Last updated on 7 July 2017

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Merluccius hubbsi

SPECIES NAME(s)

Argentine hake

COMMON NAMES

Merluza común, merluza (Spanish)

There are four different Argentine hake (Merluccius hubbsi) stocks in the South Atlantic Ocean, spanning from southern Brazil to southern Argentina (Bezzi et al., 1997; Hill et al., 2002; Vaz-dos-Santos et al., 2009): 1) from 21°S to 29°S, in Southeastern Brazil, 2) from 29°S to 41°S, shared by Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina, 3) from 41°S to 54°S in Southern Argentina (Patagonian stock), and 4) Falkland Islands/ Malvinas stock.


ANALYSIS

No related analysis

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

< 6

Managers Compliance:

6.5

Fishers Compliance:

≥ 6

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

4

Future Health:

< 6


RECOMMENDATIONS

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN
  • Develop programmes to improve catch data and information on non-target species, and increase efforts towards reducing uncertainty over stock status by conducting regular assessments
  • Contact Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front (CTMFM) and Argentina’s Federal Fisheries Council and ask them to set a unified total allowable catch for the entire stock and in accordance with scientific advice.
  • Press regulators to make public and implement the fishery management plan as recommended by the Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front.
  • Work with industry to increase compliance with bycatch reduction devices.

FIPS

No related FIPs

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
Bonaerense/North of 41º S Argentina/CTMFM Argentina Bottom trawls
Uruguay/CTMFM Uruguay Bottom trawls

Analysis

OVERVIEW

RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on 12 June 2017

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
  • Develop programmes to improve catch data and information on non-target species, and increase efforts towards reducing uncertainty over stock status by conducting regular assessments
  • Contact Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front (CTMFM) and Argentina’s Federal Fisheries Council and ask them to set a unified total allowable catch for the entire stock and in accordance with scientific advice.
  • Press regulators to make public and implement the fishery management plan as recommended by the Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front.
  • Work with industry to increase compliance with bycatch reduction devices.

1.STOCK STATUS

STOCK ASSESSMENT

Last updated on 29 January 2016

The stock assessment conducted by the National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development (Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Desarrollo Pesquero, or INIDEP) considers the fishery operating between 34ºS to 41ºS, however the stock is considered to extend to 29ºS (Vaz-dos-Santos et al., 2009).

The stock assessment model used by the INIDEP is a Virtual Population Analysis (VPA) combined with the Extended Survivors Analysis (XSA). One of the main inputs to the model is age structure from landings; until 2014 only data from the Argentinean fleet was available but data from the Uruguayan fleet is now being added to the model. To calibrate the model, age structure from juvenile and adult hake research surveys are also used. A stratified, swept-area survey, between the end of July and the beginning of September (winter) is conducted annually. However, since 2002, there have been several breaks in the adult and juvenile survey series (Irusta, 2014a; 2015).

An updated CPUE time series was included in the model, considering data from both Argentinean and Uruguayan fleets (Irusta, 2014a; 2015). Catch data from Uruguay refer to the Argentina-Uruguay Common Fishing Zone (ZCP), it is unclear if no fishing occurs in the Uruguayan ZEE outside the ZCP or if catch data from this area is not available. Catch estimates do not include corrections due to misreporting and discarding (Irusta, 2014a; 2015). A series of studies aiming the definition of bottom métiers in the North 41°S area was conducted to estimate a time-series of species-specific fishing effort. Recent results indicate that Merluccius hubbsi is targeted mainly (85.5 % in average) by demersal-pelagic vessels between the coastal and continental platform and M. hubbsi bycatch by other métiers is low (Fernández Áraoz, 2012; 2014a,b).

SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

Last updated on 29 January 2016

Total and spawning stock biomass (SSB) declined significantly between 1986 and 2014, 75% and 80% respectively. A 50% increase in SSB was observed from 2012 to 2014, due to a reduction in adult and juvenile fishing mortalities, in result of temporal closures and management measures aiming reduction on fishing effort.

