publicada el 31 de diciembre de 1993 y sus modificaciones publicadas los días 30 de Julio de 1997 y 28 de Noviembre de 2006”. 22 February 2013. (In Spanish.)http://dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5288724&fecha=22/02/2013
      29. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). 2008. Action program for the conservation of the species: Vaquita (Phocaena sinus). Comprehensive Strategy for Sustainable Management of Marine and Coastal Resources in the Upper Gulf of California. United Mexican States Federal Government. 76 pp.http://www.iucn-csg.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/PACE-vaquita-english.pdf
      30. Valles-Jimenez, R, Cruz, P and Perez-Enriquez, R, 2004. Population genetic structure of Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) from Mexico to Panama: microsatellite DNA variation. Marine biotechnology, 6, 5: 475-484.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10126-004-3138-6
      31. Wells, R.J., Cowan, J.H. and Patterson, W.F., 2008. Habitat use and the effect of shrimp trawling on fish and invertebrate communities over the northern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil, 65: 1610-1619.http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/65/9/1610.full
      32. WWF, 2011. "Gulf of California Species". World Wildlife Foundation Website. [Accessed on 15 March 2011].http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/wherewework/gulfofca/species.html
      Additional references:
      1. Hilborn, R. and Walters, C.J. 1992. Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment: Choice, Dynamics and Uncertainty. Chapman and Hall, New York. 570 pp.
      2. García-Caudillo J.M. and Gómez Palafox, J.V. 2005. La pesca industrial de camarón en el Golfo de California: Situación económico-financiera e impactos socio-ambientales. Conservación Internacional México. Mexico. 104 pp. (In Spanish.)
      3. Instituto Nacional de la Pesca. 2000. Catálogo de sistemas de captura de las principales pesquerías comerciales. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y Pesca. Mexico DF. 139 pp.
      4. Nava-Romo, J.M. 1994. Impactos a corto y largo plazo en la diversidad y otras características ecológicas de la comunidad béntico-demersal capturada por la pesquería del camarón en el norte del alto Golfo de California, México. Master Thesis. Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey. Guaymas, SON, Mexico. 83 pp. (In Spanish.)
      References

        Comments

        This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

        Comments on:

        Whiteleg shrimp - Sinaloa-Nayarit, Sinaloa-Nayarit, Mexico Pacific industrial, Mexico, Single boat bottom otter trawls

        comments powered by Disqus