Last updated on 18 August 2016

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 suggest that this species forms several genetically differentiated populations, one of which in the Gulf of California (Valles-Jimenez et al., 2005).


ANALYSIS

Strengths

The fishery is regulated by a Mexican Official Standard since 1993 which is currently under an update process. 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; but it has not been implemented, or evaluated as precautionary yet. Since 2005 Mexico has implemented a buy-out program for the industrial fleet resulting on the diminishing of 50% of the fleet (1422 vessels in 2005, 711 in 2011). The CPUE has increased from 12 to 17 metric tons/year. There are no biomass estimates available but relative abundance survey indices indicated an increasing trend of Whiteleg shimp in Sinaloa- Nayarit (Zones 30, 40 and 60). Catches levels increased in 2013. It has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: control documents in place and policy changes to increase transparency.

Weaknesses

There is not a full assessment of the Whiteleg shrimp in Pacific waters, thus the real stock condition is unknown. A Total Allowable Catch system is not in place yet. High levels of bycatch have been reported for the industrial sector.

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

    Strengths

    The fishery is regulated by a Mexican Official Standard since 1993 which is currently under an update process. 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; but it has not been implemented, or evaluated as precautionary yet. Since 2005 Mexico has implemented a buy-out program for the industrial fleet resulting on the diminishing of 50% of the fleet (1422 vessels in 2005, 711 in 2011). The CPUE has increased from 12 to 17 metric tons/year. There are no biomass estimates available but relative abundance survey indices indicated an increasing trend of Whiteleg shimp in Sinaloa- Nayarit (Zones 30, 40 and 60). Catches levels increased in 2013. It has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: control documents in place and policy changes to increase transparency.

    Weaknesses

    There is not a full assessment of the Whiteleg shrimp in Pacific waters, thus the real stock condition is unknown. A Total Allowable Catch system is not in place yet. High levels of bycatch have been reported for the industrial sector.

    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 7 November 2014

      The National Fisheries Institute (Instituto Nacional de la Pesca, or 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 (INAPESCA, 2013).

      SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

      Last updated on 7 November 2014

      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).

      CURRENT STATUS

      Last updated on 14 March 2015

      According to the latest National assessment of shrimp fisheries, all shrimp stocks are thought of being exploited Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), with fluctuations in total production related to environmental conditions (SAGARPA, 2012a). However, quantitative biomass data for the stock is not available in the report, or the estimated long term biomass target (BMSY). Results from a recent study suggested however that the whiteleg shrimp stock biomass is declining (Madrid-Vera et al., 2012) but the analysis were based on data until 2008-2009 season. Recent catches seems to indicate a rapid recovery of the stock.Additionally, 2014 survey abundance index (kg/h)in offshore waters (“Alta Mar”) indicated that the Whiteleg shrimp in Sinaloa-Nayarit (Zones 30, 40 and 60) is above the long-term average (1992-2014) and presents an increasing trend in all Zones (INAPESCA, 2014).

      2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

      MANAGEMENT

      Last updated on 7 November 2014

      Under the General Law on Sustainable Fishing and Aquaculture (Ley General de Acuacultura y Pesca Sustentable, LGAPS), the Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación, SAGARPA) is responsible by the Fisheries sector. The agency responsible for fisheries management, monitoring and enforcement is CONAPESCA.

      Frequently, management decisions are taken based on the scientific advice, but in response to social pressures trying to satisfy to both sectors industrial and small scale (artisanal).

      The fishery is regulated by a Mexican Official Standard since 1993 (NOM-002-PESC-1993), which is currently under an update process. Seasonal and spatial bans are established, as well as control on the fishing effort, vessels and gears. In 2014, the seasonal closure occurred between March and September (SAGARPA, 2014). Trawl is only possible in zones deeper than 9,14 meters. Turtle exclusion devices (TED) are mandatory and fish exclusion devices are used in Pacific area to reduce bycatch (SAGARPA, 2012a). 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.

      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).

      This fishery is under a “Fishery Improvement Plan (FIP)”: http://www.sustainablefish.org/fisheries-improvement/shrimp/gulf-of-california-industrial-shrimp/gulf-of-california-industrial-shrimp-fip. and fishing practices have been changed.

      COMPLIANCE

      Last updated on 17 March 2015

      There are no Set TACs or quotas for this stock. IUU fishing activities existed in the past but in recent years has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: Turtle Exclusion Devises (TEDs) 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.Bycatch is controlled by area and training on bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) for 400 fishermen occurred in 2014. Additionally, control documents are in place covering about 25% of the industrial fleet (FIP report). Observer program was in place from 2004 to 2010 covering about 3% of the fishing operations (López-González et al., 2012).

