# Presentation: 671880

## Caribbean-SEAMAP Program Reef FishUSVI Summary OverviewFinal ReportApril 30, 2004byFrancisco E. Pagán, Ph.D., Anthony R. Marshak, B.S., Idelfonso Ruiz, M.S., and  Edgardo Ojeda Serrano, Ph.D.University of Puerto RicoMarine Sciences Department

##  Introduction - Fishing effort	 					 - Catch- Length – Frequency- Spatial Relations	 				- Final Remarks	 

## Introduction

## SEAMAP-C Dataset

- Marketability Information by
- USVI DPNR

## This report includes: a description of the dataset and its corrections, an evaluation of the fishing effort and catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE), a description of species’ length-frequency distributions, and a GIS analysis of the fishing station habitats from Kendall et al. (2001) for the main reef fish species. 

After preliminary analyses were conducted, it was realized that the available electronic dataset was incomplete (30 out of 77 days at sea). Therefore, the adequacy of the current sampling methodology, including sampling size, could not be properly evaluated. 

- After preliminary analyses were conducted, it was realized that the available electronic dataset was incomplete (30 out of 77 days at sea). Therefore, the adequacy of the current sampling methodology, including sampling size, could not be properly evaluated.

## Fishing Effort

## Slide 7

| ID_C/V | Start Date | End Date | Days at Sea |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 922_58 | 10/27/1992 | 12/1/1992 | 3 |
| 922_59 | 10/21/1992 | 10/21/1992 | 1 |
| 931_58 | 9/21/1993 | 9/21/1993 | 1 |
| 931_59 | 1/18/1994 | 1/18/1994 | 1 |
| 932_59 | 9/23/1993 | 12/15/1993 | 2 |
| 932_60 | 12/14/1993 | 12/24/1993 | 2 |
| 941_59 | 1/18/1994 | 3/4/1994 | 6 |
| 941_60 | 1/3/1994 | 2/11/1994 | 3 |
| 991_60 | 8/31/1999 | 10/14/1999 | 6 |
| 001_60 | 1/13/2000 | 4/4/2000 | 10 |

## Slide 8

| ID_C/V | TR
count | HL
count | Total
Trap
Time | Total
Hook
Time | Avg. TR
Time | Avg. HL Time | 

Trap/Day | 

HL/Day |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 922_58 | 48 | 15 | 17820 | 4980 | 371.25 | 332.00 | 16.00 | 5.00 |
| 922_59 | 12 | 4 | 3960 | 960 | 330.00 | 240.00 | 12.00 | 4.00 |
| 931_58 | 12 | 3 | 2880 | 675 | 240.00 | 225.00 | 12.00 | 3.00 |
| 931_59 | 1 | 0 | 240 | 0 | 240.00 |  | 1.00 | 0.00 |
| 932_59 | 24 | 6 | 6480 | 1440 | 270.00 | 240.00 | 12.00 | 3.00 |
| 932_60 | 18 | 6 | 4500 | 1500 | 250.00 | 250.00 | 9.00 | 3.00 |
| 941_59 | 71 | 17 | 17940 | 3660 | 252.68 | 215.29 | 11.83 | 2.83 |
| 941_60 | 27 | 7 | 6912 | 1796 | 256.00 | 256.57 | 9.00 | 2.33 |
| 991_60 | 73 | 11 | 24840 | 3135 | 340.27 | 285.00 | 12.17 | 1.33 |
| 001_60 | 116 | 10 | 40740 | 3240 | 351.21 | 324.00 | 11.60 | 1.00 |

## Slide 9

| Month/Year | Days sampled | Data in dataset |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Jan-92 | 2 |   | Sep-94 | 3 |   |
| Feb-92 | 2 |   | Oct-94 | 5 |   |
| Mar-92 | 4 |   | Feb-95 | 2 |   |
| Oct-92 | 2 | 2 | Mar-95 | 2 |   |
| Nov-92 | 2 | 2 | Aug-99 | 1 | 1 |
| Dec-92 | 1 | 1 | Sep-99 | 4 | 4 |
| Aug-93 | 2 |   | Oct-99 | 1 | 1 |
| Sep-93 | 3 | 2 | Jan-00 | 3 | 3 |
| Nov-93 | 4 |   | Feb-00 | 1 | 1 |
| Dec-93 | 3 | 1 | Mar-00 | 5 | 5 |
| Jan-94 | 2 | 2 | Apr-00 | 1 | 1 |
| Feb-94 | 3 | 3 | 2-Jan | 1 |   |
| Mar-94 | 1 | 1 | 2-Feb | 3 |   |
| Jun-94 | 4 |   | 2-Mar | 2 |   |
| Jul-94 | 1 |   | 2-Jun | 4 |   |
| Aug-94 | 2 |   | 2-Jul | 1 |   |
|  |  |  |   |   |   |
|  |  |  | Total | 77 | 30 |