However, SSB is still very low and there is high uncertainty on future recruitments. Therefore, stock projections to estimate Acceptable biological catches (CBA) for 2016 were run by INIDEP under two different recruitment scenarios and two recovery levels: Blim (150,000 tonnes) or to Bpa (230,000 tonnes), in either a short (3 years) or mid-term (7 years) period. A recovery to Bpa is only predicted to be possible in the mid-term. CBA options for 2016 from Irusta (2015) are:

Recruitment scenario 1Blim > 150,000 tBpa > 230,000 t
Short-term40,276 t
Mid-term56,533 t38,489 t
Recruitment scenario 2Blim > 150,000 tBpa > 230,000 t
Short-term40,086 t
Mid-term73,353 t55,225 t

The final recommendation by INIDEP, referring to the entire stock, is based on the recovery strategy to Blim in the mid-term (7 years), considering two recruitment scenarios; therefore Advised Total Allowable Catch (TAC) ranges between 56,000 and 75,000 tonnes (Irusta, 2015).

INIDEP also advises that besides setting a TAC accordingly to the Advised TAC, it is absolutely necessary to allow continued stock rebuilding by: i) implementation of a fishing closure during fall-winter to protect the spawning stock, ii) adoption of selective gear modifications to allow juveniles to escape, iii) maintenance of temporal closures in high juvenile concentration areas, iv) increase of on-board observer coverage, v) increase control on landings declarations and vi) ensure that annual research surveys for distribution and abundance estimation are conducted (Irusta and D’Atri, 2013; Irusta, 2014a;2015).

In parallel to the above mentioned recovery strategy, within the framework of the Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front (CTMFM), recommendation by the bi-national scientific team has been to adopt in the Common Fishing Zone a scheme aiming to allow a gradual recovery of the stock, projecting an SSB increase of 20,000 tonnes every 3-5 years, to reach levels of 120,000 tonnes within 9-15 years, which have historically yielded good recruitment and consequently higher sustainable yields (Irusta, 2014b).

Reference Points

Last updated on 29 Jan 2016

No target fishing mortality reference point is known for this fishery. Two biological reference points are used by the INIDEP to evaluate the status of the Northern stock of Argentine hake: a lower limit (Blim) defined at 150,000 tonnes, and a precautionary level (Bpa) defined at 230,000 tonnes, based on the stock-recruit relationship (Irusta, 2015).

CURRENT STATUS

Last updated on 29 January 2016

The SSB estimated for 2014 was 100,487 tonnes, representing an incipient increase of 50% between through 2012 to 2014, as a result of protective measures set in 2010 aiming reduction on fishing mortalities on adults and juveniles (Irusta, 2015). However, SSB is still well below Blim (150,000 tonnes) for over a decade. Since 1999, recruitment has been highly variable and below the historical average. The stock is likely to be under recruitment overfishing, resulting in a high uncertainty about future recruitment success. This is specially a concern as the fishery is sustained by age 2 and age 3 year classes in recent years, and therefore the fishery is highly dependent on the yearly recruitment success (Irusta, 2015).

Fishing mortality (of totally recruited ages, F(3-6)) was estimated at 0.666 in 2012, at 0.42 in 2013 and at 0.366 in 2014, showing a decrease of 36% and 12% in 2013 and 2014, respectively (Irusta, 2015). Total landings (including all countries) diminished from 50,000 tonnes in 2013 to 42,000 tonnes in 2014, however this value is still preliminary. Total landings in 2014 were higher than the CBA projected for that year considering a short-term recovery to Blim (32,000 tonnes) but significantly lower than the CBA for mid-term recovery to Blim (72,000 tonnes) (Irusta & D’Atri, 2013; Irusta, 2015).

Trends

Last updated on 29 Jan 2016

Landings were high in the late 1980s, reaching a peak of 221,200 tonnes in 1991, and since then have been oscillating around a downwards trend. In 2014, landings were the lowest value of the time-series, starting in 1986.

Spawning stock biomass (SSB) has been on a generally decreasing trend since the start of the time-series, having decreased by 80% over this period, a trend mirrored by the total biomass. The main reason for this decline is the high fishing mortality rates that showed an increasing trend culminating at 1.6 in 2003 and the generally below-average recruitment observed since 1997. SSB showed the lowest historical value in 2004 and has been stable at low levels until 2012 (between 50,000 and 70,000 tonnes).