      CONAPESCA reports on VMS program indicated a diminution of the violation reports in No-take Zones from about 329 violations in 2011 to 12 violation reports in 2014 (CONAPESCA, 2012; CONAPESCA, 2014) . Additionally, in the 2013-2014 season, it was detected only 1 serious infraction in more than 230 inspections to TED devices. In the total, 1,088 vessels were certified with TED devices (PROFEPA, 2014).

      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.

      3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

      BYCATCH
      ETP Species

      Last updated on 5 July 2013

      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). Currently there are reports of bycatch of more than 600 species in the industrial sector of this shrimp fishery, including PET species (SAGARPA, 2012a). Pacific seahorse (Hippocampus ingens, IUCN red list: “Vulnerable”), totoaba (Totoaba macdonaldi, IUCN red list: “Critically Endangered”) and sea turtles are known to be affected by this fishery (Baum and Vincent, 2005; López-Martínez et al., 2010; SAGARPA, 2012a).

      Other Species

      Last updated on 11 November 2014

      Bycatch levels are regarded as high in the industrial sector, and include more than 600 species of both fish and invertebrates (SARGARPA, 2012a). The overall bycatch ratio in the shrimp trawl fisheries is about 1:10 (shrimp:bycatch) (López-Marínez et al., 2012), but more specific data for Sinaloa is 1:3.76 (Grande-Vidal,1996 in Gillette, 2008), with bycatch being mostly comprised of undersized individuals and low valued species (INAPESCA, 2012).

      Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) are mandatory in Mexico’s commercial shrimp fishery since 1995 (García-Caudillo et al., 2000) and the new fishery regulations will include the mandatory use bycatch reduction devices. Several research initiatives have also been conducted to develop more selective fishing techniques and gear designs (e.g., García-Caudillo et al., 2000; Carrillo et al., 2012). For example, INAPESCA has been developing gear tests to improve the selectivity of the trawl gears and recommends the use of a new gear. The proportion of shrimp to bycatch with this new gear is 1:1 (Aguilar-Ramirez et al., 2013). 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).

      HABITAT

      Last updated on 7 November 2014

      In 2000, a potential swept area of 25000 hectares per hour (ha/h) was estimated for the Gulf of California. To date, with the diminish or the fleet that potential is reduced to 12500 ha/h. 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 (MRAGAmericas, 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.

      FishSource Scores

      MANAGEMENT QUALITY

      As calculated for 2014 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 2014 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      Managers’ decisions are assumed to be taken based on the scientific advice. Seasonal and spatial bans are established. Control on the fishing effort, vessels and gears. There are continuous evaluations on the stock reproduction and recruitment (SAGARPA, 2012a).

      As calculated for 2014 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      There are no Set TACs or quotas for this stock. IUU fishing activities existed in the past but in recent years has been observed an effort to improve the compliance: Turtle Exclusion Devises (TEDs) 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. Bycatch is controlled by area (bycatch reduction devices requirements). Additionally, control documents are in place covering about 25% of the industrial fleet (FIP report). CONAPESCA reports on VMS program indicated a diminution of the violation reports in No-take Zones from about 329 violations in 2011 to 12 violation reports in 2014 (CONAPESCA, 2012; CONAPESCA, 2014). Additionally, in the 2013-2014 season, it was detected only 1 serious infraction in more than 230 inspections to TED devices. In the total, 1,088 vessels were certified with TED devices (PROFEPA, 2014).

      STOCK HEALTH:

      As calculated for 2014 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      2014 survey abundance index (kg/h) in offshore waters (“Alta Mar”) indicated that the Whiteleg shrimp in Sinaloa-Nayarit (Zones 30, 40 and 60) is above the long -term average (1992-2014) and presents an increasing trend in all Zones (INAPESCA, 2014).

      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).

      No data available for biomass
      No data available for biomass
      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
      1. In Sinaloa-Nayarit region, the Whiteleg shrimp fishery comprises the Zones 30, 40 and 60.
      2. 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. However, there are relative abundance surveys indices available for the Zones 30, 40 and 60 for offshore waters (“Alta Mar”) (INAPESCA, 2014).
      3. The catch data series represents catches for Whiteleg shrimp in Sinaloa-Nayarit (source: Madrid-Vera et al., 2012; CONAPESCA/SAGARPA website for the period after 2006 inclusive). Catches data include data of unspecific shrimp catch values which were distributed proportionally by the other species present in the area.

      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