OCS Study

BOEM 2020-038

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

New Orleans Office

Explosive Removal of Structures:

Fisheries Impacts Assessment
OCS Study

BOEM 2020-038

Published by

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

New Orleans Office

New Orleans, LA

June 2020

Explosive Removal of Structures:

Fisheries Impact Assessment

Authors

Benny J. Gallaway, PhD

Scott Raborn

Kyle McCain

Taylor Beyea

Susan Dufault

Will Heyman, PhD

and Greeneridge Sciences, Inc.:

Katharine Kim

Alexander Conrad

Prepared under BOEM Contract

M16PC00005

by

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc.

4103 S. Texas Ave

Suite 211

Bryan, TX 77802-4043
DISCLAIMER

Study concept, oversight, and funding were provided by the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Environmental Studies Program, Washington, DC, under Contract 

Number M16PC00005. This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM, and it has been approved 

for publication. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should 

not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of BOEM, nor does mention of trade names or 

commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

REPORT AVAILABILITY

To download a PDF file of this report, go to the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management Data and Information Systems webpage (http://www.boem.gov/Environmental-StudiesEnvData/), click on the link for the Environmental Studies Program Information System (ESPIS), and 

search on 2020-038. The report is also available at the National Technical Reports Library at 

https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/.

CITATION

Gallaway BJ, Raborn S, McCain K, Beyea T, Default S, Conrad A, Kim K. 2020. Explosive removal of 

structures: fisheries impact assessment. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management. Contract No.: M16PC00005. Report No.: OCS Study BOEM 2020-038. 

149 p.

ABOUT THE COVER

Copyright LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We particularly thank Mark Belter, the Contracting Officer’s Representative for clear and helpful 

guidance throughout the program. Key to the success of the field work were representatives of the Charter

Fishing Association, Inc., (especially captains S. Hickman, Buddy Guindon, Mike Jennings, Shane 

Cantrell, Steve Tomney) who provided research support and field sampling surveys. Dr. Steven 

Szedlmeyer (Auburn University) and Dr. Brad Erisman (University of Texas) led the telemetry and 

hydroacoustic studies, respectively. Their reports were incorporated in the annual platform assemblage 

reports, the results of which are summarized herein. We especially thank Connie Fields of LGL for 

formatting and producing the reports associated with this study.
i

Contents

List of Figures................................................................................................................................................iii

List of Tables................................................................................................................................................ iv

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms............................................................................................................. vi

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Study Approach............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Report Organization ...................................................................................................................... 2

2 Assemblage Characterization Studies .................................................................................................. 3

2.1 Study Area..................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Methods......................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2.1 Key Species Selection .......................................................................................................... 6

2.2.2 Species Abundances ............................................................................................................ 9

2.2.3 Red Snapper Studies ..........................................................................................................12

2.3 Results ........................................................................................................................................15

2.3.1 Assemblage Structure.........................................................................................................15

2.3.2 Species Accounts................................................................................................................20

3 Explosive Removal Impacts................................................................................................................29

3.1 Estimation of Effects ...................................................................................................................34

3.1.1 2017 and 2018 Removals ...................................................................................................34

3.1.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year (2018) ...............................................................40

3.1.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 miles of Fishing Ports ................................................40

4 Assessment of Removal Impacts........................................................................................................45

4.1 2017 and 2018 Platform Removal Mortality................................................................................45

4.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year...................................................................................47

4.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 Miles of Fishing Ports ........................................................49

5 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................................................................53

5.1 The Model ...................................................................................................................................53

5.2 Estimation of Effects ...................................................................................................................53

5.2.1 2017 and 2018 Removals ...................................................................................................53

5.2.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year (2018) ...............................................................54

5.2.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 miles of Fishing Ports ................................................54

5.3 Assessment of Effects.................................................................................................................54

5.3.1 2017 and 2018 Platform Removal.......................................................................................54
ii

5.3.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year...........................................................................55

5.3.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 miles of Fishing Ports ................................................55

5.4 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................55

References..................................................................................................................................................57

Appendix 1. Version 6 of the Endnote TM Database ...................................................................................63

Appendix 2. Data Tables...........................................................................................................................136
iii

List of Figures

Figure 1. The distribution of standing platforms by year, private recreational red snapper state 

management area and depth zone. .............................................................................................................. 4

Figure 2. The distribution of randomly selected study platforms by year, private recreational red snapper 

state management area, and depth zone. .................................................................................................... 5

Figure 3. Location of telemetry and mark-recapture study sites, 2017 and 2018.......................................14

Figure 4. Acoustic fish density in number of fish/m3 with increasing distance from platform across all a) 

2017 survey sites and b) 2018 survey sites................................................................................................19

Figure 5. Home range (95% kernal density estimate) of an individual red snapper at each of the three 

sites is illustrated with a white line. .............................................................................................................22

Figure 6. Comparison of abundance estimates made with the hydroacoustic and/or SRV approach and 

mark and/or recapture method for selected sites. ......................................................................................24

Figure 7. Comparison of age distributions for year, depth zones, and hook size.......................................25

Figure 8. Von Bertalanffy curves by depth zone and pooled compared to SEDAR estimates...................26

Figure 9. Comparison of Von Bertalanffy curves among depth zones and SEDAR estimates. .................26

Figure 10. Comparison of weight compared to length relationships for gender, depth zones, and ages. .27

Figure 11. Random placement of 670 fish around platform D1_2017 in 91.44 m water depth, using 

hydroacoustic abundance estimates...........................................................................................................36

Figure 12. Fish exposed to lethal doses. ....................................................................................................37

Figure 13. The location of the 1,171 standing platforms in the Gulf of Mexico in 2018..............................41

Figure 14. Distribution of platforms, and substrate types, in a selected area offshore western Louisiana.50

Figure 15. Rock and gravel bottom substrate distribution on the Louisiana Shelf corresponding to Region 

2 of the Sea Grant Red Snapper abundance study....................................................................................51

Figure 16. Distribution of limited shrimp trawling effort...............................................................................52
iv

List of Tables

Table 1. Number of standing platforms in the study area by state and depth zone, 2017 and 2018 ...........6

Table 2. Federally-managed fish showing species observed on platforms, those with stock assessments 

and species initially chosen for study............................................................................................................ 7

Table 3. Gulf-wide numbers at age (0+ and 2+) for five focal species at the most recently assessed year 9

Table 4. Stock status for the five focal species as reported in their most recent assessments ...................9

Table 5. Model estimates of the abundance of fish at the “average platform” in the four depth zones 

defined in this study ....................................................................................................................................18

Table 6. Estimated abundance of Age 2+ red snapper at platforms within each of our four bottom depth 

zones, 2017 and 2018.................................................................................................................................21

Table 7. Estimated abundance of age 2+ vermilion snapper at platforms within each of our bottom depth 

zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and bottom depth zone 2017 and 2018...................................................29

Table 8. Estimated abundance of age 2+ gray triggerfish at platforms within each of our bottom depth 

zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and bottom depth zone 2017 and 2018...................................................30

Table 9. Estimated abundance of age 2+ greater amberjack at platforms within each of our bottom depth 

zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and bottom depth zone 2017 and 2018...................................................31

Table 10. Estimated abundance of age 2+ cobia on the platforms within each of our bottom depth zones, 

2017 and 2018, by state and depth zone 2017 and 2018 ..........................................................................32

Table 11. Bounding model cases................................................................................................................34

Table 12. Abundance estimates for each species for each depth zone .....................................................36

Table 13. Estimates of red snapper killed by explosive removal of structures in 2017 and 2018. .............39

Table 14. Median abundance of red snapper by age on the 1,171 standing platforms present in federal 

waters of the Gulf of Mexico in 2018...........................................................................................................41

Table 15. Median abundance of vermilion snapper on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal waters of 

the Gulf of Mexico in 2018 ..........................................................................................................................42

Table 16. Median abundance of greater amberjack on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal waters of 

the Gulf of Mexico in 2018 ..........................................................................................................................42

Table 17. Median abundance of gray triggerfish on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal waters of the 

Gulf of Mexico in 2018 ................................................................................................................................42

Table 18. Median abundance of cobia on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal waters of the Gulf of 

Mexico in 2018 ............................................................................................................................................43

Table 19. Median abundance of red snapper by age on the 1,115 standing platforms within 100 miles of 

major fishing ports in 2018..........................................................................................................................43

Table 20. Median abundance of other federally-managed species on the 1,115 standing platforms within 

100 miles of a major fishing ports ...............................................................................................................44
v

Table 21. Exploitation rates (number killed/total age 2+ stock size) associated with 2017 and 2018 

platform removals based on estimated mortalities and stock size from SEDAR stock assessments ........46

Table 22. Allowable Catch Limit (ACL) for red snapper for each Gulf state in 2018, and comparative 

"takes" from platform removals ...................................................................................................................46

Table 23. Recreational and commercial fleet landings of red snapper (numbers) in 2016, the terminal year 

of the SEDAR 52 red snapper stock assessment.......................................................................................47

Table 24. Numbers and biomass of red snapper associated with offshore platforms in the eastern and 

western Gulf of Mexico................................................................................................................................48
vi

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Short Form Long Form

ACL allowable catch limit

APE average percent error

ARA Applied Research Associates, Inc.

BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

BSEE Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

cm centimeters

Comp B Composition B (explosive material)

C4 Composition C-4 (explosive material)

dB decibel

DO dissolved oxygen

DOI US Department of the Interior

ESPIS Environmental Studies Program Information System

ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute

F instantaneous fishing mortality rate

FL fork length

fm fathom

GA Galveston BOEM Lease Area

GMFMC Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council

GNLMM generalized non-linear mixed model

GOM Gulf of Mexico

GLM generalized linear model

GLMM generalized linear mixed model

HBX-1 high blast explosive composition 1

HL hook-and-line

in inches

ISO International Organization for Standardization

KDE kernel density estimate

kg kilograms

Knts nautical miles per hour

LD5O lethal dose resulting in 50% mortality

LGL LGL Ecological Researcher Associates, Inc.

LOA letter of authorization

LSM leased square mean

m meter

mm millimeter

ML mudline

MS-222 tricaine methanesulfonate
vii

Short Form Long Form

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

MMS Minerals Management Service (now BOEM)

NE northeast

NW northwest

NMFS National Marine Fishery Service

NOAA US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

OCS Outer Continental Shelf

ODO % sat optical dissolved oxygen percent saturation

ODO mg/L optical dissolved oxygen milligrams/liter

OTC oxytetracycline dehydrate

ROV remotely operated vehicle

SAIC Science Applications International Corporation

SEDAR Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review

SPL sound pressure level

SPLpeak peak sound pressure level

SRV submerged rotating video

SW southwest

TFA total fish abundance

TL total length

UWC underwater calculator by Applied Research Associates, Inc.

VPS VEMCO Positioning System

W west

W-NW west-northwest
1

1 Introduction

The US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and Bureau of 

Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) perceived the need for updated estimates of the impacts 

from explosive severance decommissioning activities on fish and fisheries. This study was funded with 

the overarching goal to estimate potential impacts on federally-managed commercial and recreational fish 

and fisheries resulting from explosive severance decommissioning activities on the Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS). The study area includes the federal waters in the Western and Central Planning Areas from 

the limit of state waters to a water depth of 300 m. The results from this report will be used to guide 

BOEM and BSEE in authorizing appropriate decommissioning activities that will minimize impacts to

fish and fisheries.

1.1 Study Approach

We implemented a phased approach described as follows. Our first step was to compile a comprehensive 

literature synthesis describing the history of offshore oil and gas development in the Gulf of Mexico

(Gulf), the sampling approaches that have been used to sample platform habitat, results of previous 

studies describing the fish assemblages associated with offshore oil and gas structures, and the perceived 

impacts of offshore platform removal (LGL 2017a). The results of the literature synthesis guided the 

selection of the sampling methodologies (e.g., active hydroacoustics, acoustic telemetry, biological 

sampling and underwater video) and the overall sampling design (stratified random design using region 

and depth as the basis for strata). Once the approach and design were established, a Field Season 1, “proof 

of concept” reconnaissance study was conducted in the late 2016 and early 2017 (LGL 2017b). During 

this same period, GSI and LGL (2017) prepared an acoustics synthesis report that: 1) reviewed the effects 

on fish of explosive removal of offshore platforms in the Gulf ; 2) reviewed sound characteristics of 

underwater explosive events; and 3) identified widely accepted models used to predict lethal effects; and 

4) provided a detailed description of the explosive propagation model we used to estimate effects of 

explosive platform removal on federally managed fish and fisheries based on the results of our studies.

The first comprehensive field survey (Field Season 2) was conducted during April–August 2017 (LGL 

2017c). A total of 30 sites were sampled in 2017, each of which was randomly selected from the total 

pool of 1260 offshore platforms and well protectors (but not caissons) that were in place at the time. The 

study team (LGL, Auburn University, and University of Texas) obtained 100% of the planned samples as 

described by LGL (2017c). LGL et al. (2018) provided a description of the results obtained during the 

summer of 2017, including overall fish abundance and diversity by platform site and depth layer, and the 

distribution and abundance of selected federally managed species. Red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) 

was the most abundant of the federally managed species. For this species, we not only described 

distribution and abundance, but also obtained site fidelity estimates based on telemetry, and estimated 

population sizes at some platforms based upon mark-recapture estimates. Red snapper sampling also 

enabled estimation of their catch rates, age composition, growth and condition at platforms.

Field Season 3 sampling was conducted during May–August, 2018 (LGL 2018). Once more, 100% of the 

planned samples were obtained. In 2018, 32 platforms were randomly selected for sampling from the 

overall pool of 1,171 platforms and well protectors. In total we sampled 62 platforms (30 in 2017; 32 in 

2018). Of these 3 were sampled during both years. A total of 89 structures had been removed between 

field seasons. LGL et al. (2018b) characterized the results obtained during Field Season 3, essentially as 

described above for Field Season 2. 
2

Based mainly on LGL et al. (2018a) and LGL et al. (2018b), a final assemblage characterization report 

was developed LGL (2019). This report described the species assemblages and abundance of each fish 

species present at an average platform within each of four depth zones, 10 to 17 m, 18 to 30 m, 31 to 90 

m, and the 91 to 300 m deep. As will be described below, hydroacoustic surveys were used to estimate 

total fish abundance at each platform sampled and submerged rotating video (SRV) surveys were used to 

estimate assemblage composition at each platform. The SRV data were used to apportion the total 

abundance into species abundances. For red snapper, we also conducted mark recapture estimates at a 

subset of sites, acoustic-telemetry studies to determine the proportion of time this species was in the lethal 

blast radius and age, growth, and condition studies (LGL et al. 2018a, 2018b, and LGL 2019).

Conrad et al. (2019) used the distribution and abundance data for the selected federally-managed species 

in conjunction with the selected acoustic model to estimate mortality of these species due to the explosive 

severance of the offshore structures removed in 2017 and 2018. These were supplemented with the 

projected mortality that would be estimated if all structures were explosively removed in a single year,

and the mortality that would be estimated if all platforms within a 100 mi radius of a major port were all 

removed in a single year.

1.2 Report Organization

Below we first describe the study area, methods, and results of the assemblage characterization studies 

(Section 2.0), followed by an assessment of effects based on acoustic modeling (Section 3.0). We then 

provide an evaluation of the significance of the estimated efforts (Section 4.0). 
3

2 Assemblage Characterization Studies

Assemblage characterizations were based on a comprehensive database review (LGL 2017a) and three

field studies (LGL 2017a, LGL 2017c, LGL 2018). It should be noted that the literature syntheses of Gulf 

of Mexico (Gulf) platform studies was compiled using Thomson Reuters EndNote TM version X7.7 

bibliographic software which allows searching of any/all database fields as well as searching of the text of 

attached PDFs. All of the major reports produced by this study are also included in the EndNote TM 

database.

The initial literature synthesis methodology was summarized in LGL (2017). Briefly, various online 

sources were searched using key words related to platforms, acoustic impacts, fish habitat, and artificial 

reefs as well as the common and species names of the selected federally managed fish species. Additional 

references related to oil and gas platform ecology were identified by the Project Manager based on his 

professional experience, and all papers related to the relevant SEDAR stock assessment reports were also 

included. This resulted in 668 references that we grouped into eight categories based on those used in 

Versar (2008) (see Table 2.1 in LGL 2017) and compiled into an EndnoteTM database. Throughout the 

study additional references were added to the EndNoteTM database where relevant to the project work or 

as new references were published. The current version of the database (version 6.0) contains 895 

references, which are provided as a bibliography at the end of this report (Appendix 1). We next describe 

the field studies.

2.1 Study Area 

The study area included federal waters in the Central and Western planning areas from the limit of state 

waters to a water depth of 300 m (Figures 1 and 2). The distribution of total platforms and well protectors 

by depth zone during 2017 and 2018 is shown in Figure 1, while those selected for our surveys are given 

in Figure 2. The number of platforms by year, State management area and depth zone can be found in 

Table 1.

In Figures 1 and 2, we show the recently established State Management boundaries for red snapper. In 

April 2019, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC) delegated management 

authority of the private angling component for recreational red snapper fishing to each Gulf state; that is, 

each state now manages both federal and state waters for red snapper (GMFMC 2019). The GMFMC also 

delegated to each state the authority to establish or modify the bag limit, a minimum size limit within 14-

18 inches total length, and to establish a maximum size limit. 
4

Figure 1. The distribution of standing platforms by year, private recreational red snapper state 

management area and depth zone. 

All marked platforms were in place when the study commenced in 2017 and those marked in red were removed by 

2018.
5

Figure 2. The distribution of randomly selected study platforms by year, private recreational red 

snapper state management area, and depth zone.
6

Table 1. Number of standing platforms in the study area by state and depth zone, 2017 and 2018

The data were obtained from the 2019 BOEM database.

2017

Depth Zone 

(m) Total TX LA MS AL

10–17 374 30 297 39 8

18–30 247 26 198 20 3

31–90 520 50 386 67 17

91–300 119 31 66 13 9

1,260 137 947 139 37

2018

Depth Zone 

(m) Total TX LA MS AL

10–17 346 26 275 39 6

18–30 229 23 186 17 3

31–90 484 47 356 66 15

91–300 112 26 65 13 8

1,171 122 882 135 32

2.2 Methods

Below we describe the basis for selecting key species, our analytical methods for modeling assemblage 

structure, and methods used to estimate age, growth, and condition of red snapper.

2.2.1 Key Species Selection

246 species of fish have been documented on petroleum platforms in the Gulf (Versar 2008). Assessing 

the impacts on all species is beyond the scope of this study. As specified in the contract, our focus is 

restricted to federally-managed species (Table 2) that are commercially and recreationally important, 

relatively abundant throughout the range of the study, known to be associated with platforms, and for 

which stock assessments are available for modeling purposes.

There are 39 federally managed fish species in the Gulf (GMFMC 2015). Only 25 of the federally 

managed species are known to occur on platforms in the Gulf , and, of those, stock assessments from 

SEDAR are available for only nine fish species (see Table 2). Since our study period corresponds to the 

May to October season, during which nearly all decommissioning activity takes place, we eliminated king 

mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla), and Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculatus) because they 

have only short-duration residence times during the summer months (Gallaway 1981). The yellowtail 

snapper (Ocyurus chrysurus) is not common in the Western Gulf, and the SEDAR stock assessment for 

this species is more than a decade old (SEDAR 3 2003). Very few groupers were observed in our study 

and they were not included as key species. Hence, we selected five key species for consideration: red 

snapper, gray triggerfish, vermilion snapper, greater amberjack, and cobia.

Stock assessments for the five focal species have been completed within the last 8 years and the total 

numbers at age 2+ for each species in the most recent year available (Table 3) serve as the basis for the 
7

comparative analyses presented later in this report. Numbers at each age across all ages for each species 

are provided in Appendix 1 of LGL 2019. All 5 of the focal stocks were overfished at some point in the 

past and are therefore under rebuilding plans. These measures have helped all of the focal stocks to 

rebound. Four of the five focal species’ stocks (red snapper, gray triggerfish, vermilion snapper and 

cobia), have recovered to the point that the most recent assessment concluded that the stocks were not 

overfished nor was overfishing occurring (Table 4). By contrast, greater amberjack was still considered 

overfished and undergoing overfishing at the time of the most recent assessment (SEDAR 33 Update 

2016; Table 4).

Table 2. Federally-managed fish showing species observed on platforms, those with stock 

assessments and species initially chosen for study

Common name Scientific name

Observed 

on 

Platforms

With Stock 

Assessments

Chosen for 

Impact 

Analysis

Almaco jack Seriola rivoliana Yes

Banded rudderfish Seriola zonata Yes

Black grouper Mycteroperca bonaci

Blackfin snapper Lutjanus buccanella

Bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix Yes

Blueline tilefish Caulolatilus microps

Cero Scomberomorus 

regalis

Cobia Rachycentron 

canadum

Yes Yes Yes

Cubera snapper Lutjanus cyanopterus

Dolphinfish Coryphaena hippurus Yes

Gag Mycteroperca 

microlepis

Yes Yes

Goldface tilefish Caulolatilus chrysops

Goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara Yes

Gray snapper Lutjanus griseus Yes

Gray triggerfish Balistes capriscus Yes Yes Yes

Greater amberjack Seriola dumerili Yes Yes Yes

Hogfish Lachnolaimus maximus Yes

King mackerel Scomberomorus 

cavalla

Yes Yes

Lane snapper Lutjanus synagris Yes

Lesser amberjack Seriola fasciata Yes

Little tunny Euthynnus alletteratus Yes
8

Common name Scientific name

Observed 

on 

Platforms

With Stock 

Assessments

Chosen for 

Impact 

Analysis

Mutton snapper Lutjanus analis

Queen snapper Etelis oculatus

Red drum Sciaenops ocellatus Yes

Red grouper Epinephelus morio Yes

Red snapper Lutjanus campechanus Yes Yes Yes

Scamp Mycteroperca phenax Yes

Silk snapper Lutjanus vivanus Yes

Snowy grouper Hyporthodus niveatus

Spanish mackerel Scomberomorus 

maculatus

Yes Yes

Speckled hind Epinephelus 

drummondhayi

Tilefish Lopholatilus 

chamaeleonticeps

vermilion snapper Rhomboplites 

aurorubens

Yes Yes Yes

Warsaw grouper Hyporthodus nigritus

Wenchman Pristipomoides 

aquilonaris

Yes

Yellowedge grouper Hyporthodus 

flavolimbatus

Yellowfin grouper Mycteroperca 

venenosa

Yes

Yellowmouth 

grouper

Mycteroperca 

interstitialis

Yellowtail snapper Ocyurus chrysurus Yes Yes

n = 39 n = 39 n = 25 n = 9 n = 5
9

Table 3. Gulf-wide numbers at age (0+ and 2+) for five focal species at the most recently assessed 

year

Eastern and Western Gulf data are also provided for red snapper

Species Area

Total 

number of 

Age 2+

Total 

number of 

Age 0+

Year 

Estimated Reference

Red snapper Gulf-wide 36,738,000 256,277,000 2016 SEDAR 52, 2018

Red snapper Eastern 

Gulf 13,095,000 72,231,000 2016 SEDAR 52, 2018

Red snapper Western 

Gulf 23,643,000 184,046,000 2016 SEDAR 52, 2018

Vermilion 

snapper

Gulf-wide 30,184,024 63,736,924 2014 SEDAR 45, 2014

Gray triggerfish Gulf-wide 2,822,750 10,872,330 2013 SEDAR 43, 2015

Greater 

amberjack Gulf-wide 695,549 2,674,016 2015 SEDAR 33 Update, 2016

Cobia Gulf-wide 423,955 2,054,265 2011 SEDAR 28 2013

Table 4. Stock status for the five focal species as reported in their most recent assessments

Species

Undergoing 

Overfishing 

(Y/N)

Overfished 

(Y/N)

Year 

Estimated Reference

Red snapper N N 2016 SEDAR 52, 2018

Vermilion snapper N N 2014 SEDAR 45, 2014

Gray triggerfish N N 2013 SEDAR 43, 2015

Greater 

amberjack Y Y 2015 SEDAR 33 Update, 2016

Cobia N N 2011 SEDAR 28 2013

2.2.2 Species Abundances

Species abundances were estimated using hydroacoustic surveys coupled with submerged rotating video

(SRV) camera surveys and measurement of physical properties of the water column. Additionally, 

weather conditions (wind strength, wind direction, wave height, current strength and direction) were 

recorded for each site. The detailed protocols for these surveys are described in LGL et al. (2018a, 

2018b). At each site, hydroacoustic surveys were conducted first, followed by measurement of water 

column properties and SRV surveys. For convenience, a summary of these methods is provided in 

Appendix 2 of LGL (2019).

The abundance estimation approach using hydroacoustic and SRV data had to be carefully evaluated. For 

example, at a given site the estimation of red snapper abundance could be accomplished by combining 

total fish abundance estimated from the hydroacoustic survey with species relative abundances estimated 

concurrently with an SRV (Koenig and Stallings 2015). At some sites, bias was obvious when there was 

misalignment of the species being enumerated with each type of equipment. For instance, the 

hydroacoustic density estimate may have been 2,000 and was unknowingly comprised of 1,000 Atlantic 
10

bumper (Chloroscombrus chrysurus) and 1,000 red snapper. However, if the SRV sample videoed only

ten fish because of poor visibility, nine of which were Atlantic bumper and only one was a red snapper, 

then the red snapper abundance estimate would be biased low (i.e., 200 instead of 1,000). For this reason, 

site-specific estimates were not reported. Instead, we modeled the average assemblage structure for a 

given depth zone and vertical depth layer given average environmental variables and used this output to 

apportion the corresponding model output of average total fish abundance.

Variables quantifying the number of legs descending from the surface and categorizing a given platform 

as occupied or unoccupied were considered but were not used in the final model. The number of legs did 

not capture the number of total pipes descending to the ocean floor nor the complexity of cross structures 

beneath the surface. We reasoned that the fish assemblage on a occupied platform would be exposed more 

to fishing pressure. However, we observed instances where crew boats were tied to and actively fishing 

platforms designated as “unoccupied” in the BOEM database. For these reasons, these variables were 

considered poor descriptors and were ultimately dismissed as misleading.

Below we describe how assemblage structure and total fish abundance were modeled separately. For each 

depth zone-layer combination, predictions from both models were combined to provide species 

abundance estimates with confidence intervals. Species abundances are predicted for what we term an 

“average platform” within each depth zone. One could argue that given the variabilities in substrate type, 

physicochemical variables, bottom depth, platform complexity, distance from fishing ports, etc., that an 

average platform does not exist. Though our estimates may not apply to any single platform within a 

depth zone, we argue that our average platform estimates yield unbiased expanded abundances when 

multiplied by the total number of platforms within a given depth zone because they were based on 

random samples spanning the ranges of the variabilities just mentioned. 

2.2.2.1 Assemblage Structure from Submerged Rotating Video (SRV) Surveys

At each site, a survey of assemblage structure was available from the SRV max count observations for 

each vertical depth layer. That is, the relative abundance of a given species was estimated as its max count 

divided by the sum of the max counts for all species. In essence, this response, Assemblage Structure, can 

be characterized as a nominal multinomial distribution, which we modeled using a generalized logit link 

function:

llllllee �

PPPP(yy=jj|xxii)

PPPP(yy=kk|xxii)

� = ααjj + xxiiββjj (1)

where, all jth nominal species categories were referenced to a particular species category k (we used the 

most numerically dominant species for k), xi=the vector of fixed effects explanatory variables for the ith 

sample, and αjk and βjk were parameters specific to the jth category and referenced to k. Hence, we 

modeled the log odds of a fish in the Assemblage Structure being in the jth category rather than being in 

the reference category, k, and allowed this relationship to change with the explanatory variables. The 

likelihood (li) for each ith observation was given as:

llii = ∑ yyii llllllee�λλii � JJ

jj=1 (2)

where, J=total number of species in the analysis, yij=observed number of individuals in the jth species 

and ith sample, and λij=the predicted number of individuals in the jth species and ith sample. Fixed effect 

variables included the categorical variable DepthZone (10–17 m, 18–30 m, 31–90 m, or 91–300 m), and 

the covariates Layer (vertical depth bands 3–12 m [labeled as 1], 13–22 m [labeled as 2], etc.), 

temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO). These last two covariates were included as extraneous/nuisance 

variables to reduce noise and confounding influences; furthermore, they were converted to standard 
11

normal deviates (z-scores) within each DepthZone-Layer combination before analysis. Layer was entered 

as a covariate to allow change in Assemblage Structure along the vertical depth gradient. Ignoring

subscripts and parameters for the right side of the equation, fixed effects for the final model were 

specified as follows:

λλii = DDDDDDDDhZZ ZZ |LLLL LL + TT TT TT + DDDDDDDD DDDDDDDD DD (3)

where the operator “|” indicates an interaction of two or more terms and all of the corresponding main 

effects. We attempted to let the intercept and covariates Temperature and DO vary randomly across 

subjects defined with the categorical variable Site nested within each Year-DepthZone combination. 

Model convergence could not be achieved with this specification so Site could not be modelled as a 

random variable. Thus all effects remained fixed. This specification formed a generalized linear model 

(GLM) for which we estimated parameters with the GLIMMIX procedure in the statistical software SAS 

9.4 TS Level 1M5 (SAS Institute, Inc. 2016).

2.2.2.2 Total Fish Abundance from Hydroacoustic Surveys

The hydroacoustic surveys provided observations of total fish abundance (TFA) for each Site-Layer 

combination. This response was assumed to be from a lognormal distribution, which we modeled with the 

log link function:

llllllee(TTTTTTii) = αα + xxiiββ + zziibb (4)

where, TFAi=predicted total fish abundance for the ith sample, α = the intercept, xi=the vector of fixed 

effects explanatory variables for the ith sample, β= their corresponding vector of coefficients, and Zi and 

b = the random effects and coefficients. The likelihood (li) for each ith observation was given as:

llii = − 1

2 �

llllll{yyii}−μμii

σσii

2 + llllll{σσii

2} + llllll{2ππ}� (5)

where yi = observed total fish abundance for the ith sample, μi and σi2 are the respective predicted mean 

and variance parameters for the loge transformed observations, and π=the constant pi. The same fixed 

effects variables were used as was described above for modeling Assemblage Structure. However, as the 

pattern of fish abundance throughout the water column did not appear to be linear, the term Layer was fit 

using a cubic B-spline (splLAYER) with three equally spaced knots positioned between the minimum and 

maximum values. Ignoring subscripts and parameters for the right side of the equation, fixed effects for 

the final model were specified as follows:

μμii = DDDDDDDDhZZ ZZ | ssssss + TT TT TT + DD (6)

The intercept and covariates Temperature and DO were allowed to vary randomly across subjects defined 

with the categorical variable Site nested within each Year-DepthZone combination. This specification 

formed a generalized nonlinear mixed model (GNLMM) whose parameters were also estimated with the 

GLIMMIX Procedure in SAS.
12

2.2.2.3 Species Abundance and Associated Variance Propagation

Abundance of each species was predicted by Layer for an average platform within each Depth Zone as 

the product of their predicted proportions from the Assemblage Structure model output and the predicted 

total fish abundance from the TFA model output. The arithmetic variance of TFA was given by the 

method of moments estimator:

VV [TTTTTT] = 2μμ+σσ2

� σσ2

− 1� (7)

Variances from TFA and Assemblage Structure were then combined using Goodman’s (1960) variance of 

products estimator:

VV [λλ ∗ TTTTTT] = λλ2VV [TTTTTT] + TTTTTT2VV [λλ] − VV [TTTTTT] ∗ VV [λλ] (8)

2.2.3 Red Snapper Studies

Red snapper were collected for age, growth and condition evaluations by means of hook-and-line fishing. 

Gear and bait were standardized across all sampling sites. We used two hook sizes: a 6/0 Mustad demon 

perfect circle hook (model 39948NP-BN) baited with squid (order Teuthida), and an 11/0 Mustad circle 

hook (model 39960-DT) baited with Gulf menhaden (Brevoortia patronus). Each hook size and bait 

combination was deployed on independent poles at the same time during sampling and no more than one 

of each hook size was deployed while sampling. Red snapper were marked according to which hook size 

they had been caught on. Morphometric measurements (total length [TL], fork length [FL] in mm, 

individual weight in kilograms) were recorded, sex was determined by macroscopic examination of 

gonads, and sagittal otoliths were extracted, rinsed and cleaned, dried, and stored in coin envelopes.

Additionally telemetry studies of red snapper were conducted at three selected sites to estimate site 

fidelity, and mark and/or recapture studies were attempted at 10 sites as described below to obtain 

independent population estimates for comparison to the hydroacoustic and/or SRV estimates obtained 

independently.

2.2.3.1 Age and Growth

Otoliths provided from field sampling were mounted and thin sectioned in a transverse plane with a Pace 

Technologies, Pico 155 sectioning machine outfitted with 2, 4” diamond embedded waffering blades with 

a 0.75 mm spacer between the blades. Sections were polished on 2000 grit wet-dry sandpaper. Otoliths 

sections were submerged in water on a black background read under reflected light using a dissecting 

microscope outfitted with a Tucsen Bioimager camera. This method allowed us to read the annuli along 

the dorsal margin of the sulcus acousticus from the core to the proximal edge (Allman et al. 2005).