SSB has increased to 78,000 tonnes in 2013 and 100,000 tonnes in 2014, due to lower fishing mortality of both adults and juveniles (Irusta, 2014; 2015). Recruitment is yet predicted to be highly variable and below the historical average, since SSB is still well below Blim.

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

MANAGEMENT

Last updated on 29 January 2016

The Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front (CTMFM), a bilateral entity formed by delegations from Argentina and Uruguay, has among its functions to establish the catch levels for the species that are exploited within the Common Fishing Zone (ZCP) and to distribute this catch among both countries. The Northern stock is distributed also outside the ZCP, within Argentina and Uruguay’s Exclusive Economic Zones. The stock is managed through Total Allowable Catches (TAC), established by the CTMFM for the ZCP, and also by the Federal Fisheries Council (Consejo Federal Pesquero, CFP) in Argentina.

In general, advised TACs have been consistently exceeded by the total TAC, as parallel TACs are established, by the CTMFM and CFP, without clear reference to area covered by the CFP regulation. For 2016, the Argentinean TAC remained at 30,000 tonnes (CFP, 2015a) and the ZCP TAC remained at 50,000 tonnes (CTMFM, 2015b). This represents a total TAC of 80,000 tonnes for 2016, above higher limit of recommended range by INIDEP, 75,000 tonnes, to allow stock recovery to Blim in the mid-term (Irusta, 2015).

Management measures were set in 2009 and 2010 by Argentina (CFP, 2009b, 2010); including minimum mesh size of 120 mm, complementary restrictions for nets, use of selectivity devices, minimum legal fish size of 35 mm and vessel fishing effort limitations. Due to a critical decrease in biomass and high juvenile bycatch rates, the CTMFM decreased the ZCP TAC significantly in 2011, from 90,000 to 50,000 tonnes, laid out the requirement for a management plan, established measures of control and monitoring, such as satellite monitoring of the fleet, and gear modifications to reduce capture of juveniles (CTMFM, 2011a; CTMFM, 2014b-e), and though progress on development of the management plan has been published, it has not been adopted yet (CTMFM, 2016).

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 29 Jan 2016

Several management measures have been taken to protect the adults and juveniles since 2010, e.g. TAC reduction, temporal closures to in high juvenile concentration areas, fishing effort limitations (CFP, 2009, 2010; CTMFM, 2011a, CTMFM, 2014b-e, among others). Resolution N° 7/2011 (CTMFM, 2011) requires a joint recovery plan for the Common Fishing Zone (ZPC) in 150 days. A working group has been working on this task and proposed a strategy for gradual recovery; however, the management plan has not been adopted to date (Irusta, 2014b).

A recovery plan with clear management objectives for the entire hake stock North 41°S is not being considered.

COMPLIANCE

Last updated on 31 January 2016

In regards to total landings as compared to the total set TAC in the last ten years the annual quota was only surpassed in 2011, since two parallel TACs are established, by the CTMFM and CFP. However, landings have been generally above the advised levels in most years. As well, catch estimates do not include corrections due to misreporting and discarding (Irusta, 2014a; 2015). Between 2007 and 2011, reported landings were around 100% above the advised levels, but since then this percentage has fallen; in 2012 landings were 28% above the levels advised and in 2013 and 2014 were below advised TAC, as landings have decreased significantly since 2011.

Enforcement of EU Council regulation No. 1005/2008 is assumed to have contributed to a decrease in IUU activities, however the control and monitoring system has been negatively evaluated by external auditors, which have stressed the malfunction of this sector, resulting in fishing unreliable declarations and several regulations not being properly enforced, such as the use of juvenile hake bycatch reduction devices (CeDePesca, 2015). The use of on-board cameras to assist in control of catches and discards has been announced by managers but it has not been implemented (CeDePesca, 2015).

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

BYCATCH
ETP Species

Last updated on 29 January 2016

Several elasmobranch species are known to be captured as bycatch in bottom trawl fisheries that target Argentine hake (e.g., Crespi-Abril et al., 2013), but the existence of systematic information regarding their interaction with this fishery in particular is unknown.