## Slide 10

|  | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| January | X |  | X |  |  |  |  |  | X |  | x |
| February | X |  | X | x |  |  |  |  | X |  | x |
| March | X |  | X | x |  |  |  |  | X |  | x |
| April |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | X |  |  |
| May |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| June |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| July |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| August |  | x | x |  |  |  |  | X |  |  |  |
| September |  | X | x |  |  |  |  | X |  |  |  |
| October | X |  | x |  |  |  |  | X |  |  |  |
| November | X | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| December | X | X |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

## Given the level of variability between cruises and gear deployments, the use of an average measure is preferred in order to properly smooth the data. An effort measured as monthly mean of catch per day at sea was chosen and used for the different evaluations in this study.

## Catch

## Cephalopholis fulva

|  | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| January | X |  | 0.18 |  |  |  |  |  | 3.75 |  | x |
| February | X |  | 0.69 | x |  |  |  |  | 7.63 |  | x |
| March | X |  | 0.34 | x |  |  |  |  | 0.60 |  | x |
| April |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.46 |  |  |
| May |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| June |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| July |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| August |  | x | x |  |  |  |  | 2.78 |  |  |  |
| September |  | 0.00 | x |  |  |  |  | 0.71 |  |  |  |
| October | 1.33 |  | x |  |  |  |  | 0.0 |  |  |  |
| November | 2.11 | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| December | 3.89 | 0.30 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

***Cephalopholis fulva***

## Slide 14

## Ephinephelus guttatus

|  | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| January | X |  | 0.00 |  |  |  |  |  | 4.29 |  | x |
| February | X |  | 1.88 | x |  |  |  |  | 3.77 |  | x |
| March | X |  | 0.00 | x |  |  |  |  | 0.27 |  | x |
| April |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1.51 |  |  |
| May |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| June |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| July |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| August |  | x | x |  |  |  |  | 3.90 |  |  |  |
| September |  | 0.00 | x |  |  |  |  | 5.39 |  |  |  |
| October | 5.27 |  | x |  |  |  |  | 0.0 |  |  |  |
| November | 3.80 | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| December | 5.32 | 0.00 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

***Ephinephelus guttatus***

## Slide 16

## Balistes vetula

|  | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| January | x |  | 1.40 |  |  |  |  |  | 5.86 |  | x |
| February | x |  | 0.17 | x |  |  |  |  | 1.48 |  | x |
| March | x |  | 4.77 | x |  |  |  |  | 1.92 |  | x |
| April |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.00 |  |  |
| May |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| June |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| July |  |  | x |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | x |
| August |  | X | x |  |  |  |  | 3.67 |  |  |  |
| September |  | 0.00 | x |  |  |  |  | 2.24 |  |  |  |
| October | 0.00 |  | x |  |  |  |  | 0.0 |  |  |  |
| November | 1.16 | X |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| December | 9.72 | 1.00 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

***Balistes vetula***

## Slide 18

## Length - Frequency

## Length-frequency diagram for coney (Cephalopholis fulva) captured in St. Croix, USVI. 

## Length-frequency diagram by cruises for coney (Cephalopholis fulva) captured in St. John, USVI.

## Length-frequency diagram by cruises for red hind (Epinephelus guttatus) captured in St. John, USVI. 

## Length-frequency diagram by sexes for coney (Cephalopholis fulva) captured in St. John, USVI. 

## Length-frequency diagram by sexes for red hind (Epinephelus guttatus) captured in St. John, USVI.

## Slide 25

## Spatial Relations

## Slide 27

## Slide 28

## Slide 29

## Slide 30

## Slide 31

## Slide 32

## Final Remarks

## There exists a high potential for generating analyses using the data collected by the SEAMAP-C program. The previous evaluations form but a sample of what could be achieved with the complete dataset. As an example, the number of species used for these analyses were limited by the number of captures realized. Making the whole data structure available will increase the number of species which could be used in the future.

## Nevertheless, the completion of such task (dataset) needs to be done carefully to avoid carrying over errors, such as recording weights in the improper unit system. Furthermore data collection training should be promoted to improve sex identification. Sex is a variable of great importance and it should not be overlooked.

## Capture per unit of effort as defined previously in this report should be considered for any future analysis. The averaging of the variable effort (traps, hooks and lines, soaking time) during the month could help enhance and facilitate the potential resolution of data analysis problems. A more constant field sampling effort could allow other alternatives for CPUE to be considered.

## The current habitat maps available for deep waters in the area, limits the capability to associate the different spatial variables, such a map should be produced if possible to improve the potential spatial analyses of the area.

## Acknowledgements

-   	We wish to thank all those who contributed to the completion of this report, particularly to Roger Uwate, Ph.D. Also, the analyses in this report were enhanced by discussions with Richard Appeldoorn, Ph. D., to whom we extend our deepest gratitude.

## Questions ?