We obtained the reference otolith dataset used in Allman et al. 2005 to gauge the ability of our reader to 

obtain an Average Percent Error (APE) of 5% or better. An APE of 5% is the benchmark for moderately 

long-lived species with relatively difficult to read otoliths (Morison et al. 1998; Campana, 2001). Our 

readers obtained an APE of 5% on the reference dataset. A second reader read our sectioned otoliths at a 

later date.

Age structure was modeled as a nominal multinomial distribution using a generalized logit link as 

described above for Assemblage Structure. Fixed effects for the final model were all categorical and 

specified as follows:

λλii = DDDD hZZ ZZ + + HH HH + SS (9)
13

where, λij is now the predicted number of individuals in the jth Age and ith sample (i.e., platform), Year 

was either 2017 or 2018, Hook size was either 6/0 or 11/0, and Sex was male or female. 

Growth was modeled for observed TL with the three parameter Von Bertalanffy growth equation 

following the SEDAR stock assessments:

TLt = L∞(1 – e -K(t-t

0

)

) (10)

where, TLt = TL at age t, L∞ = TL asymptote, K = growth coefficient, t = age in years, and t0 = age at 

length 0. The growth performance index,φ, developed by Munro and Pauly (1983) is reported, but not 

used for comparisons:

φ =log10K + 2*log10L∞ (11)

2.2.3.2 Condition

Individual weight (Wt in kg) for red snapper was related to total length (TL in mm) as per Anderson and 

Neumann (1996) using the power function (Wt=aTLb), where Ln (TL) was interacted with three 

categorical variables. Ignoring subscripts and parameters, fixed effects for the final model were specified 

as follows:

WW = TT |SS + TT |DDDDDDDDhZZ ZZ + TT | + (12)

where, sex was either male or female, DepthZone (defined above), and age ranged from 1 to 13 (ages 9-

13 were grouped due to low sample sizes for each of these ages). Error (e) was assumed to be lognormally 

distributed. The intercept was allowed to vary randomly across subjects defined with the categorical 

variable Site nested within each Year-DepthZone combination. Likewise, we attempted to let the 

covariate TL vary randomly as well, but its covariance parameter was essentially estimated to be zero. 

This specification formed a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) for which we estimated parameters 

with the GLIMMIX procedure. All effects were tested at α = 0.05. 

2.2.3.3 Site Fidelity (Telemetry)

Four VPS telemetry arrays were deployed on platforms off the coast of Alabama and Louisiana (Figure 3, 

Panel A). The East site (Site 30) was located 25 km (13 nautical miles) southeast of Dauphin Island, 

Alabama and was deployed on 28 March 2017. The Center site (Site 9) and West site (Site 6) were 

located south of coastal Louisiana. The Center site was deployed on 3–4 July 2017. The West site was 

deployed 7–8 July 2017. The fourth site (Site 59) was placed 2 km east of Site 30 on 23 May 2018. The 

first data set from Site 59 was downloaded 30 Oct 2018 and has not yet been analyzed. Each array 

includes six VEMCO VR2Tx receivers. A center receiver (C) was placed 20 m north of each platform. 

Surrounding receivers were placed 300 m to the northeast (NE), northwest (NW), southeast (SE) and 

southwest (SW) of the C receiver. A south receiver (S) was placed 415 m south of the C receiver. 

Environmental meters (DO, temperature, and salinity) were attached to the center receiver line at each 

site. Receivers were collected and replaced at the East site on 11 August 2017, 30 November 2017, 4 May 

2018, and 30 October 2018. Receivers were collected and replaced at the Center and West sites on 30–31 

October 2017 and 24–25 April 2018. The Center and West sites were permanently removed on 27 July 

2018.
14

Figure 3. Location of telemetry and mark-recapture study sites, 2017 and 2018.

Red snapper were tagged following previous protocols (Piraino and Szedlmayer 2014; Williams-Grove 

and Szedlmayer 2016a, 2016b). As of October 2018, 81 red snapper (>406 mm total length TL) were 

tagged with acoustic V16-6x transmitters (69 kHz, 20–69 s signal interval, five year battery life) and 

internal anchor tags (Floy® FM-95W) over all VPS platform sites. Fish were captured using hook and 

line, anesthetized in 150 mg/L MS-222 (tricaine methanesulfonate) for 90 s, weighed (0.1 kg), measured 
15

(mm) and injected with 0.4 ml/kg oxytetracycline dehydrate (OTC). Fish were released with remotely 

opening predator protection cages at depth (Piraino and Szedlmayer 2014; Williams-Grove et al. 2015; 

Williams-Grove and Szedlmayer 2016a, 2016b).

A monetary reward ($150) was offered for red snapper tag returns to increase fisher reporting rate and 

increase the accuracy of fishing mortality estimates. Also, to increase tag reporting, reward posters were 

displayed at local marinas, tackle stores and bait shops, and identification numbers, contact information 

and reward notice were placed on external floy tags that were used to tag red snapper.

Fish positions for 54 red snapper were analyzed with the R program for home range area estimates (95% 

KDE) and compared over diel and seasonal time periods with repeated measures (GLMM and TukeyKramer, SAS 9.4; Venables and Ripley 2002; Venables and Dichmont 2004; Seavy et al. 2005; Bolker et 

al. 2008; Piraino and Szedlmayer 2014; Williams-Grove and Szedlmayer 2016a, 2016b). Fish size (TL) 

was compared to area use by linear regression in SAS software. Mean environmental measures of DO, 

salinity and temperature were calculated by date for each VPS site and compared to home range with 

linear regression.

Distances (m) of fish positions from platform structure were measured with ArcMap 10.4.1 proximity 

analysis tools (Environmental Systems Research Institute [ESRI]; McKinzie et al. 2014). Percent 

frequencies of positions located inside (0 m), near (< 95 m) or away (≥ 95 m) from platform structure 

were calculated.

A known fate model in the “MARK” program (White 2014) was used to estimate residence time, site 

fidelity and mortalities for tagged red snapper (Edwards 1992; Kaplan and Meier 1958; Schroepfer and 

Szedlmayer 2006; Topping and Szedlmayer 2011; Topping and Szedlmayer 2013; Williams-Grove and 

Szedlmayer 2016a, 2016b).

2.2.3.4 Mark and/or Recapture

Mark and/or recapture studies were attempted at 21 sites; 10 sites in 2017 and 11 sites in 2018 (Panel B of 

Figure 3). Fish were captured using hook and line, tagged with internal anchor tags (Floy ® FM-95W) 

and released with remotely opening predator protection cages at depth. A remote YSIEX02 was used to 

record oceanographic conditions at each site. As noted above, a high monetary tag reward was offered for 

red snapper tag returns and reward posters were placed at key facilities as described above.

A minimum of 10 days was allowed to pass between marking and recapture attempts to allow full 

recovery and mixing of tagged and untagged fish. All recapture events coincided with trips made to 

obtain samples for age, growth and condition analyses so all recaptured fish were kept for age 

determination. Population estimated were made using the historical Peterson estimate as well as a 

Bayesian approach following Gazey and Staley (1986).

2.3 Results

2.3.1 Assemblage Structure

A total of 36 taxa were included in our GLM and it provides an estimate of abundance for each of these 

species at each “average platform”, even if a species was not actively observed at platforms within that 

depth zone (Table 5). We actually observed 7, 26, 32, and 13 species at study platforms within the depth 

zones 10 to 17 m, 18 to 30 m, 31 to 90 m, and 91 to 300 m, respectively. The abundance estimates for the 

species actually observed at platforms within a depth zone constituted from 97 to 99% of the total 
16

estimated abundance for all 36 species. Some of the species not documented to have been present during 

sampling would be expected to occur given a larger sample size; others would not be expected to be 

present or they would only rarely occur. Nevertheless, the overall abundance of such species would be 

expected to be low, as suggested by the model.

Model diagnostics for the hydroacoustic predictions of TFA indicated no pattern in the residuals, and the 

average predicted values agreed well with those observed (Appendix 4 in LGL 2019; Figures A4-1 and 

A4-2). Likewise, the predicted values for the SRV counts were similar to those observed (Figure A4-3); 

however, residuals are not available for multinomial responses. The interaction of Depth Zone and Layer

(modeled as spline) was significant for the hydroacoustic model of TFA as was the random covariate 

effect of DO, while Temperature was not statistically significant (Tables A4-1 and A4-2 of Appendix 4, 

LGL 2019). All fixed effect terms were statistically significant (at α=0.05) for the SRV model (Table A4-

3). 

The dominant species at the average platforms within the 10- to17- m deep shallow Coastal Zone were, in 

order of abundance, Atlantic bumper (4,362), Atlantic spadefish (1,815), blue runner (622), and red 

snapper (359). These four species comprised 92% of the total number of individuals at the average 

shallow coastal platform. Numerically dominant species at an average platform in the deeper Coastal 

Zone (18- to 30- m deep) included Atlantic bumper (6,227), Gulf menhaden (2,876), blue runner (1,712), 

red snapper (1,015), Atlantic spadefish (926), Atlantic moonfish (514) and gray snapper (400). 

Collectively, these species comprised about 91% of the fish present (13,670 of 15,014, Table 5). The 

dominant species predicted to be associated with the average platform within each of the Coastal Zones 

(10- to 17- m deep and 18- to 30- m deep) were remarkably consistent with the historical findings (LGL 

2017a), albeit there was one major exception.

For example, the similarity of our assemblages with the only literature included common dominant 

species for both the early studies (see Gallaway and Lewbel 1982) and our study conducted in 2017 and 

2018. Namely, these included Atlantic spadefish, bluefish, blue runner, lookdown, Atlantic moonfish, and 

red snapper. The exception was Atlantic bumper. This species was observed in our study to be the most 

abundant species at coastal platforms in the 10- to 30- m depth range (Table 5). It was not listed by 

Gallaway and Lewbel (1982) as even being present on Gulf platforms, nor was it listed as being seen at 

coastal platforms in the Northern Gulf by Stanley and Wilson (1997, 2003) or by Stunz and Ajemian 

(2016) for platforms offshore south Texas. In contrast, Reeves (2015), Munally (2016) and Reeves et. al.

(2017) observed Atlantic bumper were abundant at platforms offshore Louisiana by the mid 2000s. 

Chesney et al. (2000) noted that Gunter (1936) reported that Atlantic bumper ranked 22nd in abundance 

in shrimp trawl bycatch in the 1930s but, by the mid 1990s, Atlantic bumper ranked 7th in abundance in 

the shrimp trawl bycatch (Adkins 1993). Many possible factors may have contributed to this and other 

changes in faunal assemblages. Chesney et al. (2000) focused on eutrophication and hypoxia as being 

possible factors accounting for Atlantic bumper increases over time, but also suggested that installation of 

offshore oil and gas platforms may have also been a contributing factor. Whatever the reason, the Atlantic 

bumper, a forage species, has become the dominant species on coastal platforms in the Northern Gulf in 

recent years (since about 2015). Apparently, it was not abundant or even present on platforms from the 

1970s to the early 2000s.

At the average Offshore and/or Bluewater Platform (31- to 90- m deep), 10 species comprised 93% of the 

numerical abundance and adding the unidentified component raised the total percent to 95% (Table 5). 

The 10 dominant species were blue runner (3,971), red snapper (2,980), vermilion snapper (3,506), 

Bermuda chub (838), gray snapper (491), leatherjack (706), Atlantic cumper (841), greater amberjack 
17

(487), Atlantic spadefish (481), and Crevalle jack (326). Again the results are consistent with historical 

knowledge (LGL 2017a) with the exception of Atlantic bumper, as noted above.

We documented 13 species to occur at Shelf-Edge Platforms (91- to 300- m deep) based on SRV surveys 

(Table 5). Unidentified baitfish dominated the estimates of total abundance (13,090 of 20,284 total fish)

but the deep platforms, on average, were characterized by Crevalle jack (2,074) and Bermuda chub 

(1,405). Other notable species present included great barracuda (478), horse-eye jack (416), greater 

amberjack (587), rainbow runner (405) and red snapper (133). The 13 documented species comprised 

97% of the total abundance.

Abundance-by-vertical depth estimates for all 36 species for each of the four bottom depth zones are 

shown in Appendix 3 of LGL 2019. Vertical abundance patterns for key federally managed species will 

be discussed below. Vertical abundance and distance from platform will be key factors in the model used 

to predict mortality from explosive decommissioning activities.

Though the focus of the project was specific numbers of individual fish species, the “raw” hydroacoustic 

information was also highly useful in providing information concerning the general abundance of fish 

around platforms. Hydroacoustic data of fish density in number of fish/m3 is plotted with increasing 

distance from the platforms as a boxplot in Figure 4. This shows how the overall fish density declines 

with increasing distance from the center of each platform at the seafloor and provides reassurance that we 

are capturing the platform associated fish. In 2017, differences between distance zones were statistically 

significant (F = 38.511, p < 0.001) with the greatest difference between the 0-25m and 75-100m zones 

(Z=16.29, p < 0.001), and similarly in 2018 significant differences were seen (F = 57.33, p < 0.001) with 

the greatest difference being between the 0-25m and >100m zones, unsurprisingly (Z=26.136, p < 0.001).
18

Table 5. Model estimates of the abundance of fish at the “average platform” in the four depth 

zones defined in this study

(For additional detail see Appendix Table 2.1)

Depth zone (m)

Common Name 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300

Amaco jack 5 16 129 111 

Angelfish sp. 0.4 2 47 0.7 

Atlantic bumper 4,362 6,227 841 324 

Atlantic moonfish 19 514 97 23 

Atlantic spadefish 1,815 926 481 60 

Bar jack 1 4 13 178 

Bermuda chub 39 162 838 1,405 

Black jack 0.1 0.2 0.1 23 

Blue runner 622 1,712 3,971 691 

Bluefish 2 4 0.6 0.6 

Butterflyfish sp. 0.1 0.4 8 0.2 

Cobia 57 13 24 1.4 

Crevalle jack 16 148 326 2,074 

Dog snapper 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.05 

Filefish sp. - - 0.2 - 

Gray snapper 137 400 491 37 

Gray triggerfish 1.3 13 63 2 

Great barracuda 4 27 75 478 

Greater amberjack 14 32 487 587 

Grouper sp. 0.2 0.7 16 0.3 

Guaguanche 3 32 22 2 

Gulf menhaden 67 2,876 169 105 

Horse-eye jack 3 19 86 416 

kKng mackerel 4 81 38 5 

Leatherjack 26 105 706 45 

Lookdown 3 26 107 8 

Ocean triggerfish 0.6 1 10 20 

Rainbow runner 13 266 53 405 

Red drum 0.1 4 0.2 0.2 

Red snapper 359 1,015 2,980 133 

Sheepshead 0.3 19 6 1 

Spanish hogfish 0.1 0.3 2 0.1 

Spanish mackerel 0.2 - 0.1 - 

Unidentified fish 142 250 276 13,090 
19

Depth zone (m)

Common Name 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300

Vermilion snapper 45 118 3,506 57 

Yellow jack 0.8 0.9 7 0.5 

Total 7,764 15,014 15,877 20,284

Confidence Intervals

(1975-

30517)

(8593-

26234)

(6349-

39700)

(10169-

40459)

7 26 32 13

7,494 14,784 15,707 19,611

96.5 98.5 98.9 96.7

Figure 4. Acoustic fish density in number of fish/m3 with increasing distance from platform across 

all a) 2017 survey sites and b) 2018 survey sites. 

Box plots show median values (solid horizontal line) and means (black dot). The lower and upper ends of the box are 

the 25% and 75% quartiles, respectively.
20

2.3.2 Species Accounts

We discuss each of the five selected species in order of their overall stock size estimate. Red snapper has 

the largest stock of our selected species (36.8 million fish), followed by vermilion snapper (30.1 million 

fish), gray triggerfish (2.8 million fish), greater amberjack (696 thousand fish), and cobia (424 thousand 

fish).

2.3.2.1 Red Snapper

The red snapper is one of, if not the, most valuable finfish in the Gulf recreational and commercial 

fisheries (SEDAR 2018). It occurs throughout the Gulf and is considered to be represented by two stocks, 

divided at the mouth of the Mississippi River. The Gulf-wide stock of age 2+ fish is estimated to consist 

of nearly 37 million individuals; 13 million fish in the East and 24 million fish in the West (see Table 3 

above). In our study, red snapper ranked 4th in overall abundance (Table 5).

2.3.2.1.1 Distribution and Abundance

Red snapper were most abundant at offshore platforms within the 31- to 90- m bottom depth range (2,980 

fish typically present with a 95% confidence interval of 875 to 10,152, Table 5), followed by abundance 

at platforms in the 18- to 30- m bottom depth range where 1,015 fish (confidence interval: 541 to 1904) 

were typically present. About 359 red snapper were estimated at shallow platforms (10- to 17- m bottom 

depth). At deeper (91- to 300- m bottom depth) platforms, on the order of 133 fish were seen. Using the 

abundance levels from Table 5 and the number of platforms present by bottom depth and State 

Management Zone in 2017 and 2018 (Table 1), we estimate that about 5.3% of the total age 2+ red 

snapper stock resided on platforms in 2017 and 4.9% in 2018 following the removal of 89 platforms 

(Table 6). Approximately 75% of the age 2+ red snapper estimated to occur on offshore platforms in the 

Gulf occurred in the Louisiana Management Zone.

Vertical distribution patterns for age 2+ red snapper determined from the hydroacoustic/SRV surveys 

(Appendix 3 of LGL 2019) show that, for the average platform within the 18- to 30- m bottom depth 

zone, this species was present throughout the water column, but was more abundant at depths of 13 to 22 

m (490 fish) and 22 to 30 m (315 fish) than in the upper water column (210 fish between 3 to 12 m in 

depth) (see Appendix 3 of LGL 2019). Similarly, red snapper occurred throughout the water column at 

platforms in the 31- to 90- m depth zone but were least abundant in the surface layer. Abundance by depth 

at these sites ranged from 575 to 768 fish at depths between 13 and 32 m, and from 282 to 487 fish were 

present at depths of 33m to the bottom. As will be shown below, red snapper remained close to the 

platform with 98% of all positions measured in the telemetry study being either within or adjacent to the 

platform.

Before Williams-Grove and Szedlmayer (2017), the common view was that the red snapper was a 

demersal fish species exhibiting a high association with low relief bottom standing throughout their life 

span. However, in recent years, anecdotal accounts from fishers began to suggest upper water column use 

by this species. Williams-Grove and Szedlmayer (2017) documented red snapper tended to stay at deeper 

depths during colder months (<3m from the seafloor) but moved up in the water column more frequently 

during spring and summer months. Their results were consistent with our findings.

2.3.2.1.2 Site Fidelity

A total of 764,515 red snapper positions from 54 individuals (from the total of 81 red snapper tagged with 

acoustic telemetry tags) were recorded. These data were analyzed from the three primary sites (Sites 6, 9, 

30) from March 2017 to May 2018. Red snapper remained close to platform structure with 98% of all 
21

positions either within or near the structures (LGL et al. 2018b). Over all sites, red snapper were, on 

average, located 28.2 ± 33.9M from the platforms (Everett et al. in prep). Observed home range estimates 

(95% KDE) for an individual fish at each of the three sites are shown by Figure 5. Overall, least square 

mean (LSM) home range estimates based on all red snapper at each site ranged from a high of 35,026 m2 

at the West site to a low of 15,199 m2 at the East site. The home range estimate for the Central site was 

22,749 m2. red snapper at the East and Central sites showed no significant differences in area used 

between diel periods, but fish at the West site showed significantly increased area used during the midday 

as compared to night, dawn and dusk. Area use was largest in summer and fall and smallest during winter 

(LGL et al. 2018b).

Site fidelity on platforms was 30% per year; i.e., 30% of the fish remained at the site marked for an entire 

year. Of the 22 fish that emigrated from the marking sites, 9 showed homing behavior and returned to

their original release site. Residence time (50% of the fish still present) was 11 months. Fishing mortality 

(F) for red snapper at all sites was high (F=0.75, LGL et al. 2018b). Whereas, the estimate of natural 

mortality was low (M=0.06; 95% Confidence Limits 0.01 to 0.22).

Table 6. Estimated abundance of Age 2+ red snapper at platforms within each of our four bottom 

depth zones, 2017 and 2018 

A) Age 2+ Red Snapper by Year and Depth Zone (Median Estimates with Confidence Limits)

2017 2018

Depth 

Zone (m) LCL Median UCL LCL Median UCL

10–17 35,156 134,247 511,258 32,524 124,197 472,982

18–30 133,627 250,774 470,288 123,889 232,499 436,016

31–90 455,000 1,549,523 5,279,040 423,500 1,442,249 4,913,568

91–300 29,274 8,568 24,570 27,552 8,064 23,125

Total 1,943,113 1,807,008

B) Age 2+ Red Snapper by State and Depth Zone, 2017 (Median Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 10,769 26,397 148,993 2,232 188,390

LA 106,608 201,025 1,150,223 4,752 1,462,609

MS 13,999 20,306 199,650 936 234,891

AL 2,872 3,046 50,657 648 57,223

2017 Platform 

Total 1,943,113

GOM Stock Size 36,738,000

Percent of Stock 

on Platforms 5.3

C) Age 2+ Red Snapper by State and Depth Zone, 2018 (Median Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 9,333 23,351 140,053 1,872 174,609

LA 98,711 188,842 1,060,827 4,680 1,353,061
22

MS 13,999 17,260 196,670 936 228,865

AL 2,154 3,046 44,698 576 50,473

2018 Platform 

Total 1,807,008

GOM Stock Size 36,738,000

Percent of Stock 

on Platforms 4.9

Figure 5. Home range (95% kernal density estimate) of an individual red snapper at each of the 

three sites is illustrated with a white line.

Two previous telemetry studies of red snapper on Louisiana offshore platforms (Peabody 2004, 

McDonough and Cowan 2007) reported lower site fidelity than we observed. Peabody (2004) observed 

high site fidelity in the first five months of a 202-d long study followed by low site fidelity in later 

months. The low site fidelity observed after the first few months may have been related to red snapper

movements or a number of other factors. Peabody (2004) reported three possible difficulties that may 

have reduced site fidelity: variable transmitter detection range, thermoclines causing reduced detections, 

and transmitter battery failures. The transmitter detection range was greatly reduced (ranging from 30 to 

180 m) compared with previous studies that indicated a high detection rate (~50%) out to 800 m with a 

maximum detection of 1600 m (Szedlmayer and Schroepfer 2005; Topping and Szedlmayer 2011b).

McDonough and Cowan (2007) tracked red snapper on a single platform with the Vemco Radio-linked 

Acoustic Positioning system (VRAP, Vemco, Bedford, Nova Scotia) that had a hard wire link between all 

receivers allowing fine-scale movement estimates. This system was the predecessor of the VPS system 

and has been discontinued. red snapper of unspecified sized (N = 20) were caught from several platforms 

but all were released on the same platform. Movements from 15 fish were tracked for a limited time 

period (14 days), and low residency was reported, with only five fish remaining at their release site until 

the end of the study. This study also reported a short detection range (150 m), which was attributed to 
23

acoustic noise on the active production platforms. In both of these platform studies that reported low site 

fidelity, short study periods, structural interference, and equipment failure prevented long-term tracking 

of red snapper. All things considered, we believe the present study represents the best estimate of red 

snapper site fidelity at offshore petroleum platforms.

2.3.2.1.3 Mark and/or Recapture Population Estimates at Platforms

As a way of verifying our abundance estimates for red snapper based on the hydroacoustic and/or SRV 

approach, we obtained mark and/or recapture abundance estimates at selected sites (Figure 6). Ten 

mark/recapture estimates were available for the 18–30 m depth zone across site-year combinations and 

ranged from 447 to 5,347. The median value from these ten estimates was 1,166, which was remarkably 

close to our hydroacoustic/SRV median estimate of 1,015 for this depth zone. No mark and/or recapture 

estimates were obtained from the 10–17 m and 91–300 m depth zones, and only one estimate was 

available for 31–90 m. This one estimate, 534, was lower than the hydroacoustic/SRV median estimate of 

2,980.

2.3.2.1.4 Age Distribution

In all, there were 2,155 red snapper aged from otolith cross sections; after filtering for missing 

independent variables, 1,900 remained for analysis. Only one red snapper was caught in the 91–300 m 

depth zone and was not reported. Because the sample sizes varied by combinations of the various factor 

levels, means are reported as marginal means across all factor combinations.

The age distribution for red snapper increased with depth zone (Figure 7; p<0.0001); modal ages were 

ages 2–3 for 10-17 m, age 3 for 18–30 m, and age 5 for 31–90 m. Year was also significant and modes at 

ages 3 and 5 in 2017 clearly translated into modes at ages 4 and 6 in 2018. Though the hook size was 

significant at p=0.0343, the biological significance appeared negligible. Age structure did not differ 

between sexes.
24

5,347 1,155 824 447 854 2,475 1,402 2,514 1,177 990 534

359 

1,015 

2,980 

133 

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

2017 Site 30

2017 Site 5B

2017 Site 9

2017 Site 11

2017 Site 72017 Site 22018 Site 2

2018 Site 492018 Site 472018 Site 602017 Site 13

10 - 17 m 18 - 30 m 31 - 90 m 91 - 300 m

Abundance estimate (log10 scale)

Red Snapper Abundance Estimates

Depth zone =

Mark-recapture estimates by site

(error bars = 95% CLs, point estimates at base of bars)

Hydroacoustic/SRV estimates by depth zone

(dashed lines = 95% CLs, point estimates for solid line in white boxes)

Median value across mark-recapture estimates = 1,166

Figure 6. Comparison of abundance estimates made with the hydroacoustic and/or SRV approach 

and mark and/or recapture method for selected sites. 

The hydroacoustic/SRV estimates represent median values; as such, the median value is reported for the 

mark/recapture estimates within the 18–30 m depth zone (point estimates for each site are given at the base of each 

bar).

2.3.2.1.5 Growth and Condition

Length at age was modeled for each depth zone with a three parameter Von Bertalanffy growth equation 

(Figure 8). Fitted curves were similar across all depth zones and to the curve reported in SEDAR 31 

(Figure 9). Though no analyses were performed to test for statistical significance of differences, these 

plots indicate there was little if any biological significance.

Weight-length relationships were compared between males and females, depth zones, and ages (Figure 

10) to assess condition. None of the comparisons demonstrated statistically or biologically significant 

differences.

2.3.2.2 Vermilion Snapper

The vermilion snapper population is centered in the Gulf but ranges north to North Carolina and south to 

Brazil (Grimes et al.1982). This species occurs in moderately deep (40–300 m) waters, most commonly 

over rock, gravel, or sand bottoms near the edge of the continental shelf. Vermilion snapper are generalist 

predators that are able to feed on benthic and pelagic fishes, shrimp, crabs, polychaetes, cephalopods, and 

other invertebrates (Sedberry and Cuellar 1993). Vermilion snapper share similar habitats and diets as red 

snapper, though red snapper are more voracious predators. In our study, the vermilion snapper ranked 

fifth in overall abundance of fishes present on offshore platforms area during 2017 and 2018. Vermilion 

snapper were present at all depth zones but were most abundant at platforms within the 31- to 90- m depth 
25

range. Within this depth range, the average platform harbored 3,506 vermilion snapper (95% CI: 428–

28,743) as shown by Table 5 and/or Appendix Table 2.1. Using the abundance levels from Table 5 and 

the numbers of platforms present by bottom depth and State Management Zone in 2017 and 2018 (Table 

1), we estimate that about 6.2% of the total age 2+ vermilion snapper resided on platforms in 2017 and a 

similar percentage, about 5.8% was estimated for 2018 (Table 7). Considering the numbers of platforms 

in each state management and depth zone, approximately 75% of the total vermilion snapper on platforms 

occurred offshore Louisiana. As shown in Appendix 3 of LGL (2019), this species was most abundant at 

depths between 13 and 72 m, as compared to shallower and deeper water layers. Few were observed 

within the 12- m deep layer in the 31- to 90- m bottom depth zone where vermilion snapper was most 

abundant.

Figure 7. Comparison of age distributions for year, depth zones, and hook size. 

Type III p-values are given for each comparison.
26

Figure 8. Von Bertalanffy curves by depth zone and pooled compared to SEDAR estimates.

Figure 9. Comparison of Von Bertalanffy curves among depth zones and SEDAR estimates.
27

Figure 10. Comparison of weight compared to length relationships for gender, depth zones, and 

ages.
28

2.3.2.3 Gray Triggerfish

The gray triggerfish was reported by Gallaway (1981), Gallaway and Lewbel (1982), Stanley and Wilson 

(2003) and Gitschlag et al. (2000) as being one of the more abundant species associated with platforms at 

bottom depths greater than 20 m. In this study, gray triggerfish were not abundant (ranked 22nd in overall 

abundance), ranging from about only 1 to 63 fish at the “average platform” over all depths (Table 5). We 

suspect that this might reflect a sampling problem and that many more gray triggerfish were present at our 

study sites but were within the structure itself where they could not be counted. Based on our estimates, 

only about 1.0% of the age 2+ gray triggerfish stock occurred at platforms (Table 8). 

2.3.2.4 Greater Amberjack

Greater amberjack ranked 10th in overall abundance in our study (Table 5). The “average platform” 

within the 31- to 90- m bottom depth zone was characterized by 487 (176-1,347) greater amberjack and 

similar numbers were estimated to occur on the average platform within the 91- to 300- m bottom depth 

zone (median estimate was 587 fish with a confidence interval of 313-1,095 specimens). Most of the 

greater amberjack collected at platforms were relatively large fish, averaging over 28 lbs. each. 

Considering only age 2+ fish, a total of 336,210 fish were at offshore platforms in 2017 and 313,602 fish 

were present at these habitats in 2018 (Table 9). The estimates, if accurate, would suggest that about 48% 

of the stock resided on platforms in 2017 and that number was reduced to 45% in 2018 due to the removal 

of 89 platforms. The vast majority of the greater amberjack occurred in the Louisiana Management zone 

where deep platforms are most abundant (Table 9).

Greater amberjack were most abundant in the water column at depths between 13 to 32 m (118 to 140 fish 

present, on average) based on the “average platform “within the 31- to 90- m depth zone. In the deep zone 

(91- to 300- m deep), the high abundance zone shifted to depths between 33 and 52 m (see Appendix 3 in 

LGL 2019).

2.3.2.5 Cobia

Cobia are usually thought of as being generally solitary but are also common in pairs and/or small groups 

ranging up to 8 or more fish. Cobia ranked 21st in total abundance in our study. The number of cobia 

present on an “average platform” in water 10- to 17- m deep, 18- to 30- m deep, 31- to 90- m deep and 

91- to 300- m deep was 57 (14–230), 13 (6–26), 24 (16–36) and 1.4 (0–5) fish, respectively (Table 5). 

Collectively, these numbers, used in combination with the total number of platforms within each depth 

zone, suggest that 37,045 cobia were present on platforms in 2017 and 34,350 cobia were present in 2018 

following the removal of 89 platforms between years (Table 10). On the order of 8 to 9% of the Gulf 

cobia stock occurs on platforms, mostly in Louisiana where platforms are the most numerous (SEDAR 

2013). In general, cobia were typically more abundant in the upper 12 to 22 m of the water column (see 

Appendix 3 in LGL 2019).
29

3 Explosive Removal Impacts

The UnderWater Calculator version 1 (UWC), was the underwater acoustic shock propagation model 

used for this study. A description of the UWC and the motivation for its selection over other models are 

detailed elsewhere (Dzwilewski and Fenton 2003; GSI and LGL 2017). User input to the UWC includes 

detonation charge specifications (explosive type and weight), pile specifications (diameter and wall 

thickness), source (charge) depth, and receiver (e.g., fish) depth. In addition, the UWC offers three bottom 

boundary conditions to be specified by the user: water (free space), soft clay, and stiff clay. The UWC 

fixes the explosive coupling efficiency for these bottom types at 43.51%, 37.90%, and 34.37%, 

respectively.