Nonetheless, in March 2009 the Fisheries Federal Council issued Resolution N° 6/09 in which it approves the National Action Plan for the Conservation and Management of Chondrichthyes (sharks, rays and skates) in the Republic of Argentina. Other concrete actions taken for management or conservation of these species that are relevant for the fishery include: i) the establishment of a working group responsible for conservation measures and advisement for the management of Chondrichthyes fisheries (created by CTMFM); ii) a resolution that establishes that sharks bigger than 1.6 m must be returned to the sea (CFP N° 13/2003), iii) seasonal no-trawling areas in spring (November to March) to protect different concentrations of juvenile and reproductive specimens of Chondrichthyes (e.g., CTMFM, 2011;2014b; CFP, 2013a), iv) the banning of the practice of finning sharks (CTMFM, 2009a).

A National Action Plan for the Conservation of Marine Mammals has been approved in Argentina (CFP, 2015b,c) and does not report significant interaction of the bottom trawl targeting hake north of the 41ºS with these animals, however, one of the planned actions is to update the diagnosis of operational interactions of fisheries and marine mammals.

Other Species

Last updated on 29 January 2016

According to 2007 observers’ reports, 87% of retained catches corresponded to Argentine common hake Merluccius hubbsi, 5.4% to different species of skates, 2.5% was Argentine shortfin squid Illex argentinus, 2.4% was pink cusk-eel Genypterus blacodes and 2.7% was a set of various other species.

Recent analysis of catches composition defining métiers operating in north of 41°S, indicate that vessels targeting hake (demersal-pelagic coastal and platform zones) also capture other commercial species in significant proportions, as target or bycatch, such as: hoki Macruronus magellanicus (~45%), pink cusk-eel Genypterus blacodes (~22%), Plownose chimaera Callorhynchus callorhynchus (18-23%), argentine sea bass Acanthistius brasilianus (12-20.5%), chub mackerel Scomber japonicas (~14%) and Narrownose smooth-hound Mustelus schmitti (~6%) (Fernández Áraoz, 2012; 2014a,b).

On the other hand, according to a recent scientific survey related to the establishment of fishing bans, bycatch in this fishery would also include: Pompfret Cheilodactylus bergi, Blackbelly rosefish Helicolenus dactylopterus lahillei, flounders (Paralichyhys isosceles, P. patagonicus, Xystreuris rasile), cusk-eels (Genypterus blacodes, G. brasiliensis), and several species of skates (Bathyraja macloviana, B. brachyurus, Sympterigia bonapartii) and sharks (Squalus mitsukurii, S. acanthias).

HABITAT

Last updated on 29 January 2016

There is no systematic research regarding the impact of bottom trawling operations over the sea bottom. However, most of operations are carried out over sandy or muddy fields.

Marine Reserves

Last updated on 29 Jan 2016

There are three reproductive areas in the ZCP between 36°S and 38°S, during winter (July to September), when adults migrate between the coastal and the continental slope. Juveniles are concentrated in breeding zones between 34°S and 38°S in the continental platform (Aubone et al., 2000).

There are no marine reserves, but there are important areas in Argentinean waters where trawling is banned. These areas act mainly as protection zones for juveniles, since criteria to establish them include a yield equal to or higher than 200kg/h and the presence of at least 40% of juveniles. In the Common Fishing Zone, seasonal fishing closures have been established annually in areas of high aggregations of hake juveniles in autumn and spring since 1993, in summer since 1995 and in winter since 2011 (CTMFM, 2014b-e; 2015). The areas are established by research surveys conducted jointly by Argentina and Uruguay (Aubone et al., 2000). There are also seasonal closures to protected zones for cartilaginous fish (e.g., CTMFM, 2014f). These closures applied for both Uruguayan and Argentinean fleets.