Table 7. Estimated abundance of age 2+ vermilion snapper at platforms within each of our bottom 

depth zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and bottom depth zone 2017 and 2018 

A) Age 2+ Vermilion Snapper by Year and Depth Zone (Median Estimate with Confidence Limits)

2017 2018

Depth 

Zone (m) LCL Median UCL LCL Median UCL

10–17 4,114 16,708 67,320 3,806 15,457 62,280

18–30 16,549 29,242 51,870 15,343 27,111 48,090

31–90 222,560 1,823,235 14,946,360 207,152 1,697,011 13,911,612

91–300 3,570 6,783 12,971 3,360 6,384 12,208

Total 1,875,967 1,745,963

B) Age 2+ Vermilion Snapper by State and Depth Zone, 2017 (Median Estimate)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 1,340 3,078 175,311 1,767 181,496

LA 13,268 23,441 1,353,401 3,762 1,393,872

MS 1,742 2,368 234,917 741 239,768

AL 357 355 59,606 513 60,831

2017 Platform 

Total 1,875,967

GOM Stock Size 30,184,024

Percent of Stock 

on Platforms 6.2

C) Age 2+ Vermilion Snapper by State and Depth Zone, 2018 (Median Estimate)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 1,161 2,723 164,792 1,482 170,159

LA 12,285 22,020 1,248,214 3,705 1,286,225

MS 1,742 2,013 231,411 741 235,906

AL 268 355 52,593 456 53,673

2018 Platform Total 1,745,963

GOM Stock Size 30,184,024

Percent of Stock on 

Platforms 5.8
30

Table 8. Estimated abundance of age 2+ gray triggerfish at platforms within each of our bottom 

depth zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and bottom depth zone 2017 and 2018 

A) Age 2+ Gray Triggerfish by Year and Depth Zone (Median Estimates with Confidence 

Limits)

2017 2018

Depth Zone 

(m) LCL Median UCL LCL Median UCL

10–17 42 485 4,114 39 449 3,806

18–30 1,482 3,174 6,311 1,374 2,943 5,851

31–90 20,800 32,973 52,520 19,360 30,690 48,884

91–300 119 251 714 112 236 672

Total 36,883 34,318

B) Age 2+ Gray Triggerfish by State and Depth Zone, 2017 (Median 

Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 39 334 3,170 65 3,609

LA 385 2,544 24,476 139 27,545

MS 51 257 4,248 27 4,583

AL 10 39 1,078 19 1,146

2017 

Platform 

Total 36,883

GOM 

Stock Size 2,822,750

Percent of 

Stock on 

Platforms 1.3

C) Age 2+ Gray Triggerfish by State and Depth Zone, 2018 (Median 

Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 34 296 2,980 55 3,364

LA 357 2,390 22,574 137 25,458

MS 51 218 4,185 27 4,481

AL 8 39 951 17 1,014

2018 

Platform 

Total 34,318

GOM 

Stock Size 2,822,750

Percent of 

Stock on 

Platforms 1.2
31

Table 9. Estimated abundance of age 2+ greater amberjack at platforms within each of our bottom 

depth zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and bottom depth zone 2017 and 2018

A) Age 2+ Greater Amberjack by Year and Depth Zone (Median Estimates with Confidence 

Limits)

Year: 2017 2018

Depth Zone 

(m) LCL Median UCL LCL Median UCL

10 - 17 1,122 5,226 22,440 1,038 4,835 20,760

18 - 30 4,199 7,910 14,573 3,893 7,334 13,511

31 - 90 91,520 253,279 700,440 85,184 235,744 651,948

91 - 300 37,247 69,795 130,781 35,056 65,689 123,088

Total 336,210 313,602

B) Age 2+ Greater Amberjack by State and Depth Zone, 2017 (Median 

Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 31–300 Total

TX 419 833 24,354 18,182 43,787

LA 4,150 6,341 188,011 38,710 237,212

MS 545 640 32,634 7,625 41,444

AL 112 96 8,280 5,279 13,767

2017 

Platform 

Total 336,210

GOM Stock 

Size 695,549

Percent of 

Stock on 

Platforms 48.3

C) Age 2+ Greater Amberjack by State and Depth Zone, 2018 (Median 

Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 363 737 22,893 15,249 39,242

LA 3,843 5,956 173,399 38,123 221,321

MS 545 544 32,147 7,625 40,861

AL 84 96 7,306 4,692 12,178

2018 

Platform 

Total 313,602

GOM Stock 

Size 695,549

Percent of 

Stock on 

Platforms 45.1
32

Table 10. Estimated abundance of age 2+ cobia on the platforms within each of our bottom depth 

zones, 2017 and 2018, by state and depth zone 2017 and 2018

A) Age 2+ Cobia by Year and Depth Zone (Median Estimates with Confidence Limits)

Year: 2017 2018

Depth Zone 

(m) LCL Median UCL LCL Median UCL

10 - 17 5,236 21,365 86,020 4,844 19,765 79,580

18 - 30 1,598 3,216 6,391 1,482 2,981 5,925

31 - 90 8,320 12,303 18,720 7,744 11,451 17,424

91 - 300 21 162 595 20 152 560

Total 37,045 34,350

B) Age 2+ Cobia by State and Depth Zone, 2017 (Median Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 1,714 338 1,183 42 3,277

LA 16,966 2,578 9,133 90 28,766

MS 2,228 260 1,585 18 4,091

AL 457 39 402 12 910

2017 

Platform 

Total 37,045

GOM 

Stock Size 423,955

Percent of 

Stock on 

Platforms 8.7

C) Age 2+ Cobia by State and Depth Zone, 2018 (Median Estimates)

Depth zone (m)

State 10–17 18–30 31–90 91–300 Total

TX 1,485 299 1,112 35 2,932

LA 15,709 2,421 8,423 88 26,642

MS 2,228 221 1,562 18 4,028

AL 343 39 355 11 748

2018 

Platform 

Total 34,350

GOM 

Stock Size 423,955

Percent of 

Stock on 

Platforms 8.1
33

The minimum slant range (distance) to a defined peak acoustic pressure is a function of said pressure, the 

explosive weight, and two Swisdak Similitude Coefficients specific to a given explosive (Dzwilewski and 

Fenton, 2003). The UWC includes four built-in types of explosive material (TNT, pentaerythritol 

tetranitrate, H6, and C-4) as well as allows user-defined Swisdak Similitude Coefficients for other 

explosives. For the four types of explosives included in the UWC, relevant Swisdak coefficients K and a 

range from 52.4–60.6 and 1.13–1.22, respectively. The explosive material utilized for platform removals 

during the hydroacoustic measurements of this report was Composition B (Comp-B). Unfortunately, 

Swisdak coefficients were unavailable for Comp-B. Such coefficients were available for mixtures HBX-1 

and HBX-3 (Kaye, 1983), initially thought to be similar to Comp-B based upon their peak pressure 

equivalents in free air (Brown, 1986). However, when these coefficients were applied in the UWC, they 

predicted weaker explosions than TNT, yet TNT Equivalent Weight Factors were known for Comp-B to 

range from 1.11 (NATO, 2010) to 1.35 (Dahl, 2016). That is, a given Comp-B charge should yield the 

same impact as a TNT charge with 11–35% larger mass. Consequently, to accommodate Comp-B, rather 

than relying upon Comp-B-specific Swisdak coefficients which were unavailable, Swisdak coefficients 

for TNT were used as input, and a TNT Equivalent Weight Factor for peak pressure was added to the 

UWC. For this study, the aforementioned TNT Equivalent Weight Factors for Comp-B were used as 

bounding values to adjust the effective weight of the explosives. The additional user input of a TNT 

Equivalent Weight Factor to the UWC in and of itself does not affect the modeled impacts, although the 

increased effective weight of Comp-B relative to TNT certainly does.

This study analyzes the explosive severance of four types of pipes: piles, conductors, skirt piles, and 

caissons. The UWC was designed for piles and lacks a method for modeling other types of pipes. This 

study treated all pipe types the same except for the 11 sites that had conductors with internal concentric 

pipes. Although the thickness of the internal pipes was available, their diameters were not. The UWC is 

based upon parametric numerical simulations of “typical pile diameters” of 24, 36, 48, and 72 in 

(Dzwilewski and Fenton, 2003) and, thus, treats any pipes with diameters less than 24 in (61.0 cm) as 

having no effect on the efficiency of the transmitted shock wave. Therefore, for the results in this report, 

two pipe cases were considered. One case was Small Internal Pipes, in which the internal pipes were less 

than 24” in diameter and, thus, assumed to have no effect on acoustic energy. In this case, only outer pipe 

specifications were used in the UWC. The second case was Large Internal Pipes, which assumed the outer 

diameter of the internal pipe was as large as the inner diameter of the largest pipe. In this case, the sum 

total of the wall thicknesses of all concentric pipes was entered into the UWC model as a single pipe wall 

thickness. 

In its forward calculation, the UWC estimates underwater shock wave parameters such as the peak 

pressure, impulse, and energy flux density for a user-specified source-to-receiver slant range. In its 

backward or inverse calculation, the UWC estimates the slant range from the explosive charge to a userspecified energy flux density or peak pressure value. In this study, the range of received peak sound 

pressure level (SPLpeak) of 229–234 dB re 1μPa was adopted as the acoustic threshold for mortal and 

potential mortal injury to fish (Popper et al., 2015), and the inverse calculation was performed to 

determine the ranges to that threshold.

For each pipe explosion, the inverse calculation was performed twice: once to calculate a narrow range of 

mortal injury using the most conservative model input values and a second time for a wider range of 

potential mortal injury using the least conservative values (Table 11). 
34

Table 11. Bounding model cases

Variable Narrow Range Wide Range

(Less Conservative) (More Conservative)

Sediment type Stiff clay Soft clay

Pipe option Large internal pipes Small internal pipes

SPLpeak 234 dB re 1 μPa 229 dB re 1 μPa

One set of estimates is based on the less conductive stiff clay, the large internal pipe option (i.e., all internal 

concentric pipes are large enough to consider in the thickness of the outer pipe), and the higher peak pressure 

mortality threshold. The second set of estimates are based on the more conductive soft clay, small internal pipe 

option (i.e., all internal pipes are smaller than 24 in (0.61 m) and, thus, do not affect calculations), and the lower peak 

pressure mortality threshold.

The range of each randomly placed fish to each explosion was calculated and the count of lethal 

exposures tallied. Minimum and maximum exposure levels, as well as the total number of exposures 

(most sites involved multiple explosions), were recorded for any fish located farther than the defined 

lethal range based on the UWC forward calculation.

Below, we first describe methods and results obtained from modeling the effects of the explosive removal 

activities on the mortality of the resident fish based upon three scenarios: 1) the actual explosive removals 

of 24 platforms in 2017 and 23 platforms in 2018; 2) the effects that would occur if all the remaining 

platforms in the study area were removed in a single year; and 3) the effects of removing all the 

remaining platforms within a 100 mile radius of major fishing ports. The last section of the report 

provides an assessment of the predicted effects using existing stock assessment models for each of the 

five selected species.

3.1 Estimation of Effects

As described above, we organized our effects description around three scenarios: the actual removals that 

occurred in 2017 and 2018 (the years of our study), the removal of all the remaining platforms in federal 

waters in a single year and the removal of all platforms within 100-miles of major ports.

3.1.1 2017 and 2018 Removals

3.1.1.1 Model Results

In 2017 and 2018, 329 explosions were used to sever 319 pipes at 47 platforms in water depths ranging 

from 10 m to 93 m. These 47 platforms were divided into four depth zone categories as follows:

Depth 

Zone

Water 

Depth 2017 2018

Number 

of 

Platforms

A 10–17 m 3 11 14

B 18–30 m 12 1 13

C 31–90 m 8 10 18

D 91–300 

m

1 1 2
35

A listing of each platform and its attributes used in the assessment is provided as Appendix 1 in Conrad et 

al. (2019). Detailed structural plans were available for only a subset of the platforms. For those platforms 

with very limited or no available structural information other than depth, the depth zones were used, in 

part, to estimate platform size and pipe orientation.

The explosive material used in the 2017–2018 removals was Comp B, a mixture of the explosives RDX 

and TNT along with paraffin wax (see Appendix 2 in Conrad et al. 2019). The standard proportions are 

59.5% RDX, 39.4% TNT, and 1% wax. The explosions generally used 36.3–90.7 kg (80–200 lbs) of 

explosive material. At platform B1_2018, three explosions were made using 36.3 kg (80 lbs) each of 

Comp B. In addition, two explosions were made using only 3.2 kg (7 lbs) of explosive material each, and 

one explosion was made using 15.0 kg (33 lbs) of Comp B. Using such small quantities of Comp B to 

sever pipes was atypical.

The explosions severed pipes having diameters 0.25–1.8 m (10–72 in) with wall thicknesses generally 

ranging between 1.0–6.35 cm (0.38–2.5 in). Platforms A8_2018 and A11_2018 had conductors with wall 

thicknesses of 29.2 cm (11.5 in) and 22.6 cm (8.88 in), respectively, but these were unusually thick. Data 

on abundance of fishes were binned with respect to horizontal distance from the platforms and vertical 

depth below the water surface (see Appendices 3 through 7 in Conrad et al. 2019). Four horizontal bins, 

shaped as rounded rectangular rings each of 25 m width, surrounded each platform. The depth bins were 

10 m thick, starting 3 m below the surface. Depending on the water depth, the number of depth bins for 

the platforms ranged from 1 to 9.

For each platform and based on fish distances derived from the hydroacoustic data, simulated fish were 

randomly placed in a uniform distribution within each horizontal bin. First, the total number of fish in 

each bin was determined by randomly rounding the (non-integer) abundance estimate of that bin up or 

down depending on the decimal portion of the abundance estimate value. For example, if the abundance 

estimate in a bin was 104.2, then in 8 random simulations out of 10, 104 fish would be placed. For the 

other 2 simulations out of 10, 105 fish would be placed. Thus, the average over all simulations would be 

104.2 fish placed.

For each platform site, fish in each horizontal and vertical bin were randomly placed based on the 

abundance distribution estimates for that site’s depth category. The initial placements were done in 

circular rings, using polar coordinates. The bins were not circular, however; they were rounded rectangles 

(see Fig. 11 below) because they represented distances from a rectangular platform. Consequently, fish 

initially placed outside of bins were removed and then randomly placed again. This placement process 

was repeated until the correct number of fish had been placed in each bin.

Table 12 displays the number of fish of each federally-managed species that were estimated to occur at 

sites within each of the depth zones, A–D. These represent the total number of fish summed over all depth 

bins at each depth zone. Due to abundance estimates’ binning into four depth zones “A” through “D”, 

most platforms were actually in shallower water than the deepest bins for their prescribed depth zone. All 

fish in bins shallower than each platform’s total water depth were placed, and the remaining fish were 

then placed in the deepest bin based on the depth at the platform. The number of fish and their locations 

were randomized 10,000 times to ensure representative fish distribution.
36

Table 12. Abundance estimates for each species for each depth zone

Depth 

Zone

Red 

Snapper

Vermilion 

Snapper

Gray 

Triggerfish

Greater 

Amberjack Cobia TOTAL

A 359 44.7 1.3 14 57.1 476

B 1015.3 118.4 12.8 32 13 1191.6

C 2979.9 3506.2 63.4 487.1 23.7 7060.2

D 133.1 57 2.1 586.5 1.4 780

An example of one iteration of fish placement of the five species in the 4 horizontal range bins at the 

deepest platform removed in 2017 or 2018 (see D1_2017 in Appendix 1 of Conrad et al. 2019) can be 

seen in Figure 11. Each rounded rectangle (blue, orange, purple and black) represents the line of constant 

range from the platform edge (red). Fish were randomly placed in each range bin based on abundance 

estimates described above. Densities of each species vary but are constant within each bin.

Mortality and potential mortal injury to fish were anticipated to occur at a received sound level of 229–

234 dB re 1 μPa SPLpeak (Popper et al., 2015). For this report, over 100,000 simulated fish were placed 

around 47 platforms, and mortality ranges were calculated for 329 explosions. Using the most 

conservative inputs (229 dB, Small Inner Pipes and Soft Clay), every fish was exposed to a lethal peak 

pressure at all 47 sites. The exact number of fish and their positions were randomly selected 10,000 times 

as described above.

Figure 11. Random placement of 670 fish around platform D1_2017 in 91.44 m water depth, using

hydroacoustic abundance estimates. 
37

The five species included are red snapper (red dots), vermilion snapper (cyan dots), gray triggerfish (gray dots), 

greater amberjack (orange dots) and cobia (blue dots). Four conductors were exploded at this site on 3 July 2017. 

The estimated positions of the four conductors (based on schematics of other platforms) are shown as purple circles 

inside the red platform boundary. Edges of horizontal range bins are shown as rounded rectangles outside the 

platform boundary.

Based upon the simulated fish positions in Figure 11, all 670 fish representing federally-managed species 

present at platform D1_2017 were exposed to lethal doses using the most conservative inputs (229 dB re 

1 μPa peak, Small Internal Pipes, Soft Clay). These fish are depicted in Figure 12 as red x’s. When using 

the less conservative inputs (Large Internal Pipes, Stiff Clay), 665 fish were exposed to the lethal dose of 

234 dB re 1 μPa peak. However, the remaining five fish were each exposed to at least 232.9 dB re 1 μPa 

peak, four times due to the four conductor explosions. In Figure 12, these potentially surviving five fish 

are denoted with green triangles.

Figure 12. Fish exposed to lethal doses. 

Red x = lethal dose. Based upon the simulated fish positions in Figure 1, all 670 fish were exposed to lethal doses 

using (229 dB re 1 μPa peak, Small Internal Pipes, Soft Clay). When using (234 dB re 1 μPa peak, large Internal 

Pipes, and stiff clay, 665 fish were exposed to lethal doses. The remaining five fish, exposed to greater than 229 dB 

re 1 μPa peak but less than 234 dB re 1 μPa peak, are denoted with green triangles.
38

As shown in Appendix Table 2.2, the least conservative range of survival for platform D1_2017 was 

157 m. The explosions occurred 6.9 m below the 91.4 m deep mudline, so fish on the outer edge of the 

100 m range opposite the conductors and near the sea surface were further than 157 m.

Using the less conservative inputs (234 dB re 1 μPa peak, Large Internal Pipes, and Stiff Clay), every fish 

was exposed to a lethal dose at 46 of the 47 sites (Appendix Table 2.2). At one site, platform D1_2017, 

depending on the random placement of fish, 0 or up to 5 of the 653–688 fish (0–0.8%) were exposed to 

less than the lethal threshold. However, each of those 0–5 fish were exposed to four separate explosions 

with peak pressures of more than 232.3 dB re 1μPa. Figure 12 shows positions based on one iteration in 

which 5 fish were exposed to less than the lethal threshold using the less conservative input parameters.

The UWC acoustic model was used to estimate fish mortality based on fish abundance estimates and 

explosive type and weight at a wide variety of platform sites. Using this model, fish at all of the sites were 

exposed to lethal blasts using the most conservative (i.e., yielding greatest mortality) model inputs, and 

nearly all fish were exposed to lethal blasts when using less conservative inputs. A few fish (0.1%) may 

have survived at one site, a platform located in the deepest water using some of the smaller explosive 

charges. Nearly all of the approximately 101,742 fish simulated in this study were exposed to lethal levels 

of peak pressure from the 329 explosions detonated to remove platforms in 2017 and 2018. Based on 

these results, we conclude that all the fish at a platform will be lost if explosives are used to remove 

platforms.

“More Conservative” exposure counts were the average number of fish that experienced at least 229 dB 

re 1 μPa peak pressure based on calculations with Small Internal Pipes in soft clay. “Less Conservative” 

exposure counts were estimated using a 234 dB re 1 μPa peak pressure threshold based on calculations 

with Large Internal Pipes in stiff clay. “Range for Survival” is the minimum distance for a fish to avoid 

lethal peak pressure at each site. Platform D1_2017 is highlighted because it is the only platform at which 

some fish simulated in this study were not exposed to a lethal dose of acoustic energy.

3.1.1.1.1 Red Snapper

The explosive removal of 24 platforms in 2017 and 23 platforms in 2018 likely resulted in the mortality 

of 69,506 red snapper, 37,233 in 2017 and 32,273 in 2018 (Table 13). In 2017, based on project-specific 

ageing studies, the ages of these fish ranged, from age 1 (0.5%) to age 13 (0.2%), with most being age 5 

(40%). Based on average weight-at-age (SEDAR 52 2018), ~179,000 lbs. of red snapper were killed in 

association with platform removals in 2017, all from the western Gulf (Appendix Table 2.3). In 2018, the 

estimated 32,275 red snapper that were assumed to have been killed had a total biomass of ~152,000 lbs.

3.1.1.1.2 Vermilion Snapper

The 2017 platform removals were predicted to have resulted in an estimated kill of 29,662 vermilion 

snapper which compared to an estimated kill of 32,268 fish in 2018:

2017 2018

Depth 

Zone (m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

10–17 - 134 134 45 491 536

18–30 - 1,421 1,421 - 118 118

31–90 - 28,050 28,050 3,506 28,050 31,556

91–300 - 57 57 - 57 57
39

2017 2018

Depth 

Zone (m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

Total - 29,662 29,662 3,551 28,717 32,268

Of these, the vast majority came from the 31- to 90- m depth zone and most were from the western Gulf.

Table 13. Estimates of red snapper killed by explosive removal of structures in 2017 and 2018. 

(See Appendix Table 2.3 for detail)

Age 2017 2018 Total

1 161 358 519

2 2,673 3,765 6,438

3 7,510 4,762 12,272

4 4,727 8,368 13,095

5 14,876 5,167 20,043

6 4,144 7,004 11,148

7 1,781 1,941 3,722

8 1,134 596 1,730

9 130 219 349

11 0 31 31

12 32 31 63

13 65 31 96

37,233 32,273 69,506

Based on the model results above, all fish present were assumed to have been killed. The red snapper stock is 

divided at the mouth of the Mississippi River into the Eastern and Western stocks following the SEDAR stock 

assessments for red snapper.

3.1.1.1.3 Greater Amberjack

A total of 10,079 greater amberjack were estimated to have been killed in association with platform 

removals over the study period, 4,909 in 2017 and 5,170 in 2018:

2017 2018

Depth Zone 

(m) EastGOM WestGOM Total EastGOM WestGOM Total

10–17 - 42 42 14 154 168

18–30 - 384 384 - 32 32

31–90 - 3,897 3,897 487 3,897 4,384

91–300 - 587 587 - 587 587

Total - 4,909 4,909 501 4,669 5,170

Most of the platform removals occurred in the western Gulf and most of the estimated mortality occurred 

in the 31- to 90- m depth zone.
40

3.1.1.1.4 Gray Triggerfish

Gray triggerfish were not found to be abundant in our study. Explosive platform removals in 2017 were 

estimated to have killed 667 gray triggerfish, and 601 gray triggerfish were estimated to have been killed 

in 2018:

2017 2018

Depth Zone 

(m) East OM WestGOM Total EastGOM WestGOM Total

10–17 - 4 4 1 14 16

18–30 1,041 154 154 - 13 13

31–90 - 507 507 63 507 571

91–300 - 2 2 - 2 2

Total 1,041 667 667 65 537 601

Again, most of the mortality occurred in the 31- to 90- m depth zone.

3.1.1.1.5 Cobia

An estimated 518 cobia were assumed to have been killed in the western Gulf in 2017 in association with 

explosive platform removals and another 913 were estimated to have been killed in 2018:

2017 2018

Depth Zone 

(m) EastGOM WestGOM Total EastGOM WestGOM Total

10–17 - 171 171 57 628 685

18–30 - 156 156 - 13 13

31–90 - 189 189 24 189 213

91–300 - 1 1 - 1 1

Total - 518 518 81 832 913

In 2018, 628 of the total estimated 913 Cobia mortalities occurred in the 10- to 17- m deep zone in the 

western Gulf.

3.1.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year (2018)

In 2018, there were 1,171 standing platforms in the Gulf (Figure 13). If all of these had been explosively 

removed in 2018, we estimate that a total of 1,813,853 red snapper would have been killed having an 

estimated biomass of 8,595,496 lbs. (Table 14, Appendix Table 2.4). Tables 15-18 show the total 

numbers of vermilion snapper, greater amberjack, gray triggerfish and cobia that might have been killed 

had all the standing platforms in federal waters of the Gulf been explosively removed.

3.1.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 miles of Fishing Ports

Figure 13 shows that of the 1,171 standing offshore platforms remaining in 2018, 1,115 were located 

within a 100-mile radius of a major fishing port. Thus the vast majority of these platforms were within 

range of recreational fisheries. Had all the accessible platforms been explosively removed in 2018, a total 

of 1,755,160 red snapper having a biomass of 8,284,260 lbs. would have been lost to the directed red 
41

snapper fishery (Table 19, Appendix Table 2.5). Further, 1,680,701 vermilion snapper, 282,548 greater 

amberjack, 33,097 gray triggerfish and 33,872 cobia would have been lost (Table 20). These results 

suggest significant local effects on fisheries.

Figure 13. The location of the 1,171 standing platforms in the Gulf of Mexico in 2018. 

The red stars represent major fishing ports and the yellow polygon represents a 100-mile radius from each major 

port. A total of 1,115 platforms were located within 100-m of each port.

Table 14. Median abundance of red snapper by age on the 1,171 standing platforms present in 

federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico in 2018

(For detail, see Appendix Table 2.4)

Age Number Biomass

1 12,599 3,611

2 173,942 184,069

3 281,742 645,980

4 519,163 1,980,083

5 287,269 1,570,630

6 384,266 2,744,803

7 105,329 921,872
42

Age Number Biomass

8 32,640 333,885

9 11,833 136,698

11 1,690 23,218

12 1,690 24,709

13 1,690 25,938

1,813,853 8,595,496

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.

Table 15. Median abundance of vermilion snapper on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal 

waters of the Gulf of Mexico in 2018

Depth 

Zone (m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

10–17 2,010 13,446 15,457 

18–30 2,368 24,743 27,111 

31–90 284,007 1,413,022 1,697,029 

91–300 1,197 5,187 6,384 

Total 289,582 1,456,398 1,745,980 

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.

Table 16. Median abundance of greater amberjack on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal 

waters of the Gulf of Mexico in 2018

Depth 

Zone (m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

10–17 629 4,206 4,835 

18–30 640 6,693 7,333 

31–90 39,453 196,292 235,745 

91–300 12,317 53,373 65,690 

Total 53,039 260,564 313,603 

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.

Table 17. Median abundance of gray triggerfish on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal waters 

of the Gulf of Mexico in 2018

Depth 

Zone (m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

10–17 58 391 449 

18–30 257 2,686 2,943 

31–90 5,136 25,554 30,690 
43

Depth 

Zone (m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

91–300 44 192 236 

Total 5,496 28,822 34,318 

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.

Table 18. Median abundance of cobia on the 1,171 standing platforms in federal waters of the Gulf 

of Mexico in 2018

Depth Zone 

(m)

East 

GOM

West 

GOM Total

10–17 2,571 17,195 19,765 

18–30 260 2,721 2,981 

31–90 1,916 9,535 11,451 

91–300 29 124 152 

Total 4,776 29,574 34,350 

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.

Table 19. Median abundance of red snapper by age on the 1,115 standing platforms within 100 

miles of major fishing ports in 2018 

(For detail, see Appendix Table 2.5)

Age Number Biomass

1 12,599 3,611 

2 172,036 182,051 

3 274,388 629,119 

4 502,140 1,915,159 

5 276,238 1,510,320 

6 369,082 2,636,343 

7 101,107 884,923 

8 31,346 320,651 

9 11,356 131,192 

11 1,622 22,283 

12 1,622 23,713 

13 1,622 24,894 

Total 1,755,160 8,284,260 

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.
44

Table 20. Median abundance of other federally-managed species on the 1,115 standing platforms 

within 100 miles of a major fishing ports

Depth Zone 

(m)

Vermilion 

Snapper

Greater 

Amberjack

Gray 

Triggerfish Cobia

10–17 15,457 4,835 449 19,765

18–30 27,111 7,333 2,943 2,981

31–90 1,633,916 226,978 29,549 11,026

91–300 4,218 43,402 156 100

Total 1,680,701 282,548 33,097 33,872

Based on the model results above, all fish present would be assumed to be killed if all the platforms were explosively 

removed.
45

4 Assessment of Removal Impacts

Above we described the consequences of explosive platform removals on five federally-managed fish 

species that were documented to use these habitats. We addressed 1) the specific effects for the 2017 and 

2018 platform removals; 2) the effects of removing all the remaining platforms in a single year; and 3) the 

effects of removing all the remaining platforms within a 100-mile radius of the major fishing ports. These 

effects data have been provided to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for formal 

incorporation into upcoming stock assessments for each of the species in question. Three stock 

assessments have been initiated in 2019 (cobia, vermilion snapper, gray triggerfish) and a greater 

amberjack assessment is scheduled to be initiated in 2020. The date of the next red snapper assessment 

will follow in 2020 or 2021. For these assessments, NMFS will address the effects of platform removals 

and acknowledge the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) as the source of the data.

For the present, we base our assessment of the significance of the estimated impacts based upon the 

degree to which the platform-associated mortality increased fishing mortality rates and the consequences 

of these increases to the directed fisheries. Following the SEDAR stock assessments, we use exploitation 

rates (in our case, number killed/total age 2+ stock size) as a proxy for fishing mortality. We will be 

discussing the assessment on a State Management Area basis (see Figure 1 above). 

4.1 2017 and 2018 Platform Removal Mortality

The number of key species killed as a consequence of the specific 2017 and 2018 platform removals had 

minimal effects on exploitation rates, at least on a total stock size basis (Table 21). The maximum impact 

was observed for greater amberjack which had an exploitation rate of 0.007. However, the biological 

effects of the annual removals appeared to be of some consequence on a local basis as described below 

for red snapper which has the most comprehensive assessment information.

For background, the GMFMC and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries 

manages the red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf). NOAA Fisheries (2018) notes that fishery 

is first divided into commercial and recreational sectors. In 2018, the red snapper catch quota for both 

sectors combined was 13.74 million pounds whole weight. The recreational sector is allocated 49% of the 

total quota (6.73 mp) and the commercial sector is allocated 51% of the total quota (7.01 mp). The 

recreational quota is further split with 57.7% allocated to the private angling component and 42.3% to the 

for-hire component. An annual catch target is then set at 80% of the quota. This 20% buffer helps 

minimize the potential for a quota overage. 

NOAA (2019) provides the Allowable Catch Limit (ACL) for red snapper for the private recreational 

sector for each Gulf state in 2018 and 2019. The state ACL’s for 2018 were 1,778,515 lbs. for Florida; 

984,291 lbs. for Alabama; 137,949 lbs. for Mississippi; 743,000 lbs. for Louisiana; and 241,245 lbs. for 

Texas (Table 22). Given these ACLs, the total allowable catch for the Eastern Gulf (Florida, Alabama, 

Mississippi) was 2,900,755 lbs.; and for the western Gulf, allowable catch totaled 984,245 lbs. In 2018, 

platform removals in the Eastern Gulf region killed 16,323 lbs. (0.6 of the red snapper total ACL); 

whereas in the western Gulf, platform removals killed 135,862 lbs. of red snapper (13.8% of the western 

Gulf ACL). 
46

Table 21. Exploitation rates (number killed/total age 2+ stock size) associated with 2017 and 2018 

platform removals based on estimated mortalities and stock size from SEDAR stock assessments

1) Red Snapper East West

Total 

Removals

Exploitation 

Rate

2017 number killed 0 37,232 37,232 0.001

2018 number killed 3,339 28,936 32,275 0.004

2016 TOTAL 

STOCK1 13,094,871 23,143,192 36,738,063

2) Vermilion 

Snapper East West

Total 

Removals

Exploitation 

Rate

2017 number killed 0 29,662 29,662 0.001

2018 number killed 3,551 28,717 32,268 0.001

2014 TOTAL 

STOCK2 30,181,024

3) Greater 

Amberjack East West

Total 

Removals

Exploitation 

Rate

2017 number killed 0 4,909 4,909 0.007

2018 number killed 501 4,669 5,170 0.007

2015 TOTAL 

STOCK3 695,548

4) Gray Triggerfish East West

Total 

Removals

Exploitation 

Rate

2017 number killed 0 667 667 0.0002

2018 number killed 65 537 601 0.0002

2013 TOTAL 

STOCK4 2,822,749

5) Cobia East West

Total 

Removals

Exploitation 

Rate

2017 number killed 0 518 518 0.001

2018 number killed 81 832 913 0.002

2011 TOTAL 

STOCK5 423,955

 

1) SEDAR 52 3) SEDAR 33 5) SEDAR 28

2) SEDAR 45 4) SEDAR 43

Table 22. Allowable Catch Limit (ACL) for red snapper for each Gulf state in 2018, and comparative 

"takes" from platform removals

1) East Gulf

2018 ACL 

(lbs)

2018 Platform 

Take (lbs)

% of 

ACL

Florida 1,778,515 0 0.00%

Alabama 984,291 16,323 1.66%

Mississippi 137,949 0 0.00%

2,900,755 16323 0.56%

2) West Gulf

2018 ACL 

(lbs)

2018 Platform 

Take (lbs)

% of 

ACL
47

Louisiana 743,000 118,311 15.92%

Texas 241,245 17,551 7.28%

984,245 135,862 13.80%

3) Total Gulf 3,885,000 152,185 3.92%

For Louisiana, platform removal mortality was about 16% of the ACL allotted to the private recreational 

sector.

4.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year

Our approach for evaluating the significance of the effects of removal of all the remaining platforms in a 

single year was based on data for red snapper. Subadult and adult red snapper are targeted by both the 

recreational (Private Sector, Charter boats, and Headboats) and commercial sectors of the Gulf of Mexico 

fishery. The catch in each sector includes landed catch and fish that were discarded, both alive and dead. 

We characterized the take in each sector in 2016 (the most recent year for which data are available) in 

terms of number of red snapper, and compared these takes to the “take” that would have occurred if all 

the platforms and associated fish present in the Gulf in 2018 had been removed in 2016. This is the worst 

case scenario assuming that explosive severance was the only method used to decommission the structure 

(mechanical removal is also a common decommissioning method).

Recreational fisheries catch in numbers of fish were obtained from the SEDAR 52 stock assessment. 