FishSource Scores

SELECT SCORES

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

Different components of this stock score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

Different components of this stock score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

Different components of this stock score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

STOCK HEALTH:

Different components of this stock score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

Different components of this stock score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
No data available
DATA NOTES

Last updated on 29 January 2016

1) There is no fishing mortality reference points, therefore scores #1 and #5 were qualitatively assigned (please mouse-over score for details).
2) Although there are no formal biological reference points set for this fishery, scientists have adopted Blim = 150,000 tonnes, and a Brebuild = 230,000 tonnes for several years, in order to provide catch recommendations (Irusta, 2015).
3) Advised TAC refers to the entire stock; for 2016, the recommended range is between 56,000 and 75,000 tonnes. The recommendation is based on the recovery strategy to Blim in the mid-term (7 years), considering two recruitment scenarios (Irusta, 2015). The range average was computed in the datasheet.
4) Set TAC is the sum of that defined by the Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front (CTMFM) for the Common Fishing Zone (ZCP) and that established by the Federal Fishing Council (CFP) by Argentina.
5) Landings are by Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay; data for Uruguay is from CTMFM, data for Brazil is from FAO and only available until 2013, for 2014 the previous year catches were considered (Irusta, 2015). Landings are not corrected by misreporting and discarding estimates.
6) Score #3 was assigned qualitatively (please mouse-over score for justification).

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)

No related FIPs

Certifications

Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)

No related MSC certifications

Sources

Credits
  1. Aubone, A., Bezzi, S., Castrucci, R., Dato, C., Ibañez, P., Irusta, G., Pérez, M., Renzi, M., Santos, B., Scarlato, N., Simonazzi, M., Tringali, L., Villarino, F. Merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) In: Pesquerías de Argentina, 1997-1999: 29-39. Aubone_et_al__2000.pdf
  2. Bezzi, S.; Cañete, G.; Pérez, M.; Renzi, M. and Lassen, H., 1994. Report of the INIDEP working group on assessment of hake (Merluccius hubbsi) North of 48º S (Southwest Atlantic Ocean). INIDEP Scientific Document No. 3. Mar del Plata, Argentina. 28 pp.http://oceandocs.net/bitstream/1834/2554/1/INIDEP%20DOC.%20CIENT.%203.pdf
  3. Centro Desarrollo y Pesca Sustentable (CeDePesca), 2015. Comunicado: Ante una nueva etapa, propuesta para avanzar hacia la sustentabilidad de las pesquerías argentinas. 30 November 2015. 6 pp. http://cedepesca.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/CeDePesca-Ante-una-nueva-etapa-Noviembre-2015-V3.pdf
  4. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2009a. Resolución CTMFM Nº 5/09: Norma estableciendo buenas práticas de pesca para las especis de peces cartilaginosos. 2 pp. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/5.09-peces-cartilaginosos.pdf
  5. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2009b. Resolución CTMFM Nº 7/09: Norma estableciendo un área de prohibición de pesca de arrastre de fondo en la Zona Común de Pesca. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/?p=891
  6. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2009c. Structure and Functioning of the CTMFM.Link accessed on September 30th, 2009.http://www.ctmfm.org/actividades/estructura.asp
  7. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2009d.Landings statistics for the Treaty area.Link accessed on October 3rd, 2009.http://www.ctmfm.org/estadisticas/estad_capt.asp
  8. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2011a. Resolución Nº7/11 Norma estabeleciendo medidas de manejo para el recurso merluza común (Merluccius hubbsi) en la ZCP. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/res-7.11-merluza-CTP.pdf
  9. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2011b. Resolución CTMFM Nº 10/11: Norma estableciendo un área de prohibición de pesca de arrastre de fondo en la Zona Común de Pesca. 2 pp. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/10.11-condrictios-veda.pdf
  10. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2012a. Resolución N° 14/12: Norma estableciendo un área de veda de verano para la especie merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca. 2 pp. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/res-14.12-merluza-veda-verano.pdf
  11. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2012b. Resolución N° 7/12: Norma estableciendo un área de veda de primavera para la especie merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca. 2 pp. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/res-14.12-merluza-veda-verano.pdf
  12. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2013a. Resolución N° 12/13: Norma estableciendo medidas de manejo para el recurso merluza común (Merluccius hubbsi) en la ZCP. 26 July 2013. 3 pp. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/res-12-2013.pdf
  13. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2013b. Resolución N° 17/13: Norma estableciendo la captura total permisible (CTP) para el recurso merluza común (Merluccius hubbsi) en la ZCP, para el año 2014. 19 December 2013. 3 pp. (In Spanish.)http://ctmfm.org/wp-content/uploads/17.-13-CTP-merluza.pdf
  14. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2014a. Resolución N° 17/14: Norma estableciendo la captura total permisible (CTP) para el recurso merluza común (Merluccius hubbsi) en la ZCP, para el año 2015. 18 December 2014. 3 pp. (In Spanish.) http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1714-merluza-ctp-2015-141963717064.pdf
  15. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2014b. Resolución N°1/14. Norma estableciendo un área de veda precautoria de otoño para la especie merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca. 19 March 2014. 2 pp. (In Spanish). http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1403538404_attach76.pdf
  16. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2014c. Resolución N°10/14. Norma estableciendo un área de veda precautoria de invierno para la especie merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca. 25 July 2014. 2 pp. (In Spanish). http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1412881091_attach29.pdf
  17. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2014d. Resolución N°12/14. Norma estableciendo un área de veda de primavera para la especie merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca. 18 September 2014. 2 pp. (In Spanish). http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1412881564_attach56.pdf
  18. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2014e. Resolución N°16/14. Norma estableciendo un área de veda de verano para la especie merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca. 18 December 2014. 2 pp. (In Spanish). http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1614-merluza-veda-verano-141963672471.pdf
  19. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2014f. Resolución N°13/14. Norma estableciendo un área de prohibición de pesca de arrastre de fondo en la Zona Común de Pesca para la protección de peces cartilaginosos. 16 October 2014. 2 pp. (In Spanish) http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1314-veda-condrictios-141407479897.pdf
  20. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2015a. Resoluciones. [Assessed on 22 January 2015].http://ctmfm.org
  21. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2015b. Resolución N° 13/15: Norma estableciendo la captura total permisible (CTP) para el recurso merluza común (Merluccius hubbsi) en la ZCP, para el año 2016. 29 October 2015. 3 pp. (In Spanish.) http://ctmfm.org/upload/resolucionAdjunto/1315-merluza-ctp-144675607372.pdf
  22. Comisión Técnica Mixta del Frente Marítimo (CTMFM), 2016. Avances en la elaboración del plan de manejo para la recuperación de las pesquerías de merluza común (Merluccius hubbsi) en la Zona Común de Pesca [Accessed on 25 January 2016].http://ctmfm.org/noticia/5/pstrongavances-en-la-elaboracioacuten-del-plan-de-manejo-para-la-recuperacioacuten-de-las-pesqueriacuteas-de-merluza-comuacuten-emmerluccius-hubbsiem-en-la-zona-comuacuten-de-pescastrongp/
  23. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP),2009a.Resolution CFP N° 6/2009: Apruébase el Plan de Acción Nacional para la Conservación y el Manejo de Condrictios (tiburones, rayas y quimeras) en la República Argentina.Issued at Bs. As. on March 12th, 2009.Link accessed on September 13th, 2009. (In Spanish.)http://infoleg.mecon.gov.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/150000-154999/151432/norma.htm
  24. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2009b. Resolución 26/2009 y modificatorias: Establécense medidas de manejo y administración para ser aplicadas a la especie merluza común. 5 pp.(In Spanish.)http://www.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/160000-164999/161840/texact.htm
  25. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2009c. Resolución 28/09.http://www.cfp.gov.ar/resoluciones/res28-09.pdf
  26. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2010. Resolución 8/2010Establécese el uso obligatorio de determinados dispositivos de selectividad para todos los buques pesqueros arrastreros cuya especie objetivo sea la merluza común. 20 May 2010 . 3 pp. (In Spanish.) http://www.cfp.gob.ar/resoluciones/res08-2010.pdf
  27. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2011a. Resolución 4-2011 Establécese l Captura maxima Permisible para el año 2011, de la especie merluza común. (In Spanish.)http://www.loa.org.ar/legNormaDetalle.aspx?id=16710
  28. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2011b. Resolución 24-922. Establécese la Captura maxima Permisible para el año 2012, de la especie merluza común. (In Spanish.)http://www.revistapuerto.com.ar/PDFLegislacion/426.pdf
  29. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2012a. Acta CFP Nº 46-2012. 15 pp. (In Spanish.)http://www.cfp.gob.ar/actas/ACTA%20CFP%2046-2012.pdf
  30. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2012b. Resolución 26-2012. Establécese la Captura maxima Permisible para el año 2013, de las especies merluza común, merluza de cola, merluza negra y polaca. 4 pp. (In Spanish.)http://www.cfp.gob.ar/resoluciones/Resolucion%2026%20(19-12-12)%20CMP%20hubbsi%20cola%20negra%20y%20polaca%202013.pdf
  31. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2013a. Resolución 15-2013. Norma estableciendo un área de prohibición de pesca de arrastre de fondo en la Zona Común de Pesca para la protección de peces cartilaginosos. 31 October 2013. (In Spanish.)http://www.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/220000-224999/221861/norma.htm
  32. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2013b. Resolución 16-2013. Establécese la Captura maxima Permisible para el año 2014, de las especies merluza común, merluza de cola, merluza negra y polaca. 16 December 2013. (In Spanish.)http://infoleg.mecon.gov.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/220000-224999/223799/norma.htm
  33. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2014. Resolución N°18/2014. Establécese la Captura Máxima Permisible para el año 2015, de las especies merluza común, merluza de cola y polaca. 11 December 2014. 4pp. (In Spanish) http://www.cfp.gob.ar/resoluciones/Resolucion%2018%20(12-12-13)%20CMP%20cola,%20polaca%20y%20hubbsi%202015.pdf
  34. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2015a. Resolución N°13/2015. Establécese la Captura Máxima Permisible para el año 2016, de las especies merluza de cola, polaca, merluza negra y merluza común. 13 December 2015. 4 pp. (In Spanish.)http://www.cfp.gob.ar/resoluciones/Resolucion%2013%20%20(3-12-15)%20CMP%20negra,%20cola,%20polaca%20y%20hubbsi%202016.pdf
  35. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2015b. Resolución N°11/2015. Apruébase el Plan de Acción Nacional para Reducir la Interacción de Mamíferos Marinos con Pesquerías en la República Argentina (PAN-Mamíferos), cuyo texto se adjunta como Anexo I del Acta del Consejo Federal Pesquero N° 46/2015. 3 December 2015. 4 pp. (In Spanish.).http://www.cfp.gob.ar/resoluciones/Resolucion%2011%20(26-11-15)%20PAN-Mamiferos%20Marinos.pdf
  36. Consejo Federal Pesquero (CFP), 2015c. ANEXO I - ACTA CFP N° 46/2015. Plan de Acción Nacional Para Reducir La Interacción De Mamíferos Marinos Con Pesquerías En La República Argentina13 December 2015. 162 pp (In Spanish.) http://www.cfp.gob.ar/actas/ANEXO%20I%20-%20Acta%20CFP%20Nro%2046-2015%20PAN%20MM.pdf
  37. Crespi-Abril, AC, Pedraza, SN, García, NA and Crespo, EA, 2013. Species biology of elasmobranch by-catch in bottom-trawl fishery on the northern Patagonian shelf, Argentina. Aquatic Biology, 19, 3: 239-251.http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/ab/v19/n3/p239-251/
  38. Fernández Áraoz, N.C. 2012. Tipologia de la flota comercial argentina que opera con arrastre de fondo al norte de 41°S: perfiles de captura y potenciales métiers. Año 2010. Informe de Investigación N° 86/2012. 27 pp.28 September 2012. infinvest_086_12.pdf
  39. Fernández Áraoz, N.C. 2014a. Tipologia de la flota comercial argentina que opera con arrastre de fondo al norte de 41°S: perfiles de captura y potenciales métiers. Año 2009. Informe de Investigación N° 008/2014. 24 pp.10 February 2014. Inf_Inv_008_14.pdf
  40. Fernández Áraoz, N.C. 2014b. Tipologia de la flota comercial argentina que opera con arrastre de fondo al norte de 41°S: perfiles de captura y potenciales métiers. Año 2008. Informe de Investigación N° 010/2014. 26 pp. 18 February 2014. Inf_Inv_010_14.pdf
  41. Hill, S.; Agnew, D.; Middleton, D.; Portela, J.; Pierce, G.; Fuertes, J.R.; Wakeford, R.C.. 2002.Assessment of the Falkland Islands population of Argentine hake Merluccius hubbsi. ICES ASC 2002/L: 38. 8 pp. http://www.repositorio.ieo.es/e-ieo/bitstream/handle/10508/827/Assessment.pdf?sequence=1
  42. Irusta, C.G., 2014a. Evaluación del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2015. INIDEP Official Technical Report N° 29/2014. 9 December 2014. 30 pp. (In Spanish) Inf_Tec_029_14.pdf
  43. Irusta, C.G., 2015. Evaluación del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2016. INIDEP Official Technical Report N° 29/2015. 19 November 2015. 33 pp. (In Spanish) http://www.inidep.edu.ar/publicaciones/catalogo/informes-tecnicos-2015/
  44. Irusta, C.G., and D’Atri, L.L., 2009. Evaluacion del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2010. Official Technical Report N° 045-2009. INIDEP. 39 pp. (In Spanish.)INIDEP_Inf.tec_045_09.pdf
  45. Irusta, C.G., and D’Atri, L.L., 2010. Evaluacion del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2011. Official Technical Report N° 042-2010. INIDEP. 28 pp. (In Spanish.)INIDEP_inftec_042_10.pdf
  46. Irusta, C.G., and D’Atri, L.L., 2011. Evaluacion del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2012. Official Technical Report N° 043-2011. INIDEP. 31 pp. (In Spanish.)inftec_043_11.pdf
  47. Irusta, C.G. and D’Atri, L.L., 2013. Evaluación del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2014. Official Technical Report No. 026-2013. 21 November 2013. 29 pp. (In Spanish.)IT_26_2013.pdf
  48. Irusta, C.G., & D’Atri, L.L., 2012. Evaluacion del estado del efectivo norte de 41° S de la merluza (Merluccius hubbsi) y estimación de la captura biológicamente aceptable para el año 2013. Official Technical Report N° 037-2012. INIDEP.inftec_037_12.pdf
  49. Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008, establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999.32 pp.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:286:0001:0032:EN:PDF
  50. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Pesca y Alimentos (SAGPyA), 2009a.Vessel Monitoring System.Link accessed on October 3rd, 2009. (In Spanish.)http://www.sagpya.mecon.gov.ar/SAGPyA/pesca/pesca_maritima/05-monitoreo_satelital/zee.php
  51. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Pesca y Alimentos (SAGPyA), 2009b.Vessel Monitoring System.Link accessed on October 3rd, 2009. (In Spanish.)http://www.sagpya.mecon.gov.ar/SAGPyA/pesca/pesca_maritima/05-monitoreo_satelital/zonas.php?imp=1
  52. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Pesca y Alimentos (SAGPyA), 2009c. Landings by species and fleet.Link accessed on October 3rd, 2009. (In Spanish.)http://www.sagpya.mecon.gov.ar/SAGPyA/pesca/pesca_maritima/02-desembarques/lectura.php?imp=1&tabla=especie_flota_2008
  53. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Pesca y Alimentos (SAGPyA), 2009d.Resolution N° 65 of 2007 modified by Resolution N° 463 of 2008.Link accessed on September 24th, 2009. (In Spanish.)http://infoleg.mecon.gov.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/135000-139999/136307/texact.htm
  54. Vaz-dos-Santos, A.M.; Del Bianco Rossi-Wongtschowski, C.L.; Lima de Figueiredo, J. 2009. Merluccius hubbsi (Teleostei: Merlucciidae): Stock identification based on reproductivebiology in the South-Southeast Brazilian region. Brazilian Journal of Oceanography, 57(1). 15 pp. http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjoce/v57n1/03.pdf
References

    Comments

    This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

    Comments on:

    Argentine hake - North of 41°S to Rio Grande do Sul

    comments powered by Disqus