Table 2.12 provided landings and Tables 2.14 and 2.15 provided numbers of discards. In the commercial 

fisheries, catch was reported in kg of fish landed (e.g., Table 2.5, SEDAR 52) and in numbers of fish 

discarded (SEDAR 2018, Table 2.7). The number of fish caught by the commercial sector was determined 

by multiplying the total catch (in kg) by the age frequencies of the landings (SEDAR 52 Table 2.6), then 

dividing the total kg for each age group by an estimate of weight at age. We used a model-derived weight 

at age (kg whole weight) for Gulf red snapper calculated within the SEDAR 52 stock assessment model at 

the mid-point of the calendar year (personal communication, Matthew Smith).

Under this scenario, the “platform fleet” dead discards would have accounted for about 18% of the total 

landings in 2016 (1,813,955 fish of the total 10,150,249 fish hypothetically landed, Table 23). However, 

in the western Gulf, platform takes were on the order of 35% of the total (1,533,233 red snapper divided 

by the 4,337,717 total take, Table 23). This represented an increase in the western Gulf exploitation rate 

from 0.119 to 0.183, an increase of the base rate by a factor of 1.54.

Table 23. Recreational and commercial fleet landings of red snapper (numbers) in 2016, the 

terminal year of the SEDAR 52 red snapper stock assessment

A. Landings East West Total

2016 Rec Landings 863,253 235,478 1,098,731

2016 Rec. Discards 3,267,883 545,671 3,813,554

2016 Comm Landings 1,278,813 1,985,921 3,264,734

2016 Comm Discards 121,861 37,414 159,275

5,531,810 2,804,484 8,336,294

2018 Platform Discards 280,622 1,533,233 1,813,955

5,812,432 4,337,717 10,150,249
48

2016 Stock Size 13,094,871 23,643,192 36,738,063

B) Exploitation rates (number age 2+ killed/total number age 2+ , a 

proxy for fishing mortality)

Without Platforms 0.422 0.119 0.227

With Platforms 0.444 0.183 0.276

In 2018 the “platform fleet” removals are also assumed to be representative of actual platform mortalities in recent 

years. 

The vast majority of the red snapper Gulf platform population occurs in the western as compared to the 

eastern Gulf, and the western Gulf totals are documented by the Louisiana platform populations (Table 

24). The eastern Gulf totals are dominated by Mississippi.

Table 24. Numbers and biomass of red snapper associated with offshore platforms in the eastern 

and western Gulf of Mexico

East Number Biomass

Alabama 50,962 254,810

Mississippi 229,660 1,123,493

East Total 280,622 1,378,303

West Number Biomass

Texas 176,198 843,682

Louisiana 1,357,035 6,373,511

West Total 1,533,233 7,217,193

Total 1,813,855 8,595,497

The Florida shelf is characterized by a diversity of hard-substrate, natural habitat on its shelf but there are 

no offshore platform habitats. The natural habitats offshore Florida, especially in the Florida panhandle 

and the shelf north of the Tampa Bay area, hold large numbers of red snapper and many of these are lost 

as dead discards during closed seasons (Goethel and Smith 2018). The Alabama shelf has a high density 

of artificial reefs, as well as natural reefs (Karnauskas et al. 2017). Hard substrate within the small 

Mississippi State Management Area and the large Louisiana Management Areas is dominated by 

petroleum platform habitat and has relatively few natural reefs. Texas is characterized by a variety of 

natural and artificial reef habitats (Karnauskas et al. 2017).

We suggest that, at least for red snapper, petroleum platform habitats located over soft bottom habitats on 

the Louisiana and Mississippi shelves have served to increase productivity as opposed to simply 

aggregate fish. Carr and Hixon (1997) observed that artificial reefs could increase production under 

several scenarios. They observed if there were no natural reefs in a management area, then the addition of 

artificial reefs would enhance production of obligate reef species within the management area. We 

suggest that red snapper between age 2 and 7–10 years of age are essentially obligate reef species because 

of their demonstrated affinity for high-relief vertical structure (Gallaway et al. 2009 and many others). red 

snapper recruit to high-relief vertical structure as age-2 fish in late summer and fall. Before this age 

juveniles aggregate on low-relief habitats (shell, gravel, etc.). Natural high-relief habitat occurs as rock 

outcrops and ledges, and coral reefs. Figure 14 shows a major portion of the Louisiana Management area 

showing platforms, the distribution of soft sediments (mud and sand), gravel-sized substrate (an index to 
49

age 0–1 juvenile rearing habitat) and rock substrates (an index of natural high-relief habitat for age 2- to 

10- yr. old fish). Our study sites are displayed as numbered green stars. All presently existing platforms 

are also shown. Substrate type and distribution are from the usSEABED database (Buczkowski et al. 

2006).

Each of the 312 platforms within this polygon, on average, were populated by 1,220 age 2+ red snapper. 

The average weight of these fish was 2.02 kg. Thus a total of 768,893 kg (1,695,116 lbs.) of red snapper

were present in this area that would otherwise not have been present in the absence of any platforms. 

There were no natural adult habitat areas within our soft bottom polygon or within 6 to 8 km of the 

polygon border. We suggest the red snapper in this area represent production that would not have 

occurred in the absence of platforms. The Louisiana total recreational harvest of red snapper in 2016 was 

estimated to have been 1,103,723 lbs. (Ava Lasseter, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, pers. 

comm.) which is about the same as the biomass of red snapper within our polygon.

This report is focused on five, selected federally-managed species. At sites located in the 31- to 90- m 

depth zones these species accounted for 42.6% of the total mortalities. The other 57.4% of the mortalities 

would be expected to be documented by species such as blue runner, Atlantic bumper, jacks and 

leatherjack. In contrast, the five federally-managed species constituted less than 10% of the total fish 

present in all other depth zones. All the two shallow sites, the Atlantic bumper was the dominant species 

along with blue runner. At the deep sites, jacks and Bermuda chub were among the dominants. 

4.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 Miles of Fishing Ports

As shown above, 95% (1115 of 1,171) of the offshore platforms remaining in 2018 were within a 100-

mile radius of a major fishing port. Ultimately, the loss of these habitats will affect local directed reef fish 

fisheries, especially those in the Louisiana and Mississippi State Management areas. For example, hard 

substrate habitat within the Louisiana Management Area (not including pipelines and pipeline crossings) 

consists of 866 offshore platforms (platforms plus 161 caissons and 4 well protectors), 372 toppled oil 

platforms and bases located in 91 permitted artificial reef areas and, based on analysis of existing natural 

bank topography data, 448 km2 of natural bank habitat. Though large in area, the natural banks consist of 

only 13 discrete or named banks, mostly located well offshore at the shelf edge. On a numerical basis, 

offshore platforms (including caissons and well protectors) thus constitute about 72% of the known, 

discrete reef habitats (1031 of 1363 sites). The loss of 72% of the known sites in the Louisiana 

Management Area would likely have significant impacts on the local fisheries. The same is likely true for 

Mississippi; Texas and Alabama fisheries would be less impacted.

However, there may be more natural reef habitat offshore Louisiana than has been characterized. The 

rock areas shown in Figure 15 generally correspond to natural banks and suggest that only a dozen or 

more sites may be present (Buczkowski et al. 2006). The soft bottom areas of the region constitute prime

penaeid shrimp habitat, and the region is heavily trawled out to the 100 m depth contour. Areas of limited

trawling (≤25 total 10-min tow intervals over the 13-yr. period of record mapped) result from prevalent 

hypoxia, offshore oil and gas structures, natural banks, artificial reefs and known obstructions (e.g. 

LOOP) (Figure 16). This leaves other areas, however, where it is unknown why no shrimping occurs. 

These areas may represent bottom obstructions constituting red snapper and other reef fish habitat. There 

may be more reef habitat in western Louisiana (and other areas of the Gulf) than is currently recognized.
50

Figure 14. Distribution of platforms, and substrate types, in a selected area offshore western 

Louisiana. 

The polygon depicts a large area of soft substrate.
51

Figure 15. Rock and gravel bottom substrate distribution on the Louisiana Shelf corresponding to 

Region 2 of the Sea Grant Red Snapper abundance study.
52

Figure 16. Distribution of limited shrimp trawling effort.
53

5 Summary and Conclusions

An Acoustic model-based approach combined with measurements of the relative abundance and 

distribution of commercially and/or recreationally valuable, federally-managed fish species was used to 

estimate the mortality of managed fish species due to the explosive severance of the offshore platforms.

5.1 The Model

The UnderWater Calculator version 1 (UWC), was the underwater acoustic shock propagation model 

used for this study.

User input to the UWC includes detonation charge specifications (explosive type and weight), pile 

specifications (diameter and wall thickness), source (charge) depth, and receiver (e.g., fish) depth. In 

addition, the UWC offers three bottom boundary conditions to be specified by the user: water (free 

space), soft clay, and stiff clay. The UWC fixes the explosive coupling efficiency for these bottom types 

at 43.51%, 37.90%, and 34.37% respectively. The UWC includes four built-in types of explosive material 

(TNT, pentaerythritol tetranitrate, H6, and C-4) and allows user-defined Swisdak Similitude Coefficients 

for a fifth type. The explosive material utilized for platform removals during the hydroacoustic 

measurements of this report was Composition B (Comp-B).

We analyze the explosive severance of four types of pipes: piles, conductors, skirt piles, and caissons. We 

treated all pipe types the same except for the 11 sites that had conductors with internal concentric pipes. 

These were treated as a special case. In this study, the range of received peak sound pressure level 

(SPLpeak) of 229-234 dB re 1μPa was adopted as the acoustic threshold for mortal and potential mortal 

injury to fish (Popper et al. 2015). For each pipe explosion, the inverse calculation was performed twice: 

once to calculate a narrow range of mortal injury using the most conservative model input values and a 

second time to determine a wider range of potential mortal injury using the least conservative values. The 

range of each randomly placed fish to each explosion was calculated and the count of lethal exposures 

tallied. Minimum and maximum exposure levels, as well as the total number of exposures (most sites 

involved multiple explosions), were recorded for any fish located farther than the defined lethal range 

based on the UWC forward calculation.

5.2 Estimation of Effects

Effects were based upon three scenarios; 1) the actual removals that occurred in 2017 and 2018 (the years 

of our study); 2) the removal of all the remaining structures in federal waters in a single year (2018); and 

3) the removal of all platforms within 100 miles of major ports. A major finding of our study is that very 

few fish survive explosive removals.

5.2.1 2017 and 2018 Removals

The explosive removal of 24 platforms in 2017 and 23 platforms in 2018 likely resulted in the following 

mortalities of selected species:

• Red snapper: 69,505 fish (37,232 in 2017 and 32,275 in 2018)

• Vermilion snapper: 61,930 fish (29,662 in 2017 and 32,268 in 2018)

• Greater amberjack: 10,079 fish (4,909 in 2017 and 5,170 in 2018)

• Gray triggerfish: 1,268 fish (667 in 2017 and 601 in 2018)

• Cobia: 1,431 fish (518 in 2017 and 913 in 2018)
54

These annual mortalities typically constituted a small fraction of the total stock. Both red and vermilion

snapper have stocks that exceed 30 million age 2+ fish; the gray triggerfish stock numbers approximately 

3 million fish; the greater amberjack stock is estimated to contain about 700,000 fish; and the cobia stock 

contains an estimated 424,000 fish.

5.2.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year (2018)

If all the remaining platforms had been removed in 2018 using the explosive severance method, the 

following mortalities would have been expected:

• Red snapper: 1,813,855 killed, (4.9% of total stock)

• Vermilion snapper: 1,745,980 killed (5.8% of total stock)

• Greater amberjack: 313,603 killed (45.1% of total stock)

• Gray triggerfish: 34,313 killed (1.2% of total stock)

• Cobia: 34,500 killed (8.1% of total stock)

Of these, greater amberjack losses appear problematic, but the stock size for Greater Amberjack is 

suspect.

5.2.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 miles of Fishing Ports

As the vast majority of the offshore platforms are located within 100 miles of a major port, the results are 

similar to the effects associated with removing all the platforms in a single year using the explosive 

severance method.

• Red snapper: 1,755,161 killed

• Vermilion snapper: 1,680,701 killed

• Greater amberjack: 282,548 killed

• Gray triggerfish: 33,097 killed

• Cobia: 33,872 killed

Again, greater amberjack effects appear problematic.

5.3 Assessment of Effects

5.3.1 2017 and 2018 Platform Removal

As shown below, annual removals reflect low exploitation rates on a stock-wide basis:

Species Year

Exploitation 

Rate

Red snapper 2017 0.001

2018 0.004

Vermilion snapper 2017 0.001

2018 0.001

Greater amberjack 2017 0.007

2018 0.007

Gray triggerfish 2017 0.0002

2018 0.0002
55

Species Year

Exploitation 

Rate

Cobia 2017 0.001

2018 0.002

However, on a state and biomass basis, these same removals may represent as much as 16% of the red 

snapper Allowable Catch Limits for the Private Recreational Sector. In 2018, platform mortalities 

represented the following percentages of the respective ACLs:

East Gulf

% 

ACL

Florida 0.00

Alabama 1.66

Mississippi 0

West Gulf (2018)

Louisiana 15.92

Texas 7.28

If the Louisiana platform removal losses were subtracted from the private recreational sector ACL, fewer 

fish would be available and the allowable take would be reached sooner thereby shortening the season.

5.3.2 Removal of all Platforms in a Single Year

If all the remaining platforms were removed using only the explosive severance method in a single year 

(e.g., 2018), the platform removals would be equivalent to ~18% of the comparable total red snapper

landings, Gulfwide. However, our assessment based on the SEDAR 52 stock size and the 2018 platform 

removals suggested red snapper losses in the Western Gulf would be on the order of 35% of the total 

landings if all the platforms were removed. Platform red snapper populations are especially important to 

the Louisiana and Mississippi Management Areas and may have increased red snapper productivity in 

these areas.

5.3.3 Removal of all Platforms within 100 miles of Fishing Ports

Most of the existing platforms are within a 100-mile range of a major fishing port. Loss of these platforms 

would likely have significant adverse impacts on local fisheries. In Louisiana, platforms may represent on 

the order of 72% of the accessible fishing sites.

5.4 Conclusions

An array of recreationally and commercially valuable, federally-managed reef fish species aggregate to 

varying degrees around offshore oil and gas platforms. On a Gulf-wide basis, these aggregations typically 

represent small fractions of the overall stocks. However, there appears to be at least one potential 

exception. On the order of 48% of the greater amberjack stock is associated with offshore oil and gas 

platforms, mainly platforms offshore Western Louisiana. Few, if any, fish that aggregate around 

platforms survive explosive platform removal.
56

Platform removals are likely having, and will likely have, significant adverse impacts on local fisheries, 

especially those offshore Louisiana and Mississippi. In these specific areas, a case can be made that 

platforms serve to increase reef fish productivity as opposed to merely aggregating the fish due to the 

apparent absence of other suitable habitats. However, evidence is presented that there may be more reef 

habitat in these areas than is currently recognized.
57

References

Allman RJ, Fitzhugh GR, Starzinger KJ, Farsky RA. 2005. Precision of age estimation in red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus). Fish Res. 73 (2005):123-133. 

Anderson RO, RM Neumann. 1996. Length, weight, and associated structural indices. In: Murphy BR, 

Willis DW, editors. Fisheries techniques, 2nd ed. Bathesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 

447–482.

Adkins, G. 1993. A comprehensive assessment of bycatch in the Louisiana shrimp fishery. Baton Rouge 

(LA): Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Marine Fisheries Division. Technical Bulletin 

Number 42.

Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, et al. 2008. Generalized linear mixed 

models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol. 24(3):127-135.

Brown SJ. 1986. Pressure systems energy release protection (gas pressurized systems). Hampton (VA): 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 434 p. NASA Contractor Report 178090. 

Buczkowski BJ, Reid JA, Jenkins CJ, Reid JM, Williams SJ, et al. 2006. usSEABED: Gulf of Mexico and 

Caribbean (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) offshore surficial sediment data release: data series 

146, version 1.0. Reston (VA): US Geological Survey. 50 p. [accessed 2014 February]

http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2006/146/.

Campana SE. 2001. Accuracy, precision and quality control in age determination, including a review of 

the use and abuse of age validation methods. J Fish Biol. 59:197-242.

Carr HH, Hixson MA. 1997. Artificial reefs’ the importance of comparisons with natural reefs. Fisheries.

22 (4): 28-33.

Chesney EJ, Baltz DM, Thomas RG. 2000. Louisiana estuarine and coastal fisheries and habitats: 

perspectives from a fish’s eye view. Ecol Appl. 10(2):350-366.

Conrad AS, Kim KH, Gallaway BJ. 2019. Explosive removal of structures: acoustic model application. 

College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. 47 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005.

Dahl PH. 2016. Center for Independent Experts (CIE) independent peer review report of underwater 

calculator for shocks, or UWCv2 (Vers. 2.0). Seattle (WA): Center for Independent Experts. 30 pp. 

Dzwilewski PT, Fenton G (Applied Research Associates, Inc., Littleton, CO). 2003. Shock wave/sound 

propagation modeling results for calculating marine protected species impact zones during explosive 

removal of offshore structures. New Orleans (LA): Department of the Interior, Minerals Management 

Service. 39 p. Contract No.: 0302P057572. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2003-059.

Edwards AW. 1992. Likelihood, expanded edition. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Press. 246 

p.
58

Everett AC, Szedlmeyer ST, Gallaway BJ. Fine scale movement patterns of red snapper (lutjanus 

campechanus) based on acoustic telemetry around oil and gas platforms in the Northern Gulf of 

Mexico. Bryan (TX): LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc.

Gallaway BJ (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Bryan, TX). 1981. An ecosystem analysis of oil and 

gas development on the Texas-Louisiana continental shelf. Washington (DC): US Department of the 

Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. 89 p. Contract No.: 14-16-0009-80-

058. Report No.: FWS/OBS-81/27. 

Gallaway, B.J. and G.S. Lewbel. 1982. The ecology of petroleum platforms in the northwestern Gulf of 

Mexico: a community profile. Slidell (LA); New Orleans (LA): US Fish and Wildlife Service; Bureau 

of Land Management, Minerals Management Service. 92 p. FWS/OBS-82/27. Open-File Report 82-

03. 

Gallaway BJ, Szedlmayer ST, Gazey WJ. 2009. A life history review for red snapper in the Gulf of 

Mexico with an evaluation of the importance of offshore petroleum platforms and other artificial 

reefs. Rev Fish Sci. 17(1):48-67.

Gazey W Staley MJ.1986. Population estimation from mark-recapture experiments using a sequential 

bayes algorithm. Ecology. 67(4): 941-951. doi:10.2307/1939816.

Gitschlag GR, Schirripa MJ, Powers JE (National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami FL). 2000. Estimation 

of fisheries impacts due to underwater explosives used to sever and salvage oil and gas platforms in 

the U.S. Gulf of Mexico: final report. New Orleans (LA): US Deptartment of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. 96 p. Interagency Agreement 17912. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2000-087. 

Goodman LA. 1960. On the exact variance of products. J Am Stat Assoc. 55:708-713.

Goethel DR, Smith MW. 2018. The impact of a reduction in shrimp effort thresholds on SEDAR 52 Gulf 

of Mexico red snapper catch limit provisions. Biscayne (FL): NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center. 10 p. http://gulfcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/D-4b-SEFSC-report-on-bycatch-reductionthresholds-for-the-shrimp-fishery.pdf

Grimes CB, Manooch CS, Huntsman GR. 1982. Reef and rock outcropping fishes of the Outer 

Continental Shelf of North Carolina and South Carolina, and ecological notes on the red porgy and 

vermilion snapper. Bull Mar Sci. 32(1):277-289.

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2015. Species listed in the fishery management plans of 

the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. Revised 7/21/15. 8 p. 

http://gulfcouncil.org/Beta/GMFMCWeb/downloads/species%20managed.pdf

Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council (Tampa, FL). 2019. State management program for 

recreational red snapper final draft amendment 50a to the fishery management plan for the reef fish 

resources of the Gulf of Mexico including programmatic environmental impact assessment. 

3/13/2019. St. Petersburg (FL): National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine 

Fisheries Service Southeast Regional Office. 251 p. NOAA Award No.: NA15NMF441011. 

http://gulfcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/B-6a-State-Management-Program-for-Red-Snapper-FinalDraft-3-13-2019.pdf
59

Gunter G. 1936. Studies of the destruction of marine fish by shrimp trawlers in Louisiana. Louisiana 

Conserv Rev. 5(4):18–24, 45–46.

Kaplan EL, Meier P. 1958. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc.

53(282):457-481.

Karnauskas M, Walter III JF, Campbell MD, Pollack AG, Drymon JM, et al. 2017. Red snapper 

distribution on natural habitats and artificial structures in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast 

Fish. 9(1): 50-67.

Kaye SM. 1983. Encyclopedia of explosives and related items PATR 2700, Volume 10. Pitcantinny (NJ): 

US Army Research and Development Command (ARDEC). 786 p.

Koenig CC, Stalling CD. 2015. A new compact rotating video system for rapid survey of reef fish 

populations. Bull Mar Sci. 91(3):365-373.

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX). 2017a. Explosive removal of structures: 

fisheries impact assessment. Assemblage characterization synthesis report. Final report to Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management, New Orleans, LA. 112 p.

http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.15319.91043

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX). 2017b. Field season 1 sampling report. 

Report to Bureau of Oceanic Energy Management. College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research 

Associates, Inc. 33 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35872.00001

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX). 2017c. Field season 2 sampling report. 

Report to Bureau of Oceanic Energy Management. College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research 

Associates, Inc. 87 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25805.67049

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX) 2018. Field season 3 sampling report. 

Report to Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research 

Associates, Inc. 51 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14900.48000

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX). 2019. Characterization of fish assemblages 

sssociated with oil and gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. Report to Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management. College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. 68 p. Contract No.: 

M16PC00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.28322.25282

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (LGL), Auburn University (AU) and Marine Science 

Institute University of Texas (UT). 2018a. Field season 2 assemblage characterization report. Report 

to Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research 

Associates, Inc. 68 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16578.20160

LGL (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (LGL), Auburn University (AU) and Marine Science 

Institute University of Texas (UT). 2018b. Field season 3 assemblage characterization report. Report 

to Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. College Station (TX): LGL Ecological Research

Associates, Inc. 60 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.23289.08806
60

McKinzie MK, Jarvis ET, Lowe CG. 2014. Fine-scale horizontal and vertical movement of barred sea 

bass, Paralabrax nebulifer, during spawning and non-spawning seasons. Fish Res. 150:66-75. 

doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2013.10.016.

Morison AK, Robertson SG, Smith DC. 1998. An integrated system for production fish aging: Image 

analysis and quality assurance. N Am J Fish Manage. 18, 587-598.

NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization]. 2010. Manual of NATO safety principles for the storage of 

military ammunition and explosives. Allied Ammunition Storage and Transport Publication AASTP1, edition 1. Corrected version. Brussels (BE): NATO Headquarters. 588 p.

[NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries. 2018. NOAA announces the 2018 

Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper recreational seasons and clarifies permit regulations for vessels 

fishing in federal waters. FB18-026 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Bulletin. St Petersburg (FL): NOAA 

Fisheries Southeast Regional Office. [accessed 2020 Mar 23].

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/bulletin/noaa-announces-2018-gulf-mexico-red-snapperrecreational-seasons-and-clarifies-permit

[NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries. 2019. State recreational red 

snapper management exempted fishing permits. St Petersburg (FL): NOAA Fisheries Southeast 

Regional Office; [updated 2020 Feb 5; accessed 2020 Mar 23].

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/southeast/state-recreational-red-snapper-management-exemptedfishing-permits.

Piraino MN, Szedlmayer ST. 2014. Fine-scale movements and home ranges of Red snapper Lutjanus 

campechanus around artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 143:988-

998.

Popper AN, Hawkins AD, Fay RR, Mann DA, Bartol TJ, et al. 2014. ASA S3/SC1.4 TR-2014 Sound 

exposure guidelines for fishes and sea turtles. Springer Briefs in Oceanography. Melville (NY): 

Acoustical Society of America. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-06659-2_1. 73 p.

Reeves DB. 2015. Oil and gas platforms on Ship Shoal, Northern Gulf of Mexico as habitat for reefassociated organisms [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University. 73 p. 

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/018d/37d53b8603f1ce72ea6d0acc6f39e5a0da4d.pdf

Reeves DB, Chesney EJ, Munnelly RT, Baltz DM, Marx BD. 2019. Abundance and distribution of reefassociated fishes around small oil and gas platforms in the Northern Gulf of Mexico’s hypoxic zone. 

Estuar Coast. 41(2018):1835-1847.

SAS Institute, Inc. 2016. SAS Online Doc,Version SAS 9.4 TS Level 1M5. Cary (NC): SAS Institute. 

Schroepfer RL, Szedlmayer ST. 2006. Estimates of residence and site fidelity for red snapper Lutjanus 

campechanus on artificial reefs in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 78(1):93-101.

Sedberry GR, Cuellar N. 1993 Planktonic and benthic feeding by the reef-associated vermilion snapper, 

Rhomblites aurorubens (Teleostei, Lutjanidae). Fish Bull. 91: 699-709p.

[SEDAR] SouthEast Data, Assessment, and Review. 2003. SEDAR 3 assessment report 1: complete stock 

assessment report of yellowtail snapper in the southeastern United States. North Charleston (SC): 
61

SEDAR. 330 p. [accessed 2020 Mar 24]; 

http://sedarweb.org/docs/sar/SEDAR3_SAR1YTS_Final.pdf

[SEDAR] SouthEast Data, Assessment, and Review. 2016. SEDAR 33 stock assessment update report 

Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack (Seriola dumerlili). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 148 p. 

[accessed 2020 Mar 24]; http://sedarweb.org/docs/suar/GAJ_S33_2016%20Update_Final.pdf.

[SEDAR] SouthEast Data, Assessment, and Review. 2018. SEDAR 52 stock assessment report Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper stock assessment report. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR; [updated 9 May 2018; 

accessed 2020 Mar 24]; https://sedarweb.org/docs/sar/S52_Final_SAR_v2.pdf, South Carolina: 434p.

Seavy NE, Quader S, Alexander JD, Ralph CJ. 2005. Generalized linear models and point count data: 

statistical considerations for design and analysis of monitoring studies. In: Ralph CJ, Rich TD, 

editors. Bird Conservation Implementation and Integration in the Americas: Proceedings of the Third 

International Partnership in Flight Conference. 2002 March 20–24; Asilomar, CA. Vol. 2. Albany 

(CA): USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. Report No.: Gen. Tech. Rep. PSWGTR-191. p. 744–753.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. Wilson. 2003. Seasonal and spatial variation in the biomass and size frequency 

distribution of fish associated with oil and gas platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico. In: Stanley 

DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. Fisheries, Feefs, and Offshore Development: American Fisheries 

Society Symposium 36. Proceedings of the Gulf of Mexico Fish and Fisheries Meeting; 24–26 

October 2003; New Orleans, LA. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 123–153. 

Topping DT, Szedlmayer ST. 2011. Home range and movement patterns of red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) on artificial reefs. Fish Res. 112:77-84. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2011.08.013.

Topping DT, Szedlmayer ST. 2013. Use of ultrasonic telemetry to estimate natural and fishing mortality 

of red snapper. Trans Am Fish Soc. 142:1090-1100. doi:10.1080/00028487.2013.790844.

Venables WN, Ripley BD. 2002. Random and mixed effects. In: Venables WN, Ripley BD, editors. 

Modern applied statistics with S. New York (NY): Springer Science+Business Media. p. 271–300.

Venables WN, Dichmont CM. 2004. GLMs, GAMs and GLMMs: an overview of theory for applications 

in fisheries research. Fish Res. 70:319-337. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2004.08.011.

Versar, Inc. 2008. Literature search and data synthesis of biological information for use in management 

decisions concerning decommissioning of offshore oil and gas structures in the Gulf of Mexico

(draft). Herndon (VA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. Contract No.:

1435-01-05-39082. 129 p. [accessed 2020 Mar 24] http://sedarweb.org/docs/wsupp/SEDAR31-

RD43-%20VERSAR%20Oil%20and%20Gas%20Platform%20Biological%20Assessment.pdf

White GC. 2014. Introduction to Program Mark. Werner College of Natural Resources, Colorado State 

University. http://www.phidot.org/software/mark/docs/book/

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2015. Red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, mortality, movements, 

and habitat use based on advanced telemetry methods [dissertation]. Auburn (AL): Auburn 

University.
62

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2016a. Acoustic positioning and movement patterns of red snapper, 

Lutjanus campechanus, around artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Ecol Pro Ser.

553:223-251. doi:10.3354/meps11778.

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2016b. Mortality estimates of red snapper based on ultrasonic 

telemetry in the northern Gulf of Mexico. N Am J Fish Manage. 36(5):1036-1044. 

doi:10.1080/02755947.2016.1184197.

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2017. Depth preferences and three-dimensional movements of red 

snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, on an artificial reef in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res. 

190:61-70. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2017.01.003.
63

Appendix 1. Version 6 of the Endnote TM Database
64

Abbott JK (Arizona State University, Tucson, AZ). 2016. Effects of the two-year exempted fishing permit 

for the Gulf of Mexico headboat collaborative. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR [Southeast Data, 

Assessment, & Review]. 82 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-RD-08.

Abbott JK, Willard D. 2017. Rights-based management for recreational for-hire fisheries: evidence from a 

policy trial. Fish Res. 196:106-116.

Abelson A, Shlesinger Y. 2002. Comparison of the development of coral and fish communities on rockaggregated artificial reefs in Eilat, Red Sea. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S122-S126.

Adams MS, Sagarese SR, Rios AB. 2016. Gulf of Mexico data-limited species life history compilation. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 36 p. Report No.: SEDAR49-DW-05.

Addis DT, Patterson WF III, Dance MA. 2007. Site fidelity and movement of reef fishes tagged at 

unreported artificial reef sites off NW Florida. In: Proceedings of the 60th Gulf and Caribbean 

Fisheries Institute. Punta Cana, Dominican Republic; November 5–9. 2007. Marathon (FL): Gulf 

and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. p. 297-304.

Addis DT, Patterson WF III, Dance MA. 2016. The potential for unreported artificial reefs to serve as 

refuges from fishing mortality for reef fishes. N Am J Fish Manage. 36(1):131-139.

Adriance JW, Sweda MT (Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Department, New Orleans and Grand Isle, 

LA). 2012. Spatial distribution and occurrence of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, sampled 

off the Louisiana coast during nearshore trawl sampling efforts. Tampa (FL): SEDAR. 11 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-WP-03.

Agassiz A. 1888. Three cruises of the United States coast and geodetic survey steamer “Blake” in the 

Gulf of Mexico, in the Caribbean Sea, and along the Atlantic coast of the United States, from 

1877 to 1880. 2 volumes. Bull Mus Comp Zool Harv. (14 and 15):314 p. and 220 p.

Aglen A (Bergen, NO). 1989. Empirical results on precision-effort relationships for acoustic surveys. 

[Working paper.] CM 1989/B:30. Copenhagen (DK): International Council of Exploration of the 

Sea. 28 p. Report No.: C.M.1989/B:30. [accessed 2020 14 April]. 

http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/CM%20Doccuments/1989/B/1989_B30.pdf

Ainslie MA. 2016. Center for Independent Experts (CIE) independent peer review report of the 

Underwater Calculator and associated documentation. [accessed 2020 April 14]. 

https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/Quality-Assurance/documents/peer-reviewreports/2016/2016_09_01%20Ainslie%20UWC%20review%20report.pdf

Ajemian MJ, Wetz JJ, Shipley-Lozano B, Shively JD, Stunz GW. 2015. An analysis of artificial reef fish 

community structure along the northwestern Gulf of Mexico shelf: potential impacts of “rigs-toreefs” programs. PLoS One. 10(5):e0126354.

Ajemian MJ, Wetz JJ, Shipley-Lozano B, Stunz GW. 2015. Rapid assessment of fish communities on 

submerged oil and gas platform reefs using remotely operated vehicles. Fish Res. 167:143-155.

Albins MA, Hixon MA. 2008. Invasive Indo-Pacific lionfish Pterois volitans reduce recruitment of 

Atlantic coral-reef fishes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 367:233-238.
65

Alexander C, McKinney J. 2016. Assessment of fish assemblages on northern Gulf of Mexico manmade 

structures. New Orleans (LA): Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. 11 p. Louisiana 

State Wildlife Grant T-91-R.

Allison PD. 1995. Survival analysis using the SAS® system: a practical guide. Cary (NC): SAS Institute.

Allman R, Barnett B, Trowbridge H, Goetz L, Evou N (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2012. Red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) otolith 

ageing summary for collection years 2009-2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 26 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR31-DW05.

Allman R, Trowbridge H, Barnett B (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2013. Greater amberjack (Seriola dumerili) otolith ageing summary 

for Panama City laboratory (2009-2012). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR33-DW21.

Allman RJ. 2007. Small-scale spatial variation in the population structure of vermilion snapper 

(Rhomboplites aurorubens) from the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res. 88(1-3):88-99.

Allman RJ, Fioramonti CL, Patterson WF III, Pacicco AE. 2015. Validation of annual growth zone 

formation in gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) dorsal spines, fin rays, and vertebrae. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP01.

Allman RJ, Fitzhugh GR, Starzinger KJ, Farsky RA. 2005. Precision of age estimation in red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus). Fish Res. 73(1):123-133.

Allman RJ, Goetz LA. 2009. Regional variation in the population structure of gray snapper, Lutjanus 

griseus, along the west Florida shelf. Bull Mar Sci. 84(3):315-330.

Allman RJ, Grimes CB. 2002. Temporal and spatial dynamics of spawning, settlement, and growth of 

gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) from the west Florida shelf as determined from otolith 

microstructures. Fish Bull. 100:391-403.

Allman RJ, Tunnell JA, Barnett BK. 2005. Draft: vermilion snapper otolith aging: 2001-2004 data 

summary. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report No.: SEDAR9-DW2.

Andaloro F, Castriota L, Ferraro M, Romeo T, Sara G, et al. 2011. Evaluating fish assemblages associated 

with gas platforms: evidence from a visual census technique and experimental fishing surveys. 

Cien Mar. 37(1):1-9.

Andaloro F, Ferraro M, Mostarda E, Romeo T, Consoli P. 2013. Assessing the suitability of a remotely 

operated vehicle (ROV) to study the fish community associated with offshore gas platforms in the 

Ionian Sea: a comparative analysis with underwater visual censuses (UVCs). Helgol Mar Res. 

67:241-250.

Anderson RO, Neumann RM. 1996. Length, weight, and assocatied structural indices. In: Murphy BR, 

Willis DW, editors. Fisheries techniques, 2nd ed. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 

447-482.

Anthony KM. 2009. Translocation, homing behavior and habitat utilization of oil platform-associated 

groundfishes in the east Santa Barbara Channel, California [thesis]. Long Beach (CA): California 

State University.
66

Anthony KM, Love MS, Lowe CG. 2012. Translocation, homing behavior and habitat use of 

groundfishes associated with oil platforms in the East Santa Barbara Channel, California. Bull S 

Calif Acad Sci. 111(2):1-27.

Antoine JW. 1972. Structure of the Gulf of Mexico. In: Rezak R, Henry VJ, editors. Contributions on the 

geological and geophysical oceanography of the Gulf of Mexico. Texas A&M University 

Oceanographic Studies. Volume 3. Houston (TX): Gulf Publishing. p. 1–34.

Antoni L, Emerick N, Saillant E. 2011. Genetic variation of gray triggerfish in U.S. waters of the Gulf of 

Mexico and western Atlantic Ocean as inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. N Am J Fish 

Manage. 31(4):714-721.

Arena PT, Jordan LKB, Spieler RE. 2007. Fish assemblages on sunken vessels and natural reefs in 

southeast Florida, USA. Hydrobiologia. 580:157-171.

Bacheler NM, Bartolino V, Reichert MJM. 2013. Influence of soak time and fish accumulation on catches 

of reef fishes in a multispecies trap survey. Fish Bull. 111(3):218-232.

Bacheler NM, Berrane DJ, Mitchell WA, Schobernd CM, Schobernd ZH, et al. 2014. Environmental 

conditions and habitat characteristics influence trap and video detection probabilities for reef fish 

species. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 517:1-14.

Bacheler NM, Schobernd CM, Schobernd ZH, Mitchell WA, Berrane DJ, et al. 2013. Comparison of trap 

and underwater video gears for indexing reef fish presence and abundance in the southeast United 

States. Fish Res. 143:81-88.

Bacheler NM, Shertzer KW. 2014. Estimating relative abundance and species richness from video 

surveys of reef fishes. Fish Bull. 113(1):15-26.

Badalamenti F, Chemello R, D'Anna G, Henriquez Ramos P, Riggio S. 2002. Are artificial reefs 

comparable to neighbouring natural rocky areas? A mollusc case study in the Gulf of 

Castellammare (NW Sicily). ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S127-S131.

Baertlein N, McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2012. Commercial vertical line vessel standardized catch rates of cobia in the US Gulf of 

Mexico, 1993-2010. [Revised 1 March 2012.] North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR28-DW16.

Baine M. 2002. The North Sea rigs-to-reefs debate. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S277-S280.

Balk H, Lindem T. 2006. Sonar 4, Sonar 5, Sonar 6 e post-processing systems. Operator manual. Oslo 

(NO): Lindem Data Acquisition.

Barbieri LR, Colvocoresses JA (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Florida Marine 

Research Institute, Tallahassee, FL). 2016. Southeast Florida reef fish abundance and biology. 

Five year performance report to the US Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. 121 

p. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: F0628-2221-97-02-F and SEDAR51-RD-20. 

Grant No.: F-73.
67

Barile PJ (Marine Research & Consulting, Inc.). 2013. Analysis of annual monthly and weekly king 

mackerel landings in the southeast Florida winter “mixing zone:” evidence for stock migrations 

and a resident population along the east coast of Florida. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 12 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR38-DW-08. 

Barile PJ (Marine Research & Consulting, Inc.). 2013. Analysis of environmental factors affecting king 

mackerel landings along the east coast of Florida. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 14 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR38-DW-07. 

Barile PJ (Marine Research & Consulting, Inc.). 2014. NMFS‐Trip Intercept Program (TIP) data indicates 

significant Atlantic King Mackerel recruitment of new age classes into the East Florida 

commercial handline fishery in April 2014. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 5 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR38-RW-07.

Barile PJ (Marine Research & Consulting, Inc.). 2014. The NMFS-SEFSC must account for climate 

change and inter-annual environmental variability in all South Atlantic stock assessments. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 14 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-AW-03. 

Barkaszi MJ, Frankel A, Martin JS, Poe W (CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc., Stuart, FL). 2016. Pressure wave 

and acoustic properties generated by the explosive removal of offshore structures in the Gulf of 

Mexico. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management. 72 p. Contract no.: M13PX00068. Report No.: OCS Study BOEM 2016-019. 

[accessed 2020 April 14]. https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/100045

Baxter L II, Hays EE, Hampson GR, Backus RH (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, 

MA). 1982. Mortality of fish subjected to explosive shock as applied to oil well severance on 

Georges Bank. Washington (DC): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 

73 p. Contract No.: 14-08-0001-18920. Report No.: WHOI-82-54. DOI:10.1575/1912/2204 

Beaumariage DS (Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Resources, St. 

Petersburg, FL). 1969. Returns from the 1965 Schlitz tagging program including a cumulative 

analysis of previous results. St. Petersburg (FL): State of Florida Department of Natural 

Resources. 46 p. Report No.: Technical Series No. 59; SEDAR24-RD62. 

Beaumariage DS, Bullock LH. 1976. Biological research on snappers and groupers as related to fishery 

management requirements. In: Bullis HR Jr, Jones AC, editors. Proceedings: Colloquium on 

Snapper-Grouper Fishery Resources of the Western Central Atlantic Ocean; Pensacola Beach, 

FL. Gainesville (FL): University of Florida, Florida Sea Grant Program. Report No.: 17. p. 86-

99.

Bedinger CA Jr, Childers RE, Kimball KT, Cooper JW, Kwok A (Southwest Research Institute, Houston, 

TX). 1981. Part 1—background, program organization and study plan. In: Bedinger CA Jr, editor. 

Ecological investigations of petroleum production platforms in the Central Gulf of Mexico 

Volume I—Pollutant fate and effects studies. SWRI Project 01-5245. New Orleans (LA): Bureau 

of Land Management. Contract No.: AA551-CT8-17. Report No.: 1981-14. p. 1-53.

Benoit-Bird KJ, Lawson GL. 2016. Ecological insights from pelagic habitats acquired using active 

acoustic techniques. Ann Rev Mar Sci. 8:463-490.

Beyer SG, Szedlmayer ST. 2010. The use of otolith shape analysis for ageing juvenile red snapper, 

Lutjanus campechanus. Environ Biol Fish. 89:333-340.
68

Black BA, Allman RJ, Schroeder ID, Schirripa MJ. 2011. Multidecadal otolith growth histories for red 

and gray snapper (Lutjanus spp.) in the northern Gulf of Mexico, USA. Fish Oceanogr. 

20(5):347-356.

Bohnsack JA. 1989. Are high densities of fishes at artificial reef the result of habitat limitation or 

behavioral preference? Bull Mar Sci. 44(2):631-645.

Bohnsack JA, Bannerot SP. 1986. A stationary visual census technique for quantitatively assessing 

community structure of coral reef fishes. Washington (DC): National Marines Fisheries Service. 

21 p. Report No.: NOAA Technical Report NMFS 41.

Bohnsack JA, Harper DE, McClellan DB, Hulsbeck M. 1994. Effects of reef size on colonization and 

assemblage structure of fishes at artificial reefs off southeastern Florida, U.S.A. Bull Mar Sci. 

55(2-3):796-823.

Bohnsack JA, Sutherland DL. 1985. Artificial reef research: a review with recommendations for future 

priorities. Bull Mar Sci. 37(1):11-39.

Boland GS. 2000. Fish and epifaunal community observations at an artificial reef near a natural coral reef: 

nineteen years at platform High Island A389-A, from bare steel to coral habitat. In: McKay M, 

Nides J, Vigil D, editors. Proceedings: Gulf of Mexico Fish and Fisheries: Bringing Together 

New and Recent Research. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. Contract No.: 1435-00-01-CA-31060. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2002-

004. p. 372–392. [accessed 2020 April 14]. https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/177

Boland GS, Gallaway BJ, Baker JS, Lewbel GS (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX). 

1983. Ecological effects of energy development on reef fish of the Flower Garden Banks. Final 

report for work unit B1/B5.Galveston (TX): [NMFS-SEFSC] National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Center. 499 p. Contract No.: NA80-GA-C-00057.

Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, et al. 2009. Generalized linear mixed 

models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol. 24(3):127-135.

Bollinger MA, Kline RJ. 2017. Validating sidescan sonar as a fish survey tool over artificial reefs. J Coast 

Res. 33(6):1397-1407.

Bonney R, Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Kelling S, Phillips T, et al. 2009. Citizen science: a developing tool 

for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioSci. 59(11):977-984.

Bortone SA. 2020. Artificial reefs in the future management of Red Snapper, Lutjanus campechanus. In:

Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red Snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton 

(FL): CRC Press. p. 275-283.

Bortone SA, Hastings PA, Collard SB. 1977. The pelagic-Sargassum ichthyofauna of the eastern Gulf of 

Mexico. Northeast Gulf Sci. 1(2):60-67.

Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST. 2020. Introduction. In: Szedlmayer ST, Bortone SA, editors. Red snapper 

biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 1-4.
69

Borwn SJ (Quest Engineering Development Corp., Crosby, TX). 1986. Pressure systems energy release 

protection (gas pressurized systems). Hampton (VA): National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration [NASA], Langley Resarch Center.435 p. Contract No.: NASI-17278. Report No.: 

NASA Contractor Report 178090.

Boswell KM, Wells RJD, Cowan JH, Jr., Wilson CA. 2010. Biomass, density, and size distributions of 

fishes associated with a large-scale artificial reef complex in the Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 

86(4):879-889.

Boswell KM, Wilson MP, Wilson CA. 2007. Hydroacoustics as a tool for assessing fish biomass and size 

distribution associated with discrete shallow water estuarine habitats in Louisiana. Estuar Coast. 

30(4):607-617.

Brandt JR, Jackson DC. 2013. Influences of artificial reefs on juvenile red snapper along the Mississippi 

Gulf coast. Mar Coast Fish. 5(1):1-10.

Brandt SB, Mason DM, Patrick EV, Argyle RL, Wells L, et al. 1991. Acoustic measures of the abundance 

and size of pelagic planktivores in Lake Michigan. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 48:894-908.

Brennan K, Fitzpatrick K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Beaufort, NC). 2012. Estimates of historic recreational landings of Spanish mackerel in the South 

Atlantic using the FHWAR census method. Beaufort (NC): SEDAR. 11 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR31-RD25. 

Brickhill MJ, Lee SY, Connolly RM. 2005. Fishes associated with artificial reefs: attributing changes to 

attraction or production using novel approaches. J Fish Biol. 67(Supplement B):53-71.

Bright TJ, Pequegnat LH. 1974. Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank. Houston (TX): Gulf Publishing 

Company. 435 p.

Bright TJ, Rezak R (Texas A&M University, College Station, TX). 1978. South Texas topographic

features study. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 

824 p. Contract No.: AA550-CT6-18. 

Britt JR, Eubanks RJ, Lumsden MG. 1991. Underwater shock wave reflection and refraction in deep and 

shallow water. Volume 1: a user’s manual for the REFMS code (version 4.0). St. Joseph (LA): 

Science Applications International Corporation. No. DNR-TR-91-15-VI.

Brown H, Benfield MC, Keenan SF, Powers SP. 2010. Movement patterns and home ranges of a pelagic 

carangid fish, Caranx crysos, around a petroleum platform complex. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 403:205-

218.

Brown-Peterson NJ, Overstreet RM, Lotz JM. 2001. Reproductive biology of cobia, Rachycentron 

canadum, from coastal waters of the southern United States. Fish Bull. 99:15-28.

Brucks JT. 1971. Currents of the Caribbean and adjacent regions as deduced from drift-bottle studies. 

Bull Mar Sci. 21(2):455-465.

Bryan M, Saul S (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 

2012. Recreational indices for cobia and Spanish mackerel in the Gulf of Mexico.. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 42 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-DW22.
70

Buczkowski BJ, Reid JA, Jenkins CJ, Reid JM, Williams SJ, et al. 2006. usSEABED: Gulf of Mexico and 

Caribbean (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) offshore surficial sediment data release. US 

Geological Survey Data Series 146, 2006, version 1.0. Reston (VA): US Department of the 

Interior, US Geological Survey. 50 p. [accessed 14 April 2020]. 

https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2006/146/

Burns KM, Froeschke JT. 2012. Survival of red grouper (Epinephalus morio) and red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) caught on J-hooks and circle hooks in the Florida recreational and recreational-forhire fisheries. Bull Mar Sci. 88(3):633-646.

Burns KM, Neidig C, Lotz J, Overstreet R (Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL). 1998. Cobia 

(Rachycentron canadum) stock assessment study in the Gulf of Mexico and in the South Atlantic. 

St. Petersburg (FL): National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Marine Fisheries 

Service. 134 p. Award No.: NA57FF0294 (MARFIN). Report No.: Mote Marine Laboratory 

Technical Report No. 571 and SEDAR28-RD28.

Burns KM, Neidig CL (Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL). 1992. Cobia (Rachycentron canadum), 

amberjack (Seriola dumerili), and dolphin (Coryphaena hipurus) migration and life history study 

off the southwest coast of Florida. 100 p. St. Petersburg (FL): National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, Marine Fisheries Service. Award No.: NA90AA-H-MF747 (MARFIN). Report 

No.: Mote Marine Laboratory Technical Report No. 267 and SEDAR28-RD22.

Burton ML. 2001. Age, growth, and mortality of gray snapper, Lutjanus griseus, from the east coast of 

Florida. Fish Bull. 99:254-265.

Abbott R, Reyff JA (Strategic Environmental; Illingworth & Rodki, Inc., n.p.; Cotati, CA). 2004. San 

Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge East Span Seismic Safety Project: fisheries and hydroacoustic 

monitoring program compliance report. Oakland (CA): Caltrans. 148 p. Contract Nos.: 04-SF-80 

KP 12.2/KP 14.3 and 04-ALA-80 KP 0.0/KP 2.1. 

Campana SE. 2001. Accuracy, precision and quality control in age determination, including a review of 

the use and abuse of age validation methods. J Fish Biol. 59(2):197-242.

Campanella F, Taylor JC. 2016. Investigating acoustic diversity of fish aggregations in coral reef 

ecosystems from multifrequency fishery sonar surveys. Fish Res. 181:63-76.

Campbell M, Pollack A, Henwood T, Provaznik J, Cook M (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. Summary report of the red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) catch during the 2011 expanded annual stock assessment (EASA). Pascagoula 

(MS): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS. 

26 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW17.

Campbell MD, Driggers WB, Sauls B (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. Release mortality in the red snapper fishery: a synopsis of three 

decades of research. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 23 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW22.

Campbell MD, Driggers WB, III, Sauls B, Walter JF. 2014. Release mortality in the red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus) fishery: a meta-analysis of 3 decades of research. Fish Bull. 112(4):283-

296.
71

Campbell MD, Pollack AG, Driggers WB, Hoffmayer ER. 2014. Estimation of hook selectivity of red 

snapper and vermilion snapper from fishery-independent surveys of natural reefs in the northern 

Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish. 6(1):260-273.

Campbell MD, Pollack AG, Gledhill CT, Switzer TS, DeVries DA. 2015. Comparison of relative 

abundance indices calculated from two methods of generating video count data. Fish Res. 

170:125-133.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Felts M, Salisbury J (National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. SEAMAP reef fish video 

survey: relative indices of abundance of red snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 59 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-DW08.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Felts M, Salisbury J (National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2013. SEAMAP reef fish video 

survey: relative indices of abundance of greater amberjack. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 48 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR33-DW16. 

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of almaco jack. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 26 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR49-DW-10. 

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of lane snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 26 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR33-DW16. 

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of lesser amberjack. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 26 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR 49-DW11.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of snowy grouper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR49-DW-12. 

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of speckled hind. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR49-DW-13. 

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of wenchman. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 21 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR49-DW-20. 
72

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Felts P, Noble B, Salisbury J, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of yellowmouth grouper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 17 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR49-DW-21.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Hendon M, Felts P, Noble B, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of grey snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 31 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR51-DW-07.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Hendon M, Felts P, Noble B, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of Gulf of Mexico - red snapper. North Charleston, SC: SEDAR. p. 

36.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Hendon M, Felts P, Noble B, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2015. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of gray triggerfish. North Charleston, SC: SEDAR. p. 33.

Campbell MD, Rademacher KR, Hendon M, Felts P, Noble B, et al. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2015. SEAMAP reef fish video survey: 

relative indices of abundance of vermilion snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 35 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR43-WP-12.

Campbell MD, Rose K, Boswell K, Cowan J. 2011. Individual-based modeling of an artificial reef fish 

community: effects of habitat quantity and degree of refuge. Ecol Model. 222:3895-3909.

Campbell MD, Switzer T, Mareska J, Hendon J, Rester J,et al. 2017. SEAMAP vertical line survey: 

relative indices of abundance of Gulf of Mexico - red snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

28 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-12.

Carlson J, Gulak S, Scott-Denton E, Pulver J (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL and Galveston, TX). 2013. Relative abundance of gag grouper 

and greater amberjack based on observer data collected in the reeffish bottom longline fishery. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 14 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW-26.

Carr MH, Hixon MA. 1997. Artificial reefs: the importance of comparisons with natural reefs. Fisheries 

Spec Iss Artifical Reef Manage. 22(4):28-33.

Carr MH, McGinnis MV, Forrester GE, Harding J, Raimondi PT (University of California, Coastal 

Marine Institute, Santa Barbara, CA). 2003. Consequences of alternative decommissioning 

options to reef fish assemblages and implications for decommissioning policy. Santa Barbara 

(CA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 113 p. Cooperative 

Agreement No.: 14-35-0001-30758. Report No.: MMS OCS Study 2003-053. [accessed 2020 

April 15]. https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/438

Carruthers TR, Punt AE, Walters CJ, MacCall A, McAllister MK, et al. 2014. Evaluating methods for 

setting catch limits in data-limited fisheries. Fish Res. 153:48-68.

Caselle JE, Love MS, Fusaro C, Schroeder D. 2002. Trash or habitat? Fish assemblages on offshore 

oilfield seafloor debris in the Santa Barbara Channel, California. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S258-S265.
73

Casper BM, Smith ME, Halvorsen MB, Sun H, Carlson TJ, et al. 2013. Effects of exposure to pile driving 

sounds on fish inner ear tissues. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 166(2):352-360.

Cass-Calay SL, Porch CE, Goethel DR, Smith MW, Matter V, et al. 2015. Stock assessment of red 

snapper in the Gulf of Mexico 1872-2013 - with provisional 2014 landings. Report of the update 

assessment 09-07-2015. Tampa (FL): Science and Statistical Committee Gulf Fishery 

Management Council. 241 p. Report No.: SEDAR41-RD61. 

Chambers RC, Leggett WC. 1989. Event analysis applied to timing in marine fish ontogeny. Can J Fish 

Aquat Sci. 46:1633-1641.

Chandler J, White D, Techera EJ, Gourvenec S, Draper S. 2017. Engineering and legal considerations for 

decommissioning of offshore oil and gas infrastructure in Australia. Ocean Eng. 131:338-347.

Chapin AM, Szedlmayer ST, Phelps RP. 2009. Survival and movement of hatchery-reared red snapper on 

artificial habitats in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Manag Ecol. 16(1):28-36.

Chapman NR. 1985. Measurement of the waveform parameters of shallow explosive charges. J Acoust 

Soc Am. 78(2):672-681.

Charbonnel E, Serre C, Ruitton S, Harmelin J-G, Jensen A. 2002. Effects of increased habitat complexity 

on fish assemblages associated with large artificial reef units (French Mediterranean coast). ICES 

J Mar Sci. 59:S208-S213.

Cheng JCP, Tan Y, Liu X, Wang X. 2016. Application of 4D BIM for evaluating different options of 

offshore oil and gas platform decommissioning. In: Yakubi N, Makanae K, editors. ICCBE2016: 

Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building 

Engineering [ICCBE]. Osaka, Japan; July 6–8. 2016. Osaka (JP): ICCBE2016 Organizing 

Committee. p. 1524–1531. 

Chih C-P (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2012. 

Length frequency distributions for red snappers in the Gulf of Mexico from 1984-2011. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW10. 

Chih C-P (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2012. On 

the comparisons of regional differences in the growth of red snappers from the Gulf of Mexico. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 35 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW18.

Chih C-P. 2013. Age frequency distributions estimated with reweighting methods for red snappers in the 

Gulf of Mexico from 1991 to 2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 22 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR31-AW15.

Chih C-P. 2013. Changes in lengths-at-age and size selectivity of red snappers in the Gulf of Mexico from 

2002 to 2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 21 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW16

Chih C-P. 2013. Length frequency distributions and reweighted age frequency distributions for greater 

amberjacks in the Gulf of Mexico from 1984-2012. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR31-DW10

Chih C-P. 2014. Age frequency distributions, age length keys, length at ages, and sex ratios for king 

mackerels in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic from 1986‐2013. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 46 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-AW05
74

Chih C-P. 2014. Length frequency distributions for king mackerels in the Gulf of Mexico and South 

Atlantics from 1978-2013. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR.36 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-AW06

Chih C-P. 2015. Length and age frequency distributions for vermilion snappers collected in the Gulf of 

Mexico from 1981 to 2014. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 30 p. Report No.: SEDAR45-WP08

Chih C-P. 2015. Length frequency distributions for gray triggerfish collected in the Gulf of Mexico from 

1986 to 2013. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 30 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-04

Chih C-P. 2016. Summary of length data and length frequency distributions for eight data limited species 

collected in the Gulf of Mexico from 1981 to 2015. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 24 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR49-DW-08

Chih C-P. 2017. Length frequency distributions for gray snapper length and age samples collected from 

the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 30 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-04 

Chittenden ME Jr, McEachran JD. 1976. Composition, ecology and dynamics of demersal fish 

communities on the northwestern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf, with a similar synopsis for 

the entire Gulf. College Station (TX): Texas A&M University, Sea Grant College. 104 p. NOAA 

grant No. 04-5-158-19. Report No.: TAMU-SG-76-208. 

Christian EA. 1973. The effects of underwater explosions on swimbladder fish. White Oak (MD): Naval 

Ordnance Laboratory. 50 p. Report No.: NOLTR 73-103. 

Christiansen HM, Switzer TS, Thompson K. 2017. Indices of abundance for red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) repetitive time drop 

survey in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 12 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR52-WP-06. 

Christiansen HM, Switzer TS, Thompson K. 2017. Indices of abundance for red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) vertical longline 

survey in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 12 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR52-WP-05.Claisse JT, Pondella DJ II, Love M, Bull AS (Vantuna Research Group, Los 

Angeles, CA). 2014. Biological productivity of fish associated with offshore oil and gas 

structures on the Pacific OCS. Camarillo (CA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean 

Energy Management. 70 p. Cooperative Agreement No.: M12AC00003. Report No.: OCS Study 

BOEM 2014-030. 

Claisse JT, Pondella DJ II, Love M, Zahn LA, Williams CM, et al. 2015. Impacts from partial removal of 

decommissioned oil and gas platforms on fish biomass and production on the remaining platform 

structure and surrounding shell mounds. PLoS One. 10(9):e0135812. 

Claisse JT, Pondella DJ II, Love M, Zahn LA, Williams CM, et al. 2014. Oil platforms off California are 

among the most productive marine fish habitats globally. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 11(43):15462-

15467. 

Clardy TR, Patterson WF III, DeVries DA, Palmer C. 2008. Spatial and temporal variability in the 

relative contribution of king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) stocks to winter mixed fisheries 

off South Florida. Fish Bull. 106(2):152-160. 
75

Claydon J. 2004. Spawning aggregations of coral reef fishes: characteristics, hypotheses, threats and 

management. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev. 42:265-302. 

Colburn LL, Jepson M, Himes-Cornell A, Kasperski S, Norman K, et al. 2017. Community participation 

in U.S. catch share programs. Silver Spring (MD): National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. 136 p. Report No.: NOAA Technical 

Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-179. 

Cole RH. 1948. Underwater explosions. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press. 

Coleman FC, Koenig CC, Collins LA. 1996. Reproductive styles of shallow-water groupers (Pisces: 

Serranidae) in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the consequences of fishing spawning 

aggregations. Environ Biol Fish. 47(2):129-141. 

Coleman FC, Koenig CC, Eklund A-M, Grimes CB. 1999. Management and conservation of temperate 

reef fishes in the grouper–snapper complex of the southeastern United States. In: Musick JA, 

editor. Life in the slow lane: ecology and conservation of long-lived marine animals. American 

Fisheries Society Symposium 23. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 233-242. 

Coleman FC, Scanlon KM, Koenig CC. 2011. Groupers on the edge: shelf edge spawning habitat in and 

around marine reserves of the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Prof Geogr. 63(4):456-474. 

Coll C, de Morais LT, Laë R, Lebourges-Dhaussy A, Simier M, et al. 2007. Use and limits of three 

methods for assessing fish size spectra and fish abundance in two tropical man-made lakes. Fish 

Res. 83:306-318. 

Collins A. 2014. An investigation into the habitat, behavior and opportunistic feeding strategies of the 

protected goliath grouper (Epinephelus itajara) [dissertation]. Tampa (FL): University of South 

Florida. 

Connor JG, Jr. 1990. Underwater blast effects from explosive severance of offshore platform legs and 

well conductors. Dahlgren (VA): Naval Surface Warfare Center. 136 p. Report No.: NAVSWC 

TR 90-532. 

Conrad AS, Kim KH, Gallaway BJ (Greeneridge Sciences, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, and LGL Ecological 

Research Associates, Inc., College Station, TX). 2019. Explosive removal of structures: acoustic 

model application.New Orleans (LA): Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management. 53 p. Contract No. M16PC00005.

Consoli P, Romeo T, Ferraro M, Sarà G, Andaloro F. 2013. Factors affecting fish assemblages associated 

with gas platforms in the Mediterranean Sea. J Sea Res. 77:45-52.

Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. (Jupiter, FL). 2004. Explosive removal of offshore structures -

information synthesis report. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. 236 p. Contract No.: 1435-01-02-CT-85237. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 

2003-070.

Cowan JH Jr, Boswell KM, Simonsen KA, Saari CR, Kulaw D. 2012. Working paper for Red Snapper 

Data Workshop (SEDAR 31). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 47 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-

DW03.
76

Cowan JH Jr, Grimes CB, Patterson WF III, Walters CJ, Jones AC, et al. 2011. Red snapper management 

in the Gulf of Mexico: science- or faith-based? Rev Fish Biol Fish. 21(2):187-204.

Cowan JH Jr, Rose KA. 2016. Oil and gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico: their relationship to fish and 

fisheries. In: Mikkola H, editor. Fisheries and aquaculture in the modern world. London(GB): 

InTech. p. 95-122.

Cowan JH Jr, Shipp RL, Bailey HK IV, Haywick DW. 1995. Procedure for rapid processing of large 

otoliths. Trans Am Fish Soc. 124:280-282.

Crabtree RE, Bullock LH. 1998. Age, growth, and reproductiom of black grouper, Mycteroperca bonaci, 

in Florida waters. Fish Bull. 96(4):735-753.

Craig K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Beaufort, NC). 2012. 

The Beaufort Assessment Model (BAM) with application to cobia: mathematical description, 

implementation details, and computer code. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 35 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR28-RW01.

Craig K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Beaufort, NC). 2012. 

Development and diagnostics of the Beaufort assessment model applied to cobia. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 25 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-RW02. 

Craig MT, Hastings PA. 2007. A molecular phylogeny of the groupers of the subfamily Epinephelinae 

(Serranidae) with a revised classification of the Epinephelini. Ichthyol Res. 54(1):1-17.

Crandall CAC, Parkyn DC, Murie DJ (University of Florida, Gainesville, FL). 2013. Regional stock 

structure of greater amberjack in the southeastern United States using otolith shape analysis. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 30 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW25. 

Cripps SJ, Aabel JP. 2002. Environmental and socio-economic impact assessment of Ekoreef, a multiple 

platform rigs-to-reefs development. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S300-S308.

Cummings N, Isely J (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2012. Texas Parks and Wildlife catch per unit of effort abundance information for cobia 

(Rachycentrum Cendrum). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-DW10. 

Cummings NJ, McClellan DB (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2000. Trends in the Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack fishery through 1998: 

commercial landings, recreational catches, observed length frequencies, estimates of landed and 

discarded catch at age, and selectivity at age. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: 

SEDAR33-RD11 and SFD-99/00-99.

Curtis JM, Johnson MW, Diamond SL, Stunz GW. 2015. Quantifying delayed mortality from barotrauma 

impairment in discarded red snapper using acoustic telemetry. Mar Coast Fish. 7(1):434-449.

D’Alessandro EK, Sponaugle S, Serafy JE. 2010. Larval ecology of a suite of snappers (family: 

Lutjanidae) in the Straits of Florida, western Atlantic Ocean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 410:159-175.

Dahl PH (University of Washington, Seattle, WA). 2016. Center for Independent Experts (CIE) 

independent peer review report of Underwater Calculator for Shocks, or UWCv2 (vers 2.0). 

Seattle, WA.
77

Daigle ST, Fleeger JW, Cowan JH, Jr., Pascal P-Y. 2013. What is the relative importance of 

phytoplankton and attached macroalgae and epiphytes to food webs on offshore oil platforms? 

Mar Coast Fish. 5(1):53-64.

Dance MA, Patterson WF III, Addis DT. 2011. Fish community and trophic structure at artificial reef 

sites in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 87(3):301-324.

Danovaro R, Gambi C, Mazzola A, Mirto S. 2002. Influence of artificial reefs on the surrounding infauna: 

analysis of meiofauna. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S356-S362.

Darden T (South Carolina Department of Natural Resources). 2012. Cobia preliminary data analyses U.S. 

Atlantic and GOM genetic population structure. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 2 p. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR28-DW01. 

Darden TL, Walker MJ, Brenkert K, Yost JR, Denson MR. 2014. Population genetics of cobia 

(Rachycentron canadum): implications for fishery management along the coast of the 

southeastern United States. Fish Bull. 112(24-35):24.

Dauterive L (US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, New Orleans LA). 2000. 

Rigs-to-reefs policy, progress, and perspective. AAUS 20th Symposium Proceedings 2000: 

diving for science in the twenty-first century. Mobile (AL): AAUS [American Academy of 

Underwater Sciences]. p. 64-66.

Davis WT. 2014. Ecological and fisheries management implications of competition between red snapper 

and vermilion snapper [thesis]. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University.

Davis WT, Drymon JM, Powers SP. 2015. Spatial and dietary overlap creates potential for competition 

between red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) and vermilion snapper (Rhomboplites aurorubens). 

PLoS One. 10(12):e0144051.

Defenbaugh RE. 1976. A study of the benthic macroinvertebrates of the continental shelf of the northern 

Gulf of Mexico [dissertation]. College Station (TX): Texas A&M University.

DeMarsh G. 2000. The use of explosives in decommissioning and salvage. Paper presented at: The 2000 

Offshore Technology Conference; 2000 May 1–4; Houston, TX.

Denit K, Sponaugle S. 2004. Growth variation, settlement, and spawning of gray snapper across a 

latitudinal gradient. Trans Am Fish Soc. 133:1339-1355.

Dennis GD, Bright TJ. 1988. Reef fish assemblages on hard banks in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. 

Bull Mar Sci. 43(2):280-307.

DeVries DA, Gardner CL, Raley P (National Marines FisheriesService, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2015. Vermilion snapper Rhomboplites aurorubens findings from the 

NMFS Panama City Laboratory trap & camera fishery-independent survey 2004-2014. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 25 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR-WP-12 and Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 15-19.
78

DeVries DA, Gardner CL, Raley P, Ingram W (National Marines FisheriesService, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2015. Gray triggerfish Balistes capriscus findings from the 

NMFS Panama City Laboratory trap & camera fishery-independent survey – 2004-2014. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 26 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR-WP-14 and Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 15-12. 

DeVries DA, Gardner CL, Raley P, Overly K (National Marines FisheriesService, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2016. Almaco jack Seriola rivoliana findings from the NMFS 

Panama City Laboratory trap & camera fishery-independent survey 2004-2014. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 18 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR49-DW-15 and Panama City Laboratory Contribution 

16-05.

DeVries DA, Gardner CL, Raley P, Overly K (National Marines FisheriesService, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2016. Lane snapper Lutjanus synagris findings from the 

NMFS Panama City Laboratory trap & camera fishery-independent survey 2004-2014. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 21 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR49-DW-15 and Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 16-04. 

DeVries DA, Ingram W, Gardner CL, Raley P (National Marines FisheriesService, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2012. Red snapper findings from the NMFS Panama City 

Laboratory trap & camera fishery-independent survey – 2004-2011 [draft]. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 18 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-DW-28 and Panama City Laboratory Contribution

12-xx. 

DeVries DA, Raley P, Gardner CL, Ingram W (National Marines FisheriesService, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2013. Greater amberjack Seriola dumerili findings from the 

NMFS Panama City Laboratory trap & camera fishery-independent survey – 2004-2012. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 19 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR33-AW05 and Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 13-3. 

Diamond SL, Campbell M, Olson D, Panto L, Wang Y, et al. 2007. Movers and stayers: individual 

variability in site fidelity and movements of red snapper off Texas. In: Patterson WF III, Cowan 

JH Jr, Fitzhugh GR, Nieland DL, editors. Red snapper ecology and fisheries in the US Gulf of 

Mexico. American Fisheries Society Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries 

Society. p. 163-188.

Ditty JG, Shaw RF. 1992. Larval development, distribution, and ecology of cobia Rachycentron canadum

(Family: RachycentridaeJ in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 90:668-677.

Dokken QR, Withers K, Childs S, Riggs T (Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, Corpus Christ, TX). 

2000. Characterization and comparison of platform reef communities off the Texas coast. Corpus 

Christi (TX): Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Report No.: TAMU-CC-0007-CCS.

Domeier ML, Koenig C, Coleman F. 1996. Reproductive biology of the gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus), 

with notes on spawning for other western Atlantic snappers (Lutjanidae). In: Arreguin-Sanchez F, 

Munro JL, Balgos MC, Pauly D, editors. Biology and culture of tropical groupers and snappers: 

proceedings of an EPOMEX/ICLARM International Workshop on tropical snappers and 

groupers, University of Campeche; Campeche, Mexico; 1993 October 26–29. ICLARM Conf 

Proc 48. Makati City (PH): International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management. p. 

189-201.
79

Doray M, Josse E, Gervain P, Reynal L, Chantrel J. 2008. Joint use of echosounding, fishing and video 

techniques to assess the structure of fish aggregations around moored fish aggregating devices in 

Martinique (Lesser Antilles). Aquat Liv Res. 20(4):357-366.

Dorf BA, Fisher M (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Rockport, TX). 2012. Fishery-independent 

catch of young-of-the-year red snapper in the Texas territorial sea, 1985–2007. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 28 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-RD08.

Downey CH. 2013. Reproduction and diet of red snapper Lutjanus campechanus on natural and artifical 

reefs in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Corpus Christi (TX): Texas A&M UniversityCorpus Christi.

Drew K, Defilippi J, Sartwell T. 2012. MRFSS index for Atlantic Spanish mackerel and cobia. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 22 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-DW19. 

Drumhiller KL, Johnson MW, Diamond SL, Reese Robillard MM, Stunz GW. 2014. Venting or rapid 

recompression increase survival and improve recovery of red snapper with barotrauma. Mar 

Coast Fish. 6(1):190-199.

Dufrene TA. 2005. Geological variability and Holocene sedimentary record on the northern Gulf of 

Mexico inner to mid-continental shelf [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University.

Dunlap Kolden K, Aimone-Martin C (Alaska Seismic & Environmental LLC and Aimone-Martin 

Associates, LLC) . 2013. Blasting effects on salmonids. Final report. Prepared for the Alaska 

Department of Fish & Game under agency contract. Douglas (AK): Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game, Division of Habitat. 33 p. Contract No.: IHP-13-051.

Dzwilewski PT (Applied Research Associates, Littleton, CO). 2014. Water shock prediction for explosive 

removal of offshore structures: UnderWater Calculater (UWC) version 2.0 update based upon 

field data. New Orleans (LA): Department of the Interior, Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement. 35 p. Contract No.: GS23F0278M. Report No.: ARA project 001974.

Dzwilewski PT, Fenton G (Applied Research Associates, Littleton, CO). 2003. Shock wave/sound 

propagation modeling results for calculating marine protected species impact zones during 

explosive removal of offshore structures. New Orleans (LA): Department of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. 42 p. Contract No.: 0302P057572, ref no. 2-54000124. Report No.: OCS 

Study MMS 2003-059.

Edwards AWF. 1992. Likelihood. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Press.

Emery BM, Washburn L, Love MS, Nishimoto MM, Ohlmann JC. 2006. Do oil and gas platforms off 

California reduce recruitment of bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis) to natural habitat? An analysis 

based on trajectories derived from high-frequency radar. Fish Bull. 104:391-400.

Emmrich M, Winfield IJ, Guillard J, Rustadbakken A, Vergès C, et al. 2012. Strong correspondence 

between gillnet catch per unit effort and hydroacoustically derived fish biomass in stratified lakes. 

Freshwater Biol. 57(12):2436-2448.

Engås A, Løkkeborg S, Ona E, Soldal AV. 1996. Effects of seismic shooting on local abundance and 

catch rates of cod (Gadus morhua) and haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus). Can J Fish Aquat 

Sci. 53:2238-2249.
80

Errigo M, Hiltz E, Byrd J. 2012. SCDNR charterboat logbook program data, 1993 ‐ 2010. [Updated 5 

May 2011]. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 7 p. Report No.: SEDAR25-DW23.

Fabi G, Grati F, Puletti M, Scarcella G. 2004. Effects on fish community induced by installation of two 

gas platforms in the Adriatic Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 273:187-197.

Fabi G, Luccarini F, Panfili M, Solustri C, Spagnolo A. 2002. Effects of an artificial reef on the 

surrounding soft-bottom community (central Adriatic Sea). ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S343-S349.

Fabi G, Sala A. 2002. An assessment of biomass and diel activity of fish at an artificial reef (Adriatic sea) 

using a stationary hydroacoustic technique. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:411-420.

Fable WA, Jr. 1980. Tagging studies of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) and vermilion snapper 

(Rhomboplites aurorubens) off the south Texas coast. Contrib Mar Sci. 23:115-121.

Falace A, Bressan G. 2002. Evaluation of the influence of inclination of substrate panels on seasonal 

changes in a macrophytobenthic community. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S116-S121.

Farmer NA, Malinowski RP, McGovern MF, Rubec PJ. 2016. Stock complexes for fisheries management 

in the Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish. 8(1):177-201.

Fay RR. 1988. Hearing in vertebrates: a psychophysics databook. Winnetka (IL): Hill-Fay Associates.

Fernandes PG, Gerlotto F, Holliday DV, Nakken O, Simmonds EJ. 2002. Acoustic applications in 

fisheries science: the ICES contribution. ICES Marine Science Symposia. 215:483-492.

Fewtrell JL, McCauley RD. 2012. Impact of air gun noise on the behaviour of marine fish and squid. Mar 

Pollut Bull. 64(5):984-993.

Fischer AJ, Baker MS, Jr., Wilson CA. 2004. Red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) demographic 

structure in the northern Gulf of Mexico based on spatial patterns in growth rates and 

morphometrics. Fish Bull. 102(4):593-603.

Fischer AJ, Baker MS, Jr., Wilson CA, Nieland DL. 2005. Age, growth, mortality, and radiometric age 

validation of gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) from Louisiana. Fish Bull. 103:307-319.

Fischer AJ, Wilson CA, Nieland DL. 2002. Age and growth of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, in the 

northwestern Gulf of Mexico: implications to the unit stock hypothesis. In: Creswell RL, editor. 

Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute; Biloxi, MS’ November 

2000. Fort Pierce (FL): Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. p. 496-506.

Fischer W, editor. 1978. FAO species identification sheets for fishery purposes, western central Atlantic 

(fishing area 31). Volume II. Rome (IT): Food and Agriculture Organization of the United 

Nations (FAO)Fisheries Department. 

Fisheries Ecosystem Branch, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center. 

2013. Discards of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) for the headboat fishery in the US Gulf of 

Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-21.
81

Fisheries Hydroacoustic Working Group. 2008. Memorandum, agreement in principle for guidelines for 

injury to fish from pile driving activities, NOAA’s Fisheries Northwest and Southwest Regions, 

US Fish and Wildlife Service Regions 1 and 8, California/Washington/ Oregon Departments of 

Transportation, California Department of Fish and Game, and US Federal Highway 

Administration. June 12, 2008. 3 p. [accessed 2020 April 23] 

https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2018/01/17/ENV-FW-BA_InterimCriteriaAgree.pdf

Fitzhugh GR, Beech VC, Lyon HM, Colson P. 2017. Reproductive parameters for the Gulf of Mexico 

gray snapper, Lutjanus griseus, 1991-2015. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR1-DW-06.

Fitzhugh GR, Kline WC, Porch CE, Gardner CL. 2020. Improving the historical baseline of the Gulf of 

Mexico Red Snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, fishery. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, editors. 

Red Snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 201-231.

Fitzhugh GR, Lang ET, Lyon H (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeastern Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2012. Expanded annual stock assessment survey 2011: red snapper

reproduction. South Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 31 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW07 and Panama 

City Laboratory Contribution Series 12-05.

Fitzhugh GR, Lyon HM, Barnett BK (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeastern Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2015. Reproductive parameters for Gulf of Mexico vermilion snapper, 

Rhomboplites aurorubens, 1991‐2014. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 5 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR45-WP-02.

Fitzhugh GR, Lyon HM, Barnett BK (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeastern Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2015. Reproductive parameters of gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) 

from the Gulf of Mexico: sex ratio, maturity and spawning fraction. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 11 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-03.

Fitzhugh GR, Lyon HM, Beech VC, Colson PM (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeastern 

Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2017. Reproductive data compiled for the Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus. South Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 5 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR52-WP-15.

Flaherty KE, Switzer TS, Winner BL, Keenan SF. 2013. Regional correspondence in habitat occupancy 

by gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) in estuaries of the southeastern United States. Estuar Coast. 

37(1):206-228.

Flaherty-Walia KE, Switzer TS, Tyler-Jedlund AJ (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 

St. Petersburg, FL). 2017. Gray snapper abundance indices from inshore surveys of northeastern 

Gulf of Mexico estuaries. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 61 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-11.

Flaherty-Walia KE, Switzer TS, Winner BL, Tyler-Jedlund AJ, Keenan SF. 2015. Improved ability to 

characterize recruitment of gray snapper in three Florida estuaries along the Gulf of Mexico 

through targeted sampling of polyhaline seagrass beds. Trans Am Fish Soc. 144(5):911-926.

Flaherty-Walia KE, Winner BL, Tyler-Jedlund AJ, Davis JP. 2016. Short-term discard mortality estimates 

for gray snapper in a west-central Florida estuary and adjacent nearshore Gulf of Mexico waters. 

N Am J Fish Manage. 36(2):329-340.
82

Fodrie FJ, Heck KL, Jr. 2011. Response of coastal fishes to the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. PLoS One. 

6(7):e21609.

Fodrie FJ, Heck KL, Jr, Powers SP, Graham WM, Robinson KL. 2010. Climate-related, decadal-scale 

assemblage changes of seagrass-associated fishes in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Global Change 

Biology. 16(1):48-59.

Foote KG, Knudsen HP, Vestnes G, MacLennan DN, Simmonds EJ. 1987. Calibration of acoustic 

instruments for fish density estimation: a practical guide. Copenhagen (DM): International 

Council for the Exploration of the Sea [ICES]. 72 p. Report No.: Cooperative Research Report 

144.

Forrest RE, McAllister MK, Martell SJD, Walters CJ. 2013. Modelling the effects of density-dependent 

mortality in juvenile red snapper caught as bycatch in Gulf of Mexico shrimp fisheries: 

implications for management. Fish Res. 146:102-120.

Foss KL. 2016. Feeding ecology of red snapper and greater amberjack at standing platforms in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico: disentangling the effects of artificial light [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): 

Louisiana State University.

Fowler AM, Jørgensen A-M, Svendsen JC, Macreadie PI, Jones DOB, et al. 2018. Environmental benefits 

of leaving offshore infrastructure in the ocean. Front Ecol Environ. doi: 10.1002/fee.1827.

Fowler AM, Macreadie PI, Bishop DP, Booth DJ. 2015. Using otolith microchemistry and shape to assess 

the habitat value of oil structures for reef fish. Mar Environ Res. 106:103-113.

Fowler AM, Macreadie PI, Booth DJ. 2015. Should we "reef" obsolete oil platforms? Proc Natl Acad Sci. 

112(2):E102.

Fowler AM, Macreadie PI, Jones DOB, Booth DJ. 2014. A multi-criteria decision approach to 

decommissioning of offshore oil and gas infrastructure. Ocean Coast Manage. 87:20-29.

Frankel AS, Barkaszi M, Martin J, Poe W, Giard J, et al. 2017. Explosive offshore structure removal 

noise measurements. J Acoust Soc Am. 141:3848. 

Frankel AS, Ellison WT (Marine Acoustics, Inc., Middletown, RI). 2005. Explosive removal scenario 

simulation results: final report. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. 51 p. Contract No.: GS-10F-0164N. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2004-

064.

Franks JS. 2000. A review: pelagic fishes at petroleum platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico; 

diversity, interrelationships, and perspective. In: Cayré PA, Taquet M, editors. Tuna Fishing and 

Fish Aggregating Devices. Symposium Caribbean-Martinque; 15-19 October 1999. Vol. 28. 

Plouzane (FR): Ifremer [Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer]. p. 502-

515.

Franks JS, Brown-Peterson NJ. 2002. A review of age, growth, and reproduction of cobia, Rachycentron 

canadum, from U.S. waters of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean. In: Creswell RL, editor. 

Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute; Biloxi, MS; November 

2000. Fort Pierce (FL): Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. p. 553-569.
83

Franks JS, Warren JR. 1998. Age and growth of cobia, Rachycentron canadum, from the northeastern 

Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 97:459-471.

Frazer TK, Lindberg WJ. 1994. Refuge spacing similarly affects reef-associated species from three phyla. 

Bull Mar Sci. 55(2-3):388-400.

Friedlander AM, Ballesteros E, Fay M, Sala E. 2014. Marine communities on oil platforms in Gabon, 

West Africa: high biodiversity oases in a low biodiversity environment. PLoS One. 9(8):e103709.

Froese R. 2006. Cube law, condition factor and weight-length relationships: history, meta-analysis and 

recommendations. J Appl Ichthyol. 22(4):241-253.

Froese R, Pauly D, editors. 2018. FishBase (ver. 10/2018). [accessed 2019 Jan 23]. 

http://www.fishbase.org.

Frumkes DR. 2002. The status of the California Rigs-to-Reefs Programme and the need to limit 

consumptive fishing activities. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S272-S276.

Fujii T. 2015. Temporal variation in environmental conditions and the structure of fish assemblages 

around an offshore oil platform in the North Sea. Mar Environ Res. 108:69-82.

Fujii T. 2016. Potential influence of offshore oil and gas platforms on the feeding ecology of fish 

assemblages in the North Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 542:167-186.

Fujii T, Jamieson AJ. 2016. Fine-scale monitoring of fish movements and multiple environmental 

parameters around a decommissioned offshore oil platform: a pilot study in the North Sea. Ocean 

Eng. 126:481-487.

Gallaway BJ (LGL Ecological Research Asdociates, Bryan, TX). 1980. Pelagic, reef and demersal fishes, 

and macro-crustaceans/biofouling communities. Volume II: fishes and macrocrustaceans. In:

Jackson WB, Wilkens EP, editors. Environmental assessment of Buccaneer gas and oil field in 

the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 1975-1980. Galveston (TX): National Marine Fisheries Center, 

Galveston Laboratory. 115 p. Interagency Agreement No.: EPA-IAG-D5-E693-E0. Report No.: 

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-48.

Gallaway BJ (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Bryan, TX). 1981. An ecosystem analysis of oil and 

gas development on the Texas-Louisiana continental shelf. Washington (DC): US Department of 

the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 97 p. Contract No.: 14-16-0009-80-058. Report No.: 

FWS/OBS-81/27.

Gallaway BJ, Cole JG (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. Bryan, TX). 1997. Cumulative 

ecological significance of oil and gas structures in the Gulf of Mexico: a Gulf of Mexico fisheries 

habitat suitability model—phase II: model description. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the 

Interior, Minerals Management Service and US Geological Survey. 114 p. Contract No.: 1445-

CT0009-96-0005. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 97-0044.
84

Gallaway BJ, Cole JG, Martin LR (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX and Coastal 

Fisheries Institute, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2008. Platform debris fields 

associated with the Blue Dolphin (Buccaneer) gas and oil field artificial reef sites offshore 

Freeport, Texas: extent, composition, and biological utilization. New Orleans (LA): US 

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 113 p. Contract No.: 0199CA30951-

72406. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2008-048.

Gallaway BJ, Cole JG, Meyer R, Roscigno P. 1999. Delination of essential habitat for juvenile red 

snapper in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 128(4):713-726.

Gallaway BJ, Gazey WJ, Cole JG. 2017. An updated description of the benefits and consequences of red 

snapper shrimp trawl bycatch management actions in the Gulf of Mexico. N Am J Fish Manage. 

37(2):414-419.

Gallaway BJ, Gazey WJ, Cole JG, Fechhelm RG. 2007. Estimation of potential impacts from offshore 

liquefied natural gas terminals on red snapper and red drum fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico: an 

alternative approach. Trans Am Fish Soc. 136:655-677.

Gallaway BJ, Johnson MF, Martin LF, Margraff FJ, Lewbel GL, et al. (LGL Ecological Research 

Associates, Bryan, TX). 1981b. Volume II—The artificial reef studies. In: Bedinger CA, Jr. 

editor. Ecological investigations of petroleum production platforms in the central Gulf of Mexico. 

SWRI Project 01-5245. New Orleans (LA): Bureau of Land Management.. Contract No.: AA551-

CT8-17. Report No.: 1981-17. p. 1–199.

Gallaway BJ, Konkel WJ, Cole JG. 2019. The effects of modeled dispersed and undispersed hypothetical 

oil spills on Red Snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, stocks in the Gulf of Mexico. In: Szedlmayer 

ST, Bortone SA, editors. Red Snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. 

p. 123-139.

Gallaway BJ, Lewbel GS (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Bryan, TX). 1982. The ecology of 

petroleum platforms in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico: a community profile. New Orleans 

(LA): US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management. 

91 p. Report No.: FWS/OBS-82/27.

Gallaway BJ, Martin LR (LGL Ecological Research Associates, Bryan, TX). 1980. Effects of gas and oil 

field structures and effluents on pelagic and reef fishes, demersal fishes and macrocrustaceans. 

Volume III: fishes and macrocrustaceans. In: Jackson WB, Wilkens EP, editors. Environmental 

assessment of Buccaneer gas and oil field in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 1978-1979. 

Galveston (TX): National Marine Fisheries Center, Galveston Laboratory. 49 p. Interagency 

Agreement No.: EPA-IAG-D5-E693-E0. Report No.: NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFSSEFC-37.

Gallaway BJ, Martin LR, Howard RL, Boland GS, Dennis GD. 1981a. Effects on artificial reef and 

demersal fish and macrocrustacean communities. In: Middleditch BS, editor. Environmental 

effects of offshore oil production: the Buccaneer gas and oil field study. Marine Science, volume 

145. New York (NY): Plenum Press. p. 237-299.

Gallaway BJ, Martin LR, Howard RL, Boland GS, Dennis GS. 1980. A case study of the effects of gas 

and oil production on artificial reef and demersal fish and macrocrustacean communties in the 

northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Paper presented at: Environmental effects of offshore oil 

production: the Buccaneer oil field study, EXPOCHEM '80, October 6–9, 1980. Houston, TX.
85

Gallaway BJ, Szedlmayer ST, Gazey WJ. 2009. A life history review for red snapper in the Gulf of 

Mexico with an evaluation of the importance of offshore petroleum platforms and other artificial 

reefs. Rev Fish Sci. 17(1):48-67.

Garcia A. 2013. A comparison of site fidelity and habitat use of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) to 

evaluate the performance of two artificial reefs in south Texas utilizing acoustic telemetry 

[thesis]. Brownsville (TX): University of Texas at Brownsville.

Gardner CL, DeVries DA, Overly KE, Pollack AG (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2017. Gray snapper Lutjanus griseus findings from 

the NMFS Panama City Laboratory camera fishery-independent survey 2005-2015. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 25 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-05. 

Gardner CL, Overly KE (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Panama 

City, FL). 2017. Red snapper Lutjanus campechanus findings from the NMFS Panama City 

Laboratory camera & trap fishery-independent survey 2004-2016. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 34 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-10. 

Garner SB, Patterson WF. 2015. Direct observation of fishing effort, catch, and discard rates of charter 

boats targeting reef fishes in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 113:157-166.

Gaspin JB. 1975. Experimental investigations of the effects of underwater explosions on swimbladder 

fish, I: 1973 Chesapeake Bay tests. Silver Spring (MD): Naval Surface Weapons Center. 80 p. 

Report No.: NSWC/WOL/TR 75-58. [accessed 2020 April 24] 

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA014561.pdf

Gaspin JB, Goertner JA, Blatstein IM. 1979. The determination of acoustic source levels for shallow 

underwater explosions. J Acoust Soc Am. 66(5):1453-1462.

Gaspin JB, Shuler VK. 1971. Source levels of shallow underwater explosions. White Oak (MD): Naval 

Ordinance Laboratory. Report No.: NOLTR 71-160.

Gaspin JB, Wiley ML, Peters GB. 1976. Experimental investigation of the effects of underwater 

explosions on swimbladder fish, II: 1975 Chesapeake Bay tests. Silver Spring (MD) Naval 

Surface Weapons Center. 70 p.Report No.: NSWC/WOL/TR 76-61.

Gazey WJ. 2004. Impact on yield from density dependence of red snapper juvenile life stages. South 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report No. SEDAR-AW-12.

Gazey WJ, Gallaway BJ, Cole JG. 2012. An update to the age composition, growth, and densitydependent mortality in juvenile red snapper estimated from observer data from the Gulf of 

Mexico penaeid shrimp fishery [slideshow]. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 15 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR31-DW06.

Gazey WJ, Gallaway BJ, Cole JG. 2013. Response to comments on: age composition, growth and 

density-dependent mortality in juvenile red snapper estimated from observer data from the Gulf 

of Mexico penaeid shrimp fishery. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-

AW17.
86

Gazey WJ, Gallaway BJ, Cole JG, Fournier DA. 2008. Age composition, growth, and density-dependent 

mortality in juvenile red snapper estimated from observer data from the Gulf of Mexico penaeid 

shrimp fishery. N Am J Fish Manage. 28(6):1828-1842.

Gazey WJ, Gallaway BJ, Cole JG, Fournier DA. 2014. Accounting for fishing mortality when comparing 

density-dependent with density-independent mortality in Gulf of Mexico red snapper: response to 

comment. N Am J Fish Manage. 34(2):352-358.

Gazey WJ, Staley MJ. 1986. Population estimation from mark-recapture experiments using a sequential 

Bayes algorithm. Ecology. 67(4):941-951.

Genesis Oil and Gas Consultants, Ltd. 2011. Overview of international decommissioning regulations. 

Aberdeen (GB): Genesis Oil & Gas Consultants Ltd. Genesis Ref.: J71807. Document No.: 

J71807-A-A-PR-001-C1.docm. 41 p.

Gerard T, Muhling B. 2010. Variation in the isotopic signatures of juvenile gray snapper (Lutjanus 

griseus) from five southern Florida regions. Fish Bull. 104:98-105.

Germeroth R, Flaherty-Walia K, Sauls B, Switzer T (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Tallahassee, FL). 2016. Brief summary of FWRI-FDM tagrecapture program and brief summary of FWRI-FIM tag-recapture data. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 2 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-01.

Gilmore JA, Canady RR. 1989. Platform removal: reuse, reef, or scrap. In: Reggio, VC, Jr. compiler. 

Petroleum structures as artificial reefs: a compendium. Fourth International Conference on 

Artificial Habitats for Fisheries Rigs-To-Reefs Special Session, Miami, FL, November 4, 1987. p. 

69-76. New Orleans (LA): Minerals Management Service. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 89-

0021.

Gitschlag GR, Herczeg BA. 1994. Sea turtle observations at explosive removals of energy structures. Mar 

Fish Rev. 56(2):1-8.

Gitschlag GR, Herczeg BA, Barcak TR. 1997. Observations of sea turtles and other marine life at the 

explosive removal of offshore oil and gas structures in the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Res Rep. 

9(4):247-262.

Gitschlag GR, Schirripa MJ, Powers JE (National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL). 2000. Estimation of fisheries impacts due to underwater explosives used to 

sever and salvage oil and gas platforms in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico: final report. New Orleans 

(LA): Minerals Management Service Gulf of Mexico OCS Region. 80 p. Report No.: OCS Study 

MMS 2000-087.

Gitschlag GR, Schirripa MJ, Powers JE. 2003. Impacts of red snapper mortality associated with the 

explosive removal of oil and gas structures on stock assessments of red snapper in the Gulf of 

Mexico. In: Stanley DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. Fisheries, Reefs, and Offshore 

Development. American Fisheries Society Symposium 36. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries 

Society. p. 83-94.

Gledhill CT, Lyczkowski-Shultz J, Rademacher K, Kargard E, Crist G, Grace MA. 1996. Evaluation of 

video and acoustic methods for assessing reef-fish populations. ICES J Mar Sci. 53:483-485.
87

Glenn HD, Cowan JH, Jr., Powers JE. 2017. A comparison of red snapper reproductive potential in the 

northwestern Gulf of Mexico: natural versus artificial habitats. Mar Coast Fish. 9(1):139-148.

Gloeckner D (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2014. 

Methods used to compile South Atlantic shrimp effort used in the estimation of king mackerel 

bycatch in the South Atlantic shrimp fishery. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 22 p. Report Nos.: 

SEDAR38-RW-02 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No SFD-2014-013.

Godoy EAS, Almeida TCM, Zalmon IR. 2002. Fish assemblages and environmental variables on an 

artificial reef north of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S138-S143.

Goertner JF. 1978. Dynamical model for explosion injury to fish. Silver Spring (MD): Naval Surface 

Weapons Center White Oak Lab. 44 p. Report No.: NSWC/WOL TR 76-155.

Goertner JF. 1978. Fish killing potential of a cylindrical charge exploded above the water surface. Silver 

Spring (MD): Naval Surface Weapons Center White Oak Lab. 137 p. Report No.: NSWC/WOL 

TR 77-90.

Goertner JF, Wiley ML, Young GA, McDonald WW. 1994. Effects of underwater explosions on fish 

without swimbladders. Silver Spring (MD): Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division 

White Oak Detachment. 113 p. Report No.: NSWC TR 88-114.

Goethel DR, Smith MW (National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2018. The impact of a reduction in shrimp effort thresholds on SEDAR 52 Gulf of Mexico 

red snapper catch limit projections [working paper]. Tampa (FL): Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council; [accessed 22 Nov 2019]. http://gulfcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/D-4bSEFSC-report-on-bycatch-reduction-thresholds-for-the-shrimp-fishery.pdf.

Goethel DR, Smith MW, Cass-Calay SL, Porch CE. 2018. Establishing stock status determination criteria 

for fisheries with high discards and uncertain recruitment. N Am J Fish Manage. 38(1):120-139.

Gold JR, Saillant E, Ebelt ND, Lem S. 2009. Conservation genetics of gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) in 

U.S. waters of the northern Gulf of Mexico and western Atlantic Ocean. Copeia. 2009(2):277-

286.

Gold JR, Sun F, Richardson LR. 1997. Population structure of red snapper from the Gulf of Mexico as 

inferred from analysis of mitochondrial DNA. Trans Am Fish Soc. 126(3):386-396.

Goodman LA. 1960. On the exact variance of products. J Am Stat Assoc. 55(292):708-713.

Goodyear CP. 1995. Red snapper in U.S. waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Miami (FL): NMFS-SEFSC. 171 

p. Report No.: NMFS-SEFSC Miami Laboratory Contribution No. MIA-95/96-05.

Goodyear CP, Schirripa MJ. 1991. A biological profile for vermilion snapper with a description of the 

fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. Miami (FL): NMFS-SEFSC. 55 p. Report No.: NMFS-SEFSC 

Miami Laboratory Contribution No. MIA-90/91-78.

Govoni JJ, West MA, Settle LR, Lynch RT, Greene MD. 2008. Effects of underwater explosions on 

larval fish: implications for a coastal engineering project. J Coast Res. 24(2B):228-233.

Graham RT, Castellanos DW. 2005. Courtship and spawning behaviors of carangid species in Belize. 

Fish Bull. 103:426-432.
88

Gray AM, Sauls B (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL). 2015. Hook 

selectivity in Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish when using circle or ‘J’ hooks. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 6 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-09.

Greeneridge Sciences Inc. (Santa Barbara, CA), LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc (College 

Station, TX). 2017. Explosive removal of structures: fisheries impact assessment. Acoustic 

synthesis report. Final report for Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, New Orleans, LA. 24 p. 

Contract No.: M16PC00005.

Gregalis KC, Schlenker LS, Drymon JM, Mareska JF, Powers SP. 2012. Evaluating the performance of 

vertical longlines to survey reef fish populations in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish 

Soc. 141(6):1453-1464.

Griffin WL, Woodward RT. 2011. Determining policy-efficient management strategies in fisheries using 

data envelopment analysis (DEA). Mar Policy. 35:496-507.

Grimes CB, Manooch CS, Huntsman GR. 1982. Reef and rock outcropping fishes of the Outer 

Continental Shelf of North Carolina and South Carolina, and ecological notes on the red porgy 

and vermilion snapper. Bull Mar Sci. 32(1):277-289.

Grossman GD, Jones GP, Seaman WJ, Jr. 1997. Do artificial reefs increase regional fish production? A 

review of existing data. Fisheries Spec Iss Artifical Reef Manage. 22(4):17-23.

Guerin AJ. 2010. Marine communities of North Sea offshore platforms, and the use of stable isotopes to 

explore artificial reef food webs [thesis]. [Southampton (GB)]: University of Southampton.

Gulak SJB, Carlson JK (National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center-Panama 

City Laboratory, Panama City, FL). 2013. Catch and bycatch of greater amberjack in the Gulf of 

Mexico shark and reeffish bottom longline fishery based on observer data. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 25 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW24.

GMFMC [Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council]. 2013. Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack 

management history. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 14 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-RD05.

GMFMC. 2016. Revision of the red snapper recreational sector separation sunset provision. Amendment 

45 to the fishery management plan for the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico inclusing 

environmental assessment, fishery impact statement, regulatory impact review, and Regulatory 

Flexibility Act analysis, July 2016. St. Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Regional Office. xi + 148 p. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

GMFMC. 2017. Establish a vermilion snapper MSY proxy and adjust the stock annual catch limit. Final 

amendment 47 to the fishery management plan for the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico 

including environmental assessment, fishery impact statement, regulatory impact review, and 

Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, July 2017. St. Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Southeast Regional Office. xv + 130 p. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

GMFMC. 2017. Gray triggerfish rebuilding plan. Final amendment 46 to the fishery management plan for 

the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico including environmental assessment, fishery impact 

statement, regulatory impact review, and Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, May 2017. St. 

Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office. xvii + 200 p. 

Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.
89

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2017. Minimum stock size threshold (MSST) 

revision for reef fish stocks with existing status determination criteria. Final amendment 44 

(revised) to the fishery management plan for the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico 

including environmental assessment and fishery impact statement, July 2017. St. Petersburg (FL): 

National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office.. x + 123 p. Award No.: 

NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2017. Modifications to greater amberjack 

allowable harvest and rebuilding plan. Final framework action to the fishery management plan for 

the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico including environmental assessment, regulatory 

impact review, and Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, September 2017. St. Petersburg (FL): 

National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office. viii + 111 p. Award No.: 

NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2017. Modifications to the greater amberjack 

fishing year and the recreational fixed closed season. Final framework action to the fishery 

management plan for the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico including environmental 

assessment, regulatory impact review, and Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, November 2017. 

St. Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office. viii + 90 p. 

Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2017. Species listed in the fishery management 

plans of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council [last revised 11 Apr 2017]. 2. p. 

Tampa (FL): GMFMC; [accessed 3 May 2018]. 

http://archive.gulfcouncil.org/docs/Species%20Groupings/Species%20Managed%204_2017.pdf.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2018. Commercial fishing regulations for Gulf 

of Mexico federal waters for species managed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management 

Council. Tampa (FL): GMFMC. 57 p. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2018. Modification to the recreational red 

snapper annual catch target buffers. Framework action to the fishery management plan for reef 

fish resources in the Gulf of Mexico. 93 p. St. Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Southeast Regional Office. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2019. Commercial fishing regulations for Gulf 

of Mexico federal waters for species managed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management 

Council. 56 p. Tampa (FL): GMFMC. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2019. Recreational fishing regulations for Gulf 

of Mexico federal waters for species managed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management 

Council. 40 p. Tampa (FL): GMFMC. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011.

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 2019. State management program for 

recreational red snapper. Final draft amendment 50A to the fishery management plan for the reef 

fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico including programmatic environmental impact statement, 

April 2019. 251 p. St. Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional 

Office. Award No.: NA15NMF4410011. Report No.: Tab B, No. 6a, 3/13/2019.
90

[GMFMC] Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council Scientific and Statistical Committee. 2017. 

Review of SEDAR 33 update: Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack, March 27-29, 2017. 4 p. Tampa 

(FL): GMFMC.

Hanisko DS, Lyczkowski-Shultz J (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, 

MS). 2013. King mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) larval indices of relative abundance from 

SEAMAP fall plankton surveys, 1986 to 2012. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 32 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR38-DW-01.

Hanisko DS, Pollack A (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. 

Summary of length and weight data for gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) collected during NMFS 

and SEAMAP fishery-independent surveys in the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 6 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-02.

Hanisko DS, Pollack A, Zapfe G (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 

2015. Vermilion snapper (Rhomboplites aurorubens) larval indices of relative abundance from 

SEAMAP fall plankton surveys, 1986 to 2012. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 34 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR45-WP-05.

Hanisko DS, Pollack AG, Drass DM, Bond PJ, Stepongzi C, et al. (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. Red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) larval indices of 

relative abundance from SEAMAP fall plankton surveys, 1986 to 2016. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 36 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-11.

Harford WJ, Grüss A, Schirripa MJ, Sagarese SR, Bryan M, Karnauskas M. 2018. Handle with care: 

establishing catch limits for fish stocks experiencing episodic natural mortality events. Fisheries. 

43(10):463-471.

Harris PJ (Marine Resources Research Institute, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, 

Charleston, SC). 2004. Analytical report: age, growth, and reproduction of greater amberjack, 

Seriola dumerili, in the southwestern North Atlantic. North Charleston (SC). 37 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR33-RD12.

Harris PJ, Wyanski DM, White DB, Mikell PP, Eyo PB. 2007. Age, growth, and reproduction of greater 

amberjack off the southeastern U.S. Atlantic coast. Trans Am Fish Soc. 136(6):1534-1545.

Hartford WJ, Sagarese SR, Nuttal MA, Karnauskas M, Liu H, Lauretta M, Schirripa M, Walter JF. 2014. 

Can climate explain temporal trends in king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) catch-per-unit 

effort and landings? North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 29 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-AW-04.

Harwell GE. 2013. Acoustic biomass of fish associated with an oil and gas platform before, during and 

after "reefing" it in the northern Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State 

University.

Hastings MC, Popper AN. 2005. Effects of sound on fish. Sacramento (CA): Jones & Stokes. 82 p. 

California Department of Transportation Contract No.: 43A0139, Task Order 1.

Hastings RW, Ogren LH, Mabry MT. 1976. Observations on the fish fauna associated with offshore

platforms in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 74(2):387-402.
91

Hawkins AD, Popper AN. 2016. A sound approach to assessing the impact of underwater noise on marine 

fishes and invertebrates. ICES J Mar Sci.fsw205.

Helvey M. 2002. Are southern California oil and gas platforms essential fish habitat? ICES J Mar Sci. 

59:S266-S271.

Hendon JR, Franks JS (University of Southern Mississippi, Ocean Springs, MS). 2010. Sport fishing tag 

and release in Mississippi coastal waters and the adjacent Gulf of Mexico. Final report: project F132, segments 7-9. Biloxi (MS): Mississippi Department of Marine Resources and Atlanta (GA): 

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 34 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-RD23,

Herbig JL. 2014. Movement patterns of gray triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, around artificial reefs in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico [thesis.]. Auburn (AL): Auburn University.

Herbig JL, Szedlmayer ST. 2016. Movement patterns of gray triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, around 

artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Manag Ecol. 23(5):418-427.

Hernandez FJ Jr, Shaw RF. 2002. The across-shelf larval, postlarval, and juvenile fish communities 

associated with offshore oil and gas platforms west of the Mississippi River delta. In: Creswell 

RL, editor. Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Biloxi, MS, 

November 2000. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 646-658.

Hernandez FJ Jr, Shaw RF, Cope JS, Ditty JG, Benfield MC, et al. (Coastal Marine Institute, Louisiana 

State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2001. Across-shelf larval, postlarval, and juvenile fish 

collected at offshore oil and gas platforms and a coastal rock jetty west of the Mississippi River 

delta. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. MMS 

Contract No.: 14-35-0001-30660-19926. Report No.: MMS 2001-077.

Hernandez FJ, Jr., Shaw RF, Cope JS, Ditty JG, Farooqi T et al. 2003. The across-shelf larval, postlarval, 

and juvenile fish assemblages collected at offshore oil and gas platforms west of the Mississippi 

River delta. In: Stanley DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. Fisheries, Reefs, and Offshore 

Development. American Fisheries Society Symposium 36. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries 

Society. p. 39-72.

Heupel MR, Simpfendorfer CA. 2002. Estimation of mortality of juvenile blacktip sharks, Carcharhinus 

limbatus, within a nursery area using telemetry data. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 59(4):624-632.

Hightower JE, Jackson JR, Pollock KH. 2001. Use of telemetry methods to estimate natural and fishing 

mortality of striped bass in Lake Gaston, North Carolina. Trans Am Fish Soc. 130(4):557-567.

Hill SH. 1978. A guide to the effects of underwater shock waves on Arctic marine mammals and fish. 

Sidney (BC): Institute of Ocean Sciences. 60 p. Report No.: Pacific Marine Science Report 78-26.

Hixon MA, Beets JP. 1989. Shelter characterisitics and Caribbean fish assemblages: experiments with 

artificial reefs. Bull Mar Sci. 44(2):666-680.

Holbrook SJ, Ambrose RF, Botsford L, Carr MH, Raimondi PT et al. 2000. Ecological issues related to 

decommissioning of California’s offshore production platforms. Santa Barbara (CA): University 

of California. 41 p. [accessed 2020 May 11]. 

https://www.coastalresearchcenter.ucsb.edu/cmi/files/decommreport.pdf
92

Hollenbeck CM, Portnoy DS, Saillant E, Gold JR. 2015. Population structure of red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) in U.S. waters of the western Atlantic Ocean and the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. 

Fish Res. 172:17-25.

Hood PB, Johnson AK. 1999. Age, growth, mortality and reproduction of vermilion snapper, 

Rhomboplites aurorubens, from the eastern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 97:828-841.

Hopkins JA, Wooten R. 2018. (Plat)forms that function. [US Coast Guard] Proceedings of the Marine 

Safety & Security Council.. Spring 75(1):88–93.

Horswill C, Kindsvater HK, Juan‐Jordá MJ, Dulvy NK, Mangel M, Matthiopoulos J, Arlinghaus R. 2019. 

Global reconstruction of life‐history strategies: a case study using tunas. J Appl Ecol. 56(4):855-

865.

Hubbs CL, Rechnitzer AB. 1952. Report on experiments designed to determine effects of underwater 

explosions on fish life. Calif Fish Game. 38:333-366.

Huntsman GR, Potts J, Mays RW, Vaughan D. 1999. Groupers (Serranidae, Epinephelinae): endangered 

apex predators of reef communities. In: Musick JA, editor. Life in the slow lane: ecology and 

conservation of long-lived marine animals. American Fisheries Society Symposium 23. Bethesda 

(MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 217-231.

Hyun KH, He R. 2010. Coastal upwelling in the South Atlantic Bight: a revisit of the 2003 cold event 

using long term observations and model hindcast solutions. J Mar Syst. 83:1-13.

Ihde TF, Wilberg MJ, Secor DH, Miller TJ. 2011. FishSmart: harnessing the knowledge of stakeholders 

to enhance U.S. marine recreational fisheries with application to the Atlantic king mackerel 

fishery. In: Gido KB, Jackson DA, editors. Community ecology of stream fishes: concepts, 

approaches, and techniques. American Fisheries Society Symposium 73. Bethesda (MD): 

American Fisheries Society. p. 75-93.

Ingram GW, Jr. 2001. Stock structure of gray triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, on multiple spatial scales in 

the Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Mobile (AL): University of South Alabama. Report No.: SEDAR41-

RD45.

Ingram GW, Jr., Patterson WF, III. 2001. Movement pattems of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus), 

greater amberjack (Seriola dumerili), and gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) in the Gulf of 

Mexico and the utility of marine reserves as management tools. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual 

Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. Key West (FL): GCFI. p. 686-669.

Ingram GW, Jr., Pollack AG (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 

2012. Abundance indices of red snapper collected in NMFS bottom longline surveys in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. 24 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW19.

Ingram W. 2013. Combined index for Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute and NMFS Panama 

video surveys. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 2 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW14.

Ingram W. 2013. Dauphin Island Sea Lab bottom longline survey incorporation into the NMFS bottom 

longline survey. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 2 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW13.

Isely J. 2017. Updated shrimp bycatch estimates for SEDAR 52. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 7 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-23.
93

Isely J, Cummings N (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2012. Size frequency distribution of cobia from dockside sampling of recreational and 

commercial landings in the Gulf of Mexico 1986‐2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 19 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR28-DW08.

Isely JJ (NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2016. Shrimp fishery bycatch estimates 

for Gulf of Mexico data limited species: wenchman and lane snapper, 1972-2014. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report No.: SEDAR49-DW-01.

Isely JJ, Cummings NJ (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2012. Size frequency distribution of cobia and Spanish mackerel from the Galveston, Texas, 

reef fish observer program 2006‐2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 4 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR28-DW11.

Isely JJ, Smith MW, Chih C-P (NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2016. Size 

composition of eight SEDAR49 data limited species by sector and gear. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 11 p. Report No.: SEDAR49-DW-14.

Jackson WB, Wilkens EP. 1980. Vol. I: Synopsis/Data management. In: Jackson WB, Wilkens EP, 

editors. Environmental assessment of Buccaneer gas and oil field in the northwestern Gulf of 

Mexico, 1978-1979. Interagency Agreement EPA-IAG-D5-E693-E0. Galveston (TX): NMFSSEFSC. Report No.: NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-35.

Jagerroos S, Krause PR. 2016. Rigs-to-reef; impact or enhancement on marine biodiversity. J Ecosys 

Ecograph. 6(2):1000187.

Jaxion-Harm J, Szedlmayer ST. 2015. Depth and artificial reef type effects on size and distribution of red 

snapper in the northern Gulf of Mexico. N Am J Fish Manage. 35(1):86-96.

Jensen A. 2002. Artificial reefs of Europe: perspective and future. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S3-S13.

Johnson AG, Collins LA, Keim CP (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 1994. Age-size structure of gray snapper from the southeastern United 

States: a comparison of two methods of back-calculating size at age from otolith data. Proc Annu 

Conf Southeast Assoc Fish and Wildl Agencies. 48:592-600. Report No. SEDAR51-RD-24.

Johnson C (Coastal Carolina University, Conway, SC). 2013. Trends from non-CPUE standardized king 

mackerel landing logs from Long Bay, South Carolina recreational pier fishery. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 48 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-DW-12.

Johnson DR (University of Miami, Miami, FL). 2013. Observer reported size distribution and discard 

characteristics of Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack from the commercial vertical line and bottom 

longline fisheries. Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-2013-11. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 26 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW14.

Johnson DR, Perry HM. 2020. Red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, larval dispersal in the Gulf of 

Mexico. In: Szedlmayer ST, Bortone SA, editors. Red Snapper biology in a changing world. Boca 

Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 7-25.
94

Johnson DR, Perry HM, Lyczkowski-Shultz J (University of Southern Mississippi, MS and National 

Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. 

Connections between Campeche Bank and red snapper populations in the Gulf of Mexico via 

modeled larval transport. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 30 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-RD45.

Johnson DR, Perry HM, Lyczkowski-Shultz J, Hanisko D. 2009. Red snapper larval transport in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 138:458-470.

Johnson MW, Powers SP, Hightower CL, Kenworthy M. 2010. Age, growth, mortality, and diet 

composition of vermilion snapper from the north-central Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 

139(4):1136-1149.

Jones DT, Wilson CD, De Robertis A, Rooper CN, Weber TC, Butler JL. 2012. Evaluation of rockfish 

abundance in untrawlable habitat: combining acoustic and complementary sampling tools. Fish 

Bull. 110(3):332-343.

Jørgensen T, Løkkeborg S, Soldal AV. 2002. Residence of fish in the vicinity of a decommissioned oil 

platform in the North Sea. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S288-S293.

Kaiser MJ, Liu M. 2018. A scenario-based deepwater decommissioning forecast in the U.S. Gulf of 

Mexico. J Petroleum Sci Eng. 165:913-945.

Kaiser MJ, Mesyanzhinov DV, Pulsipher AG (Coastal Marine Institute, Louisiana State University, Baton 

Rouge, LA). 2005. Modeling structure removal processes in the Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans 

(LA): Minerals Management Service. 135 p. MMS Contract: 1435-01-99-CA-30951-85246. 

Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2005-029.

Kaiser MJ, Narra S. 2018. A hybrid scenario-based decommissioning forecast for the shallow water U.S. 

Gulf of Mexico, 2018–2038. Energy. 163:1150-1177.

Kaiser MJ, Pulsipher AG. 2005. Rigs-to-reefs programs in the Gulf of Mexico. Ocean Dev Int Law. 

36:119-134.

Kaplan EL, Meier P. 1958. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 

53(282):457-481.

Karnauskas M, Walter JF, III, Campbell MD, Pollack AG, Drymon JM, Powers S. 2017. Red snapper 

distribution on natural habitats and artificial structures in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast 

Fish. 9(1):50-67.

Karnauskas M, Walter JF, III, Paris CB (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL and University of Miami, Miami, FL). 2013. Use of the connectivity modeling 

system to estimate movements of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) recruits in the northern 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 18 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW10.

Karnauskas M, Walter JF, III, Paris CB (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL and University of Miami, Miami, FL). 2017. Use of the connectivity modeling 

system to estimate movements of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) recruits in the northern 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-20.

Kasprzak RA. 1998. Use of oil and gas platforms as habitat in Louisiana's artificial reef program. Gulf 

Mex Sci. 1998(1):37-45.
95

Kaye SM. 1983. Encyclopedia of explosives and related items. Vol. 10. Picatinny Arsenal (NJ): US Army 

Research and Development Command (ARRADCOM), TACOM, ARDEC, Warheads, 

Energetics and Combat Support Center.

Keenan SF, Benfield MC, Blackburn JK. 2007. Importance of the artificial light field around offshore 

petroleum platforms for the associated fish community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 331:219-231.

Keevin TM, Hempen GL. 1997. The environmental effects of underwater explosions with methods to 

mitigate impacts. St. Louis (MO): US Army Corps of Engineers. 99 p.

Kennish R, Wilson KDP, Lo J, Clarke SC, Laister S. 2002. Selecting sites for large-scale deployment of 

artificial reefs in Hong Kong: constraint mapping and prioritization techniques. ICES J Mar Sci. 

59:S164-S170.

Klima EF, Gitschlag GR, Renaud ML. 1988. Impacts of explosive removal of offshore petroleum 

platforms on sea turtles and dolphins. Mar Fish Rev. 50(3):33-42.

Klima EF, Wickham DA. 1971. Attraction of coastal pelagic fishes with artificial structures. Trans Am 

Fish Soc. 100:86-99.

Koenig CC, Bueno LS, Coleman FC, Cusick JA, Ellis RD, et al. 2017. Diel, lunar, and seasonal spawning 

patterns of the Atlantic goliath grouper, Epinephelus itajara, off Florida, United States. Bull Mar 

Sci. 92(2):391-406.

Koenig CC, Coleman FC, Kingon K. 2011. Pattern of recovery of the goliath gouper Epinephelus itajara

population in the southeastern US. Bull Mar Sci. 87(4):891-911.

Koenig CC, Stallings CD. 2015. A new compact rotating video system for rapid survey of reef fish 

populations. Bull Mar Sci. 91(3):365-373.

Koslow JA. 2009. The role of acoustics in ecosystem-based fishery mangement. ICES J Mar Sci. 

66(6):966–973.

Kracker L. 2007. Hydroacoustic surveys: a non-destructive approach to monitoring fish distributions at 

national marine sanctuaries. Charleston (SC): National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

National Ocean Service. 24 p. Report No.: NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 66.

Kraus RT, Friess C, Hill RL, Rooker JR. 2007. Characteristics of the snapper-grouper-grunt complex, 

benthic habitat description, and patterns of reef fish recruitment at Sonnier Bank in the 

northwestern Gulf of Mexico. In: Proceedings of the 59th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. 

Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 165-170.

Kulaw D. 2012. Habitat- and region-specific reproductive biology of female red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) in the Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-RD38.

Kurz RC. 1995. Predator-prey interactions between gray triggerfish Balistes capricus (Gmelin), and a 

guild of sand dollars around artificial reefs in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 

56(1):150-160.
96

Lang ET, Falterman BJ (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, LA). 2017. A 

comparison of sampling methods and continuation of red snapper life history metrics. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-07.

Lang ET, Falterman BJ (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, LA). 2017. A 

continuation of results in the spatial distribution and occurrence of red snapper, Lutjanus 

campechanus, sampled off the Louisiana Coast during nearshore trawl sampling efforts. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-08.

Lang ET, Fitzhugh GR (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Baton Rouge, LA and National 

Marine Fisheries Service, Panama City, FL). 2015. Oogenesis and fecundity type of gray 

triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) in the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 29 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-02.

Langland T. 2015. Fish assemblage structure, distribution, and trophic ecology at northwestern Gulf of 

Mexico banks [dissertation]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University.

Lauretta M. 2014. Virtual population analyses of Atlantic king mackerel. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 69 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-RW-03.

Lauretta M. 2014. Virtual population analyses of Gulf of Mexico king mackerel. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 69 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-RW-04.

Lauretta M, Cass-Calay SL (National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, FL). 2013. Updated standardized 

catch rates of king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) from the headboat fishery in the U.S. Gulf 

of Mexico and U.S. South Atlantic. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 27 p. Report Nos.: 

SEDAR38-DW-16 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No SFD-2008-001.

Lauretta M, Walter J (National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, FL). 2013. Updated standardized catch 

rates of king mackerel, Scomberomorus cavalla from the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistical 

Survey MRFSS. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR38-DW04 and 

Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-2013-.

Lazarre D, Sauls B, Germeroth R (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife 

Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL). 2017. A summary of data on the size distribution and 

release condition of red snapper discards from recreational fishery surveys in the eastern Gulf of 

Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 17 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-19.

Levesque JC, Richardson A. 2011. Characterization of the recreational fisheries associated with the 

Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (USA). Wildl Biol Pract. 7(1):90-115.

LGL Ecological Research Associates Inc. 1998. Cumulative ecological significance of oil and gas 

structures in the Gulf of Mexico: a Gulf of Mexico fisheries habitat suitability model—phase II 

model description. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management 

Service. 114 p. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 97-0044.

LGL Ecological Research Associates Inc. 1998. Cumulative ecological significance of oil and gas 

structures in the Gulf of Mexico: a Gulf of Mexico fisheries habitat suitability model--phase II 

user manual. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 

28 p. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 97-0043.
97

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX). 2017. Explosive removal of structures: 

fisheries impact assessment. Assemblage characterization synthesis report. Final report. New 

Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 118 p. 

Contract No.: M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX). 2017. Explosive removal of structures: 

fisheries impact assessment. Field season 1: sampling report. New Orleans (LA): US Department 

of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 34 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX). 2017. Explosive removal of structures: 

fisheries impact assessment. Field season 2 sampling report. New Orleans (LA): US Department 

of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 88 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX). 2018. Explosive removal of structures: 

fisheries impact assessment. Field season 3 sampling report. , New Orleans (LA): US Department 

of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 56 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX). 2019. Characterization of fish 

assemblages associated with offshore oil and gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans 

(LA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 74 p. Contract No.: 

M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX), Auburn University, Marine Science 

Institute (Auburn, AL). 2018. Explosive removal of structures: fisheries impact assessment. Field 

season 2 assemblage characterization report. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 74 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX), Auburn University, Marine Science 

Institute (Auburn, AL). 2018. Explosive removal of structures: fisheries impact assessment. Field 

season 3 assemblage characterization report. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 62 p. Contract No.: M16PC00005.

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. (College Station, TX), Science Applications International 

Corporation (Reston, VA). 1998. Cumulative ecological significance of oil and gas structures in 

the Gulf of Mexico: information search, synthesis, and ecological modeling. Phase I, final report. 

Kearneysville (WV): US Geological Survey Biological Resources Division and New Orleans 

(LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 137 p. BRD Contract 1445-

CT96-0005. Report Nos.: USGS/BRD/CR-1997-0006 and OCS Study MMS 97-0036.

Lindberg WJ, Frazer TK, Porter KM, Vose F, Loftin J, et al. 2006. Density-dependent habitat selection 

and performance by a large mobile reef fish. Ecol Appl. 16(2):731-746.

Lindberg WJ, Frazer TK, Stanton GR. 1990. Population effects of refuge dispersion for adult stone crabs 

(Xanthidae, Menippe). Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 66:239-249.

Lindeman KC, Pugliese R, Waugh GT, Ault JS. 2000. Developmental patterns within a multispecies reef 

fishery: management applications for essential fish habitats and protected areas. Bull Mar Sci. 

66(3):929-956.
98

Lindquist DC, Shaw RF, Hernandez FJ, Jr. 2005. Distribution patterns of larval and juvenile fishes at 

offshore petroleum platforms in the north-central Gulf of Mexico. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci. 

62(4):655-665.

Linton B (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2012. Methods for estimating shrimp bycatch of Gulf of Mexico Spanish mackerel and 

cobia: addendum. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 12 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-DW30 and 

Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD‐2012‐002.

Linton B (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2012. Shrimp fishery bycatch estimates for Gulf of Mexico red snapper, 1972-2011. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR28-DW06 and Sustainable Fisheries 

Division Contribution SFD‐2012‐017.

Linton BC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2013. Age composition of red snapper bycatch in the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery, 

1997-2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 12 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-AW05 and 

Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD‐2013-001.

Linton BC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2013. Shrimp trawl index of abundance for Gulf of Mexico red snapper, 1967-1989. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR-AW06 and Sustainable Fisheries 

Division Contribution SFD‐2013-002.

Logan RK, Lowe CG. 2019. Space use and inferred spawning activity of three exploited gamefish species 

on a large artificial reef. Fish Manag Ecol. 26:558-569.

Lokkeborg S. 2002. Spatio-temporal variations in gillnet catch rates in the vicinity of North Sea oil 

platforms. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S294-S299.

Løkkeborg S, Ona E, Vold A, Salthaug A. 2012. Sounds from seismic air guns: gear- and species-specific 

effects on catch rates and fish distribution. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 69:1278-1291.

Lombard L, Allman R, Thornton L, Palmer C (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2015. Description of age data and estimated growth for 

vermilion snapper from the northern Gulf of Mexico: 1994-2014. Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 2015-18. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 29 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR45-WP01 and 

Panama City Laboratory Contribution 2015-018.

Lombardi L (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 

2013. Ageing error matrices for SEDAR33: gag grouper and greater amberjack. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR33-AW-22 and NMFS Panama City Library 

Contribution #13-05.

Lombardi L (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 

2014. Growth models for king mackerel from the south Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 62 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR38-AW-01 and Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 14-01.
99

Lombardi L (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 

2015. Gray triggerfish ageing error. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 5 p. Report Nos.: 

SEDAR43-WP-13 and NMFS Panama City Library Contribution 15-11.

Lombardi L (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 

2017. Summary of red snapper age-length data by data providers for SEDAR52. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 24 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR52-WP-14 and Panama City Library 

Contribution 17-08.

Lombardi L, Allman R, Pacicco A (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2015. Description of age data and estimated growth for gray 

triggerfish from the northern Gulf of Mexico: 2003‐2013. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 34 p. 

Report Nos.: SEDAR43-WP-10 and Panama City Library Contribution 15-02.

Lombardi L, Campbell M, Sauls B, McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Panama City, FL, Pascagoula, MS, and Miami, FL and Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL). 2013. A meta-data analysis of discard mortality 

estimates for gag grouper and greater amberjack. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 22 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR33-DW19.

Lombardi-Carlson LA, Cook M, Lyon H, Barnett B, Bullock L. 2012. A description of age, growth, and 

reproductive life history traits of scamps from the northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish. 

4(1):129-144.

Lorenzen K, Camp EV. 2019. Density-dependence in the life history of fishes: when is a fish recruited? 

Fish Res. 217:5-10.

Lotz JM, Overstreet RM, Franks JS. 1996. Gonadal maturation in the cobia, Rachycentron canadum, 

from the northcentral Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Res Rep. 9(3):147-159.

Lounder C. 2009. Recruitment dynamics and otolith chemical signatures of juvenile gray snapper, 

Lutjanus griseus, among west Florida estuarine and coastal marine ecosystems [thesis]. Pensacola 

(FL): University of West Florida. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 103 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR51-RD-10.

Love M, Hyland J, Ebeling A, Herrlinger T, Brooks A, Imamura E. 1994. A pilot study of the distribution 

and abundances of rockfishes in relation to natural environmental factors and an offshore oil and 

gas production platform off the coast of southern California. Bull Mar Sci. 55(2-3):1062-1085.

Love MS, Brothers E, Schroeder DM, Lenarz WH. 2007. Ecological performance of young-of-the-year 

blue rockfish (Sebastes mystinus) associated with oil platforms and natural reefs in California as 

measured by daily growth rates. Bull Mar Sci. 80(1):147-157.

Love MS, Caselle J, Snook L. 1999. Fish assemblages on mussel mounds surrounding seven oil platforms 

in the Santa Barbara Channel and Santa Maria Basin. Bull Mar Sci. 65(2):497-513.

Love MS, Caselle JE, Snook L. 2000. Fish assemblages around seven oil platforms in the Santa Barbara 

Channel area. Fish Bull. 98:96-117.
100

Love MS, Nishimoto M, Clark S, Schroeder DM. 2012. Recruitment of young-of-the-year fishes to 

natural and artificial offshore structure within central and southern California waters, 2008–2010. 

Bull Mar Sci. 88(4):863-882.

Love MS, Nishimoto M, Schroeder D (Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, 

CA). 2010. Fish assemblages associated with platforms and natural reefs in areas where data are 

non-existent or limited. Camarillo (CA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, Regulation and Enforcement. 101 p. MMS Cooperative Agreement No.: 1435-01-

05-CA-39322; NSL-PC-05-01 and MMS Cooperative Agreement No.: M07AC13380; NSL-PC07-04. Report No.: OCS Study BOEMRE Study 2010-012.

Love MS, Nishimoto MM, Clark S, Bull AS (Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa 

Barbara, CA. 2015. Analysis of fish populations at platforms off Summerland, California. 

Camarillo (CA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 56 p. 

BOEM Cooperative Agreement No.: M12AC00004. Report No.: OCS Study BOEM 2015-019.

Love MS, Schroeder DM, Lenarz W, MacCall A, Scarborough Bull A, Thorsteinson L. 2006. Potential 

use of offshore marine structures in rebuilding an overfished rockfish species, bocaccio (Sebastes 

paucispinis). Fish Bull. 104:383-390.

Love MS, Schroeder DM, Nishimoto MM (Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa 

Barbara, CA. 2003. The ecological role of oil and gas production platforms and natural outcrops 

on fishes in southern and central California: a synthesis of information. Seattle (WA): US 

Geological Survey and Camarillo (CA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management 

Service. 66 p. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2003-032.

Love MS, York A. 2005. A comparison of fish assemblages associated with an oil/gas pipeline and 

adjacent seafloor in the Santa Barbara Channel, Southern California Bight. Bull Mar Sci. 

77(1):101-117.

Love MS, York A. 2006. The relationships between fish assemblages and the amounts of bottom 

horizontal beam exposed at California oil platforms: fish habitat preferences at man-made 

platforms and (by inference) and natural reefs. Fish Bull. 104(4):542-549.

Love RH. 1971. Measurements of fish target strength: a review. Fish Bull. 69(4):703-715.

Lowe CG, Anthony KM, Jarvis ET, Bellquist LF, Love MS. 2009. Site fidelity and movement patterns of 

groundfish associated with offshore petroleum platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel. Mar 

Coast Fish. 1(1):71-89.

Lowerre-Barbieri S, Crabtree L, Switzer T, Walters Burnsed S, Guenther C. 2015. Assessing reproductive 

resilience: an example with South Atlantic red snapper Lutjanus campechanus. Mar Ecol Prog 

Ser. 526:125-141.

Lowerre-Barbieri S, Crabtree L, Switzer TS, McMichael RH Jr. 2012. Spatio-temporal dynamics in red 

snapper reproduction on the West Florida Shelf, 2008-2011. p. 10.

Lowerre-Barbieri S, DeCelles G, Pepin P, Catalán IA, Muhling B, Erisman B, Cadrin SX, Alós J, OspinaAlvarez A, Stachura MM et al. 2017. Reproductive resilience: a paradigm shift in understanding 

spawner-recruit systems in exploited marine fish. Fish Fish. 18(2):285-312.
101

Lyczkowski-Shultz J, Hanisko DS. 2007. A time series of observations on red snapper larvae from 

SEAMAP surveys 1982-2003: seasonal occurrence, distribution, abundance, and size. In:

Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Fitzhugh GR, Nieland DL, editors. Red snapper ecology and 

fisheries in the US Gulf of Mexico. American Fisheries Society Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): 

American Fisheries Society. p. 3-24.

Mackinson S, Freeman S, Flatt R, Meadows B. 2004. Improved acoustic surveys that save time and 

money: integrating fisheries and ground-discrimination acoustic technologies. J Exp Mar Biol 

Ecol. 305:129-140.

Maclennan DN, Fernandes PG, Dalen J. 2002. A consistent approach to definitions and symbols in 

fisheries acoustics. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:365-369.

Maclennan DN, Simmonds EJ. 1992. Fisheries acoustics. London (GB): Chapman & Hall.

Macreadie PI, Fowler AM, Booth DJ. 2011. Rigs-to-reefs: will the deep sea benefit from artificial 

habitat? Front Ecol Environ. 9(8):455-461.

Madsen PT. 2005. Marine mammals and noise: problems with root mean square sound pressure levels for 

transients. J Acoust Soc Am. 117(6):3952-3957.

Mallet D, Pelletier D. 2014. Underwater video techniques for observing coastal marine biodiversity: a 

review of sixty years of publications (1952–2012). Fish Res. 154:44-62.

Mann DA, Hawkins AD, Jech JM. 2008. Active and passive acoustics to locate and study fish. In: Webb 

JF, Fay RR, Popper AN, editors. Fish bioacoustics. Springer Handbook of Auditory Research, 

Volume 32. New York (NY): Springer. p. 279-309.

Mann DA, Locascio JV, Coleman FC, Koenig CC. 2009. Goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara sound 

production and movement patterns on aggregation sites. Endang Spec Res. 7:229-236.

Manooch CS, III, Potts JC. 1997. Age, growth and mortality of greater amberjack, Seriola dumereli, from 

the U.S. Gulf of Mexico headboat fishery. Bull Mar Sci. 61(3):671-683.

Martin CJB, Lowe CG. 2010. Assemblage structure of fish at offshore petroleum platforms on the San 

Pedro Shelf of southern California. Mar Coast Fish. 2(1):180-194.

Matter V (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL). 2012. Recreational survey data for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-DW04 and Sustainable Fisheries 

Division Contribution No SFD-2012- 015.

Matter V (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL). 2012. Recreational survey data for Spanish mackerel and cobia in the 

Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico from the MRFSS and TPWD surveys. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 32 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR28-DW14 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution 

No SFD-2012- 004.
102

Matter VM, Cummings N, Isely JJ, Brennan K, Fitzpatrick K (Nationa Marine Fisheries Service, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL and Beaufort, NC). 2012. Estimated conversion 

factors for calibrating MRFSS charterboat landings and effort estimates for the South Atlantic 

and Gulf of Mexico in 1981-1985 with for hire survey estimates with application to Spanish 

mackerel and cobia landings. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 30 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR28-

DW12 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No SFD-2012- 003.

Matter VM, Walter JF (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Miami, FL). 2013. Headboat discards for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 8 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-AW01 and Sustainable Fisheries 

Division Contribution No SFD-2013-005.

McAllister MK (Statistical Evaluation and Resource Assessment, London, GB). 2004a. Brief review of 

red snapper data workshop report. Charleston (SC). 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR7-AW13.

McAllister MK (Statistical Evaluation and Resource Assessment, London, GB). 2004b. Identifying some 

approaches to formulating prior probability distributions for natural mortality rates in age zero 

and age one Gulf of Mexico red snapper. Charleston (SC). 20 p. Report No.: SEDAR7-AW14.

McCann B, Henrion M, Bernstein B. 2016. A decision support model for platform decommissioning: 

successful applications in California and implications for worldwide use. Paper presented at: SPE 

International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social 

Responsibility. Society of Petroleum Engineers; Stavanger, Norway, April 11-13, 2016. [accessed 

21 Jan 2109]. https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPE-179415-MS.

McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2012. 

Calculated discards of Spanish mackerel and cobia from commercial fishing vessels in the Gulf of 

Mexico and US South Atlantic. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 17 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR28-

DW04 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-2012-010.

McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2012. 

Calculated red snapper discards in the Gulf of Mexico commercial vertical line and bottom 

longline fisheries: preliminary results. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 11 p. Report Nos.: 

SEDAR31-DW31 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-2012-019.

McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2012. 

Observer reported size distribution of Gulf of Mexico red snapper from the commercial vertical 

line and bottom longline fisheries. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 27 p. Report Nos.: 

SEDAR31-DW32 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-2012-018.

McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2012. 

Standardized catch rates of cobia from commercial handline and trolling fishing vessels in the US 

South Atlantic, 1993-2010. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR28-

DW18 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-2012-008.

McCartney BS, Stubbs AR. 1971. Measurements of the acoustic strengths of fish in dorsal aspect, 

including swimbladder resonance. J Sound Vib. 15(3):397-420.

McCauley RD, Fewtrell J, Popper AN. 2003. High intensity anthropogenic sound damages fish ears. J 

Acoust Soc Am. 113(1):638-642.
103

McClatchie S, Thorne RE, Grimes P, Hanchet S. 2000. Ground truth and target identification for fisheries 

acoustics. Fish Res. 47:173-191.

McClellan DB, Cummings NJ (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 1997. Preliminary analysis of tag and recapture data of the greater amberjack, 

Seriola dumerili, in the southeastern United States. In: Proceedings of the 49th Gulf and 

Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Bridgetown, Barbados, November 1996. p. 25-45. Fort Pierce (FL): 

Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. Report No. SEDAR33-RD10.

McClenachan L. 2009. Historical declines of goliath grouper populations in South Florida, USA. Endang 

Spec Res. 7:175-181.

McCormick MI. 1994. Comparison of field methods for measuring surface topography and their 

associations with a tropical reef fish assemblage. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 112:87-96.

McDonough M. 2009. Oil platforms and red snapper movement and behavior [thesis]. [Baton Rouge 

(LA)]: Louisiana State University.

McDonough M, Cowan J. 2007. Tracking red snapper movements around an oil platform with an 

automated acoustic telemetry system. In: Proceedings of the 50th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries 

Institute [GCFI]. p. 159-163. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI.

McDonough M, Cowan JH, Jr (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2013. Short-term 

movement, home range, and behavior of red snapper around petroleum platforms in the northern 

Gulf of Mexico, as determined by high resolution acoustic telemetry. New Orleans (LA): US 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. Contract No.: 1435-01-99-

CA-30951-73515. 70 p. Report No.: OCS Study BOEM 2013-0123.

McGlaun JM, Thompson SL, Elrick MG. 1990. CTH: a three-dimensional shock wave physics code. Int J 

Impact Eng. 10:351-360.

McKinstry C, Carlson TJ, Brown RS (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA). 2007. 

Derivation of a mortal injury metric for studies of rapid decompression of depth-acclimated 

physostomous fish. Final report. Portland (OR): US Army Corps of Engineers. 16 p. Contract 

No.: DE-AC05-76RL01830. Report No.: PNNL-17080.

McKinzie MK, Jarvis ET, Lowe CG. 2014. Fine-scale horizontal and vertical movement of barred sand 

bass, Paralabrax nebulifer, during spawning and non-spawning seasons. Fish Res. 150:66-75.

McLean DL, Partridge JC, Bond T, Birt MJ, Bornt KR, Langlois TJ. 2017. Using industry ROV videos to 

assess fish associations with subsea pipelines. Cont. Shelf Res. 141:76-97.

Mikulas JJ, Jr., Rooker JR. 2008. Habitat use, growth, and mortality of post-settlement lane snapper 

(Lutjanus synagris) on natural banks in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res. 93(1-2):77-

84.

Millar RB, Anderson MJ. 2004. Remedies for pseudoreplication. Fish Res. 70(2-3):397-407.

Miller MW. 2002. Using ecological processes to advance artificial reef goals. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S27-

S31.
104

Miller TJ, Blair JA, Ihde TF, Jones RM, Secor DH, Wilberg MJ. 2010. FishSmart: an innovative role for 

science in stakeholder-centered approaches to fisheries management. Fisheries. 35(9):424-433.

Minton RV, Heath SR. 1998. Alabama’s artificial reef program: building oases in the desert. Gulf Mex 

Sci. 16(1):105-106.

Mireles C. 2010. Site fidelity and depth utilization of nearshore reef fish on offshore San Pedro Shelf 

petroleum platforms [thesis]. Long Beach (CA): California State University.

Mitchell KM, Henwood T, Fitzhugh GR, Allman RJ. 2004. Distribution, abundance, and age structure of 

red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) caught on research longlines in U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Gulf 

Mex Sci. 22(2):164-172.

Mitchell WA, Kellison GT, Bacheler NM, Potts JC, Schobernd CM, Hale LF. 2014. Depth-related 

distribution of postjuvenile red snapper in southeastern U.S. Atlantic Ocean waters: ontogenic 

patterns and implications for management. Mar Coast Fish. 6(1):142-155.

Mitson RB, Knudsen HP. 2003. Causes and effects of underwater noise on fish abundance estimation. 

Aquat Liv Res. 16(3):255-263.

Moe MA, Jr. 1963. A survey of offshore fishing in Florida. St. Petersburg (FL): Florida State Board of 

Conservation Marine Laboratory. 120 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-RD05.

Moncrief T, Brown-Peterson NJ, Peterson MS. 2018. Age, growth, and reproduction of vermilion snapper 

in the north-central Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 147(5):996-1010.

Morison AK, Robertson SG, Smith DC. 1998. An integrated system for production fish aging: image 

analysis and quality assurance. N Am J Fish Manage. 18(3):587-598.

Morris W, Winters J. 2005. Fish behavioral and physical responses to vibroseis noise Prudhoe Bay, 

Alaska 2003. Fairbanks (AK): Alaska Department of Natural Resources. Report No.: Technical 

Report No. 05-02.

Moser JG Jr, Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr, Gledhill CT, Henwood TA, et al. (National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. Developing a survey 

methodology for sampling red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, at oil and gas platforms in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 23 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW26.

Mudrak PA, Szedlmayer ST. 2012. Proximity effects of larger resident fishes on recruitment of age-0 red 

snapper in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 141:487-494.

Mudrak PA, Szedlmayer ST. 2020. Fishing mortality estimates for red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, 

based on acoustic telemetry and conventional mark-recapture. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, 

editors. Red snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. p. 75-94.

Mudrak PA, Szedlmayer ST. 2020. Juvenile red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, densities on small 

artificial reefs to estimate year-class strength. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red 

snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 27-46.

Mueller M (Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, Tampa, FL). 2012. Artificial structure and 

hard-bottom spatial coverage in the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 15 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-DW19.
105

Muller RG (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. 

Petersburg, FL). 2017. Standardized reef fish visual census index for gray snapper, Lutjanus 

griseus, for the Florida reef track from Biscayne Bay through the Florida Keys for 1997-2016. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW14.

Munday DR, Ennis GL, Wright DG, Jeffries DC, McGreer ER, et al. 1986. Development and evaluation 

of a model to predict effects of buried underwater blasting charges on fish populations in shallow 

water areas. Can Tech Rept Fish Aquat Sci. 1418:x + 49 p.

Munnelly RT. 2016. Fishes associated with oil and gas platforms in Louisiana's river-influenced 

nearshore waters [thesis]. [Baton Rouge (LA)]: Louisiana State University.

Munnelly RT, Reeves DB, Chesney EJ, Baltz DM, Marx BD. 2019. Habitat suitability for oil and gas 

platform-associated fishes in Louisiana’s nearshore waters. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 608:199-219.

Munro JL, Pauly D. 1983. A simple method for comparing the growth of fishes and invertebrates. 

Fishbyte. 1(1):5-6.

Murie DJ, Parkyn DC (University of Florida, Gainesville, FL). 2008. Age, growth and sex maturity of 

greater amberjack (Seriola dumerili) in the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC). 41 p. Report 

Nos.: SEDAR33-RD13 and MARFIN Final Report NA05NMF4331071.

Murie DJ, Parkyn DC (University of Florida, Gainesville, FL). 2013. Preliminary report on the release 

mortality of Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack from commercial and recreational hand-line 

fisheries: integration of fishing practices, environmental parameters, and fish physiological 

attributes. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW29.

Murie DJ, Parkyn DC, Austin J (University of Florida, Gainesville, FL). 2011. Seasonal movement and 

mixing rates of greater amberjack in the Gulf of Mexico and assessment of exchange with the 

South Atlantic spawning stock. Final report for cooperative research program 

(NA07NMF4540076). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 45 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW12.

Murphy HM, Jenkins GP. 2010. Observational methods used in marine spatial monitoring of fishes and 

associated habitats: a review. Mar Freshwater Res. 61:236-252.

Murray F, Needham K, Gormley K, Rouse S, Coolen JWP, Billett D, Dannheim J, Birchenough SNR, 

Hyder K, Heard R et al. 2018. Data challenges and opportunities for environmental management 

of North Sea oil and gas decommissioning in an era of blue growth. Mar Policy. 97:130-138.

NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization]. 2010. Manual of NATO safety principles for the storage of 

military ammunition and explosives. NATO Military Agency for Standardization. Brussels (BE): 

NATO MAS. Report No.: Allied Ammunition Storage and Transport Publication 1 [AASTP-1], 

Edition 1.

Neira FJ. 2005. Summer and winter plankton fish assemblages around offshore oil and gas platforms in 

south-eastern Australia. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci. 63(4):589-604.

Nelson RS, Manooch CS, III. 1982. Growth and mortality of red snappers in the west-central Atlantic 

Ocean and northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 111:465-475.
106

Nieland DL, Wilson CA. 2003. Red snapper recruitment to and disappearance from oil and gas platforms 

in the northern Gulf of Mexico. In: Stanley DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. Fisheries, reefs, and 

offshore development. American Fisheries Society Symposium 36. Bethesda (MD): American 

Fisheries Society. p. 73-81.

Nieland DL, Wilson CA, III. 2007. Declining size at age among red snapper in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico off Louisiana, USA: recovery or collapse? In: Patterson WF, III, Cowan JH, Jr., Fitzhugh 

GR, Nieland DL, editors. Red snapper ecology and fisheries in the US Gulf of Mexico. American 

Fisheries Society Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 301-307.

NMFS [National Marine Fisheries Service]. 2016. Technical guidance for assessing the effects of 

anthropogenic sound on marine mammal hearing. Underwater acoustic thresholds for onset of 

permanent and temporary threshold shifts. Report No.: NOAA Technical Memomorandum 

NMFS-OPR-55.

[NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. 2017. Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South 

Atlantic; reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; modifications to Greater Amberjack allowable 

harvest and rebuilding plan. 50 CFR Part 622. [Final rule.] Fed Reg. 82(248): 61485–61487. 

[accessed 2020 April 14]. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/28/2017-

28047/fisheries-of-the-caribbean-gulf-of-mexico-and-south-atlantic-reef-fish-fishery-of-the-gulfof-mexico

NMFS Beaufort. 2012. Preliminary standardized catch rates of Southeast US Atlantic cobia 

(Rachycentron canadum) from headboat data. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 28 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR28-DW20.

NMFS-SERO [NMFS Souteast Regional Office]. 2017. Headboat collaborative pilot program 2014 

annual report. St. Petersburg (FL): NMFS-SERO. Report Nos.: SEDAR52-RD-07 and SEROLAPP-2015-01.

NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration]. 2015. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration draft guidance for assessing the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine 

mammal hearing: underwater acoustic threshold levels for onset of permanent and temporary 

threshold shifts. 180 p.

NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] Fisheries. 2018. NOAA announces the 2018 

Gulf of Mexico red snapper recreational seasons and clarifies permit regulations for vessels 

fishing in federal waters. [accessed 13 Feb 2020]. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/bulletin/noaaannounces-2018-gulf-mexico-red-snapper-recreational-seasons-and-clarifies-permit.

NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] Fisheries. 2019. State recreational red 

snapper management exempted fishing permits. [accessed Nov 22, 2019]. 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/southeast/state-recreational-red-snapper-management-exemptedfishing-permits.

NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] SEFSC [Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center]. 2012. Gulf of Mexico red snapper 2011 projection update. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-RD03.
107

Nowling LK, Cowan JH, Jr., Shaw RF (Coastal Marine Institute, Louisiana State Univeristy). 2010. Proof 

of concept for platform recruited fish, phase I: do platforms provide habitat for subadult red 

snapper? New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 

Cooperative Agreement No.: 1435-99-CA-30951-18181. 80 p. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 

2010-002.

Ogden JC, Ebersole JP. 1981. Scale and community structure of coral reef fishes: a long-term study of a 

large artificial reef. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 4:97-103.

O'Hop J, Sauls B (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research 

Institute, St. Petersburg, FL). 2012. Index of abundance for pre-fishery recruit red snapper from 

Florida headboat observer data. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-

DW09.

Ona E, Mitson RB. 1996. Acoustic sampling and signal processing near the seabed: the deadzone 

revisited. ICES J Mar Sci. 53:677-690.

Orbesen E (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2012. Constituent based tagging of cobia in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico waters. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR28-DW13 and Sustainable Fisheries 

Division Contribution SFD‐2012‐XXX.

Orhum R, Wrege B. 2018. Commercial landings of gray or mangrove snapper (Lutjanus griseus) from the 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-RW-01.

Osenberg CW, St. Mary CM, Wilson JA, Lindberg WJ. 2002. A quantitative framework to evaluate the 

attraction-production controversy. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S214-S221.

Ouzts AC, Szedlmayer ST. 2003. Diel feeding patterns of red snapper on artificial reefs in the northcentral Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 132(6):1186-1193.

Overholtz WJ, Hare JA, Keith CM. 2011. Impacts of interannual environmental forcing and climate 

change on the distribution of Atlantic mackerel on the U.S. northeast continental shelf. Mar Coast 

Fish. 3:219-232.

Pacunski RE, Palsson WA, Greene HG, Gunderson D. 2008. Conducting visual surveys with a small 

ROV in shallow water. In: Reynolds JR, Green HG, editors. Marine habitat mapping for Alaska. 

Fairbanks (AK): Alaska Sea Grant College Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks. p. 109-128.

Page HM, Dugan JE, Schroeder DM, Nishimoto MM, Love MS, Hoesterey JC. 2007. Trophic links and 

condition of a temperate reef fish: comparisons among offshore oil platform and natural reef 

habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 344:245-256.

Pajuelo JG, González JA, Triay-Portella R, Martín JA, Ruiz-Díaz R, Lorenzo JM, Luque Á. 2016. 

Introduction of non-native marine fish species to the Canary Islands waters through oil platforms 

as vectors. J Mar Syst. 163:23-30.
108

Palmer C, DeVries D, Fioramonti C, Lang H (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Panama City, FL). 2013. A review of Gulf of 

Mexico and Atlantic king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) age data, 1986 – 2013, from the 

Panama City Laboratory, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries Service. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 59 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR38-DW-15 and Panama City Laboratory 

Contribution 13-09.

Parente V, Ferreira D, Moutinho dos Santos E, Luczynski E. 2006. Offshore decommissioning issues: 

deductibility and transferability. Energy Policy. 34(15):1992-2001.

Parker RO, Jr., Colby DR, Willis TD. 1983. Estimated amount of reef habitat on a portion of the U.S. 

South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. Bull Mar Sci. 33(4):935-940.

Parker SJ, Schultz AW, Schroeder WW. 1992. Sediment characteristics and seafloor topography of a 

palimpsest shelf, Mississippi-Alabama continental shelf. In: Fletcher CH, III, Wehmiller JF, 

editors. Quaternary coasts of the United States: marine and lacustrine system. SEPM Special 

Publication No 48. Tulsa (OK): SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology. p. 243-251.

Parker-Stetter SL, Rudstam LG, Sullivan PJ, Warner DM. 2009. Standard operating procedures for 

fisheries acoustic surveys in the Great Lakes. Ann Arbor (MI): GLFC. Report No.: Great Lakes 

Fishery Commission Special Publication 09-01.

Parrack NC, McClellan DB (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Center, Miami, FL). 

1986. Trends in Gulf of Mexico red snapper population dynamics, 1979-85. Miami, FL. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 125 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-RD15 and Coastal Resources Division 

Contribution No. CRD-86/87-4.

Parsons GR. 2012. Relative abundance of juvenile red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus in the northern 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 6 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW01.

Pattengill-Semmens CV. 2007. Fish assemblages of the Gulf of Mexico, including the Flower Garden 

Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Proceedings of the 59th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries 

Institute. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 229-238.

Patterson WF, III. 1999. Aspects of the population ecology of red snapper Lutjanus campechanus in an 

artificial reef area off Alabama [thesis]. Mobile (AL): University of South Alabama.

Patterson WF, III. 2007. A review of movement in Gulf of Mexico red snapper: implications for 

population structure. In: Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Fitzhugh GR, Nieland DL, editors. Red 

snapper ecology and fisheries in the US Gulf of Mexico. American Fisheries Society Symposium 

60. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 221-235. Report No.: SEDAR31-RD35.

Patterson WF, Cowan JH. 2003. Site fidelity and dispersion of red snapper associated with artificial reefs 

in the northern Gulf of Mexico. In: Stanley DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. Fisheries, reefs, and 

offshore development. American Fisheries Society Symposium 36. Bethesda (MD); American 

Fisheries Society. p. 181-193.
109

Patterson WF, III, Cowan JH, Jr., Barnett BK, Zapp Sluis M (University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL 

and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2010. Estimation of the source of red snapper 

recruits to west Florida and south Texas with otolith chemistry: implications for stock structure 

and management. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 49 p. Grant No. NA05NMF4331072. Report 

Nos.: SEDAR31-RD14 and MaRFIN Final Report.

Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Fitzhugh GR, Nieland DL. 2007. Red snapper ecology and fisheries in 

the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. American Fisheries Society Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): American 

Fisheries Society.

Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Wilson CA, Chen Z. 2008. Temporal and spatial variability in juvenile 

red snapper otolith elemental signatures in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 

137(2):521-532.

Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Wilson CA, Shipp RL. 2001b. Age and growth of red snapper, Lutjanus 

campechanus, from an artificial reef area off Alabama in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 

99:617-627.

Patterson WF III, Dance MA, Addis DT. 2008. Development of a remotely operated vehicle based 

methodology to estimate fish community structure at artificial reef sites in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico. Proceedings of the 61st Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. 

p. 263-270.

Patterson WF, III, Porch CE, Tarnecki JH, Strelcheck AJ. 2012. Effect of circle hook size on reef fish 

catch rates, species composition, and selectivity in the northern Gulf of Mexico recreational 

fishery. Bull Mar Sci. 88(3):647-665.

Patterson WF III, Shepard KE (University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL). 2013. A cooperative research 

approach to estimating Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico king mackerel stock mixing and population 

dynamics parameters. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 38 p. Grant No. NA06NMF4540060. 

Report No.: SEDAR38-RD-03.

Patterson WF III, Tarnecki JH, Neese JT (University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL). 2010. Examination 

of red snapper fisheries ecology on the northwest Florida shelf (FWC-08304): final report. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 40 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-RD27.

Patterson WF III, Watterson JC, Shipp RL, Cowan JH Jr. 2001a. Movement of tagged red snapper in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 130:533-545.

Patterson WF III, Wilson CA, Bentley SJ, Cowan JH Jr, Henwood T, et al. 2005. Delineating juvenile red 

snapper habitat on the northern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. In: Barnes PW, Thomas JP, 

editors. Benthic habitats and the effects of fishing. American Fisheries Society Symposium 41. 

Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 277-288.

Peabody MB. 2004. The fidelity of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) to petroleum platforms and 

artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State 

University.
110

Peabody MB, Wilson CA (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2006. Fidelity of red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus) to petroleum platforms and artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 73 p. 

MMS Contract No.: 1435-01-99-CA-30951-70414. Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2006-005.

Peabody MB, Wilson CA III, Stanley DR. 2005. The fidelity of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, to 

petroleum platforms and artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Proceedings of the 56th 

Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 842-843.

Pequegnat WE (TerEco Corporation, College Station, TX). 1983. The ecological communities of the 

continental slope and adjacent regimes of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Metairie (LA): US 

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 696 p. Contract No.: AA851-CT1-12. 

Report No.: 1983-11.

Perkinson M, Denson M. 2012. Evaluation of cobia movements and distribution using tagging data from 

the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic coast of the United States. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 16 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-DW05.

Perkol-Finkel S, Benayahu Y. 2007. Differential recruitment of benthic communities on neighboring 

artificial and natural reefs. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 340:25-39.

Pickering H, Whitmarsh D. 1997. Artificial reefs and fisheries exploitation: a review of the 'attraction 

versus production' debate, the influence of design and its significance for policy. Fish Res. 31:39-

59.

Pickering H, Whitmarsh D, Jensen A. 1998. Artificial reefs as a tool to aid rehabilitation of coastal 

ecosystems: investigating the potential. Mar Pollut Bull. 37(8-12):505-514.

Piko AA, Szedlmayer ST. 2007. Effects of habitat complexity and predator exclusion on the abundance of 

juvenile red snapper. J Fish Biol. 70:758-769.

Pinkard DR, Kocak DM, Butler JL. 2005. Use of a video and laser system to quantify transect area for 

remotely operated vehicle (ROV) rockfish and abalone surveys. Proc Oceans 2005 MTS/IEEE. 

3:2824-2829.

Piraino MN, Szedlmayer ST (Auburn University, Fairhope, AL). 2012. Fine-scale movements and home 

ranges of red snapper Lutjanus campechanus around artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 28 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW14.

Piraino MN, Szedlmayer ST. 2014. Fine-scale movements and home ranges of red snapper around 

artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 143(4):988-998.

Pitcher TJ, Buchary EA, Hutton T. 2002. Forecasting the benefits of no-take human-made reefs using 

spatial ecosystem simulation. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S17-S26.

Poe WT, Adams CF, Janda R, Kirklewski D. 2009. Effect of depth below mudline of charge placement 

during explosive removal of offshore structures (EROS). New Orleans (LA): US Department of 

the Interior, Minerals Management Service. Report No.: TAR Project No. 570.
111

Pollack A. 2016. Bottom longline analytical data collected in Gulf of Mexico from 1995-01-01 to 2013-

12-30. Asheville (NC): Nationa Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Centers for 

Environmental Information. [accessed 11 Oct 2016]. http://data.nodc.noaa.gov/cgibin/iso?id=gov.noaa.nodc:0147683.

Pollack AG (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 

2017. Continuity run - bottom longline. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 3 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR52-WP-17.

Pollack AG (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 

2017. Continuity run - groundfish. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 3 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-

WP-18.

Pollack AG, Campbell MD, Driggers WB (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2013. Estimation of hook selectivity on red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) during a fishery independent survey of natural reefs in the Gulf of Mexico. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW12.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Ingram GW Jr (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. Lane snapper abundance indices from SEAMAP groundfish 

surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 27 p. Report No.: 

SEDARDW-17.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Ingram GW,Jr (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. Wenchman abundance indices from MSLABS small pelagics 

surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 15 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR49-DW-18.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Ingram GW Jr (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2016. Wenchman abundance indices from SEAMAP groundfish 

surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 27 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR49-DW-19.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Ingram GW Jr (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. Gray snapper abundance indices from SEAMAP groundfish 

surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 28 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR51-DW-03.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Ingram GW Jr (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. Red snapper abundance indices from bottom longline surveys in 

the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 38 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP16.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Ingram GW Jr (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2017. Red snapper abundance indices from groundfish surveys in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 76 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-24.

Pollack AG, Hanisko DS, Lyczkowski-Shultz J, Jones CM, Ingram GW Jr (NOAA Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. Red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) larval 

indices of relative abundance from SEAMAP fall plankton surveys, 1986 to 2010. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 65 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW27.
112

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. Spanish mackerel and cobia abundance indices 

from SEAMAP groundfish surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 40 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-DW03.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2013. Greater amberjack and gag grouper catches 

from Mississippi Laboratories fishery independent surveys. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 15 

p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW01.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2013. King mackerel abundance indices from NMFS 

small pelagics surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 18 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR38-DW-03.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2013. King mackerel abundance indices from 

SEAMAP groundfish surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

69 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-DW02.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2015. Gray triggerfish abundance indices from 

SEAMAP groundfish surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

30 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-11.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2015. Vermilion snapper abundance indices from 

SEAMAP groundfish surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

37 p. Report No.: SEDAR45-WP-10.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr, Campbell MD, DeVries DA, Gardner CL, et al. 2015. Vermilion snapper reef 

fish video index for the eastern Gulf of Mexico: a combined index from three fishery-independent 

surveys. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 23 p. Report No.: SEDAR45-WP-09.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr, Foster DG (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2012. Red snapper abundance indices from 

SEAMAP groundfish surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

235 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW20.

Pollack AG, Ingram GW Jr, Henwood TA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Pascagoula, MS). 2013. Red snapper abundance indices from 

combined bottom trawl surveys in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

25 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW07.

Pollock KH, Winterstein SR, Bunck CM, Curtis PD. 1989. Survival analysis in telemetry studies: the 

staggered entry design. J Wildlife Manage. 53(1):7-15.

Polovina JJ, Sakai I. 1989. Impacts of artificial reefs on fishery production in Shimamaki, Japan. Bull 

Mar Sci. 44(2):997-1003.
113

Pondella DJ, Zahn LA, Love MS, Siegel D, Bernstein BB. 2015. Modeling fish production for southern 

California's petroleum platforms. Integr Enviro Assess Manag. 11(4):584-593.

Ponti M, Abbiati M, Ceccherelli VU. 2002. Drilling platforms as artificial reefs: distribution of 

macrobenthic assemblages of the “Paguro” wreck (northern Adriatic Sea). ICES J Mar Sci. 

59:S316-S323.

Popper AN, Halvorsen MB, Casper BM, Carlson TJ (University of Maryland, College Park, MD). 2013. 

Effects of pile driving sounds on non-auditory tissues of fish. Herndon (VA): US Department of 

the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 72 p. Contract No.: M08PC20010. Report 

No.: BOEM 2012-105.

Popper AN, Halvorsen MB, Kane A, Miller DL, Smith ME, Song J, Stein P, Wysocki LE. 2007. The 

effects of high-intensity, low-frequency active sonar on rainbow trout. J Acoust Soc Am. 

122:623-635.

Popper AN, Hastings MC. 2009. The effects of anthropogenic sources of sound on fishes. J Fish Biol. 

75:455-489.

Popper AN, Hastings MC. 2009. The effects of human-generated sound on fish. Integr Zool. 4:43-52.

Popper AN, Hawkins AD, Fay RR, Mann DA, Bartol S, et al. 2014. Sound exposure guidelines for fishes 

and sea turtles: a technical report prepared by ANSI-Accredited Standards Committee S3/SC1 

and registered with ANSI. ASA S3/SC1.4TR-2014. Springer Briefs in Oceanography. New York 

(NY): Springer.

Popper AN, Smith ME, Cott PA, Hanna BW, MacGillivray AO, et al. 2005. Effects of exposure to 

seismic airgun use on hearing of three fish species. J Acoust Soc Am. 117:3958-3971.

Porch CE (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL). 2013. Reconstructed time series of offshore shrimp trawl effort in the Gulf of 

Mexico from 1945 to 1972 for use in the SEDAR 31 Gulf of Mexico red snapper assessment. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 8 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW09.

Porch CE, Cass-Calay SL (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2001. Status of the vermilion snapper fishery in the Gulf of 

Mexico: assessment 5.0. Miami (FL): NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center. 66 p. 

Report No.: Sustainable Fisheries Division contribution No. SFD-01/02-129.

Porch CE, Fitzhugh GR, Linton BC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL and Panama City, FL). 2013. Modeling the 

dependence of batch fecundity and spawning frequency on size and age for use in stock 

assessments of red snapper in U.S. Gulf of Mexico waters. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-AW03.

Porch CE, Turner SC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Miami, FL). 2004. Reconstructed time series of shrimp trawl effort in the Gulf of 

Mexico and the associated bycatch of red snapper from 1948 to 1972. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 14 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-RD41 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution 

No. SFD-2004-055.
114

Porch CE, Turner SC, Schirripa MJ (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2004. The commercial landings of red snapper 

in the Gulf of Mexico from 1872 to 1962. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report Nos.: 

SEDAR31-RD46 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No. SFD-2004-054.

Powers JE, Brooks EN (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2004. Red snapper compensation in the stock-recruitment function and bycatch mortality. 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 10 p. Report No.: SEDAR7-AW-8.

Powers SP, Drymon JM, Hightower CL, Spearman T, Bosarge GS, et al. 2018. Distribution and age 

composition of red snapper across the Inner Continental Shelf of the North-Central Gulf of 

Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 147:791-805.

Powers SP, Grabowski JH, Peterson CH, Lindberg WJ. 2003. Estimating enhancement of fish production 

by offshore artificial reefs: uncertainty exhibited by divergent scenarios. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 

264:265-277.

Prytherch HF. 1983. A descriptive survey of the bottom longline fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. Miami 

(FL): National Marines Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Center. Report No.: National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-122.

Pulley TE. 1952. A zoogeographic study based on the bivalves of the Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Cambridge 

(MA): Harvard University.

Quist MC, Pegg MA, DeVries DR. 2012. Age and growth. In: Zale AV, Parrish DL, Sutton TM, editors. 

Fisheries techniques. 3rd ed. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 677-731.

Rabalais NN, Cai W-J, Carstensen J, Conley DJ, Fry B, et al. 2014. Eutrophication-driven deoxygenation 

in the coastal ocean. Oceanography. 27(1):172-183.

Rabalais NN, Wiseman WJ Jr, Turner RE. 1994. Comparison of continuous records of near-bottom 

dissolved oxygen from the hypoxia zone along the Louisiana coast. Estuaries. 17(4):850-851.

Rabaoui L, Lin Y-J, Qurban MA, Maneja RH, Franco J, et al. 2015. Patchwork of oil and gas facilities in 

Saudi waters of the Arabian Gulf has the potential to enhance local fisheries production. ICES J 

Mar Sci. 72(8):2398-2408.

Rademacher KR, Render JH. 2003. Fish assemblages around oil and gas platforms in the northeastern 

Gulf of Mexico: developing a survey design. In: Stanley DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. 

Fisheries, reefs, and offshore development. American Fisheries Society Symposium 36. Bethesda 

MD: American Fisheries Society. p. 101-122.

Radford CA, Montgomery JC, Caiger P, Higgs DM. 2012. Pressure and particle motion detection 

thresholds in fish: a re-examination of salient auditory cues in teleosts. J Exp Biol. 215:3429-

3435.

Ramos J, Santos MN, Whitmarsh D, Monteiro CC. 2007. Stakeholder perceptions regarding the 

environmental and socio-economic impacts of the Algarve artificial reefs. Hydrobiologia. 

580:181-191.

Reeves DB. 2015. Oil and gas platforms on Ship Shoal, northern Gulf of Mexico, as habitat for reefassociated organisms [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University.
115

Reeves DB, Chesney EJ, Munnelly RT, Baltz DM, Maiti K. 2019. Trophic ecology of sheepshead and 

stone crabs at oil and gas platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico's hypoxic zone. Trans Am 

Fish Soc. 148:324-338.

Reeves DB, Chesney EJ, Munnelly RT, Baltz DM, Marx BD. 2017. Abundance and distribution of reefassociated fishes around small oil and gas platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico’s hypoxic 

zone. Estuar Coast. 41(7):1835-1847.

Reggio VC Jr, Kasprzak R. 1991. Rigs to reefs: fuel for fisheries enhancement through cooperation. In:

Benner CS, Middleton RW, editors. Fisheries and oil development on the continental shelf 

American Fisheries Society Symposium 11. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 9-17.

Relini G, Relini M, Torchia G, Palandri G. 2002. Ten years of censuses of fish fauna on the Loano 

artificial reef. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S132-S137.

Render JH. 1995. The life history (age, growth, and reproduction) of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) 

and its affinity for oil and gas platforms [thesis]. [Baton Rouge (LA)]: Louisiana State University.

Reynolds EM. 2015. Fish biomass and community structure around standing and toppled oil and gas 

platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico using hydroacoustic and video surveys [thesis]. Baton 

Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University.

Reynolds EM, Cowan JH, Jr. 2014. Hydroacoustic and video surveys in the northern Gulf of Mexico in 

support of Louisiana’s artificial reef planning area: a comparison of biomass and community 

structure. Proceedings of the 67th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, November 3-7, 2014, 

Christ Church, Barbados. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 169-170.

Reynolds EM, Cowan JH, Lewis KA, Simonsen KA. 2018. Method for estimating relative abundance and 

species composition around oil and gas platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico, U.S.A. Fish 

Res. 201:44-55.

Rios A (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2013. Estimating historical recreational angler effort in the Gulf of Mexico for the 

private, charter, and headboat fishing modes. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR31-AW11.

Rios A (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2013. Standardized catch rates for greater amberjack from the Gulf of Mexico 

headboat fishery 1986-2012. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 17 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR33-

AW19 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution Number: SFD-2013-17.

Rios A (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

Miami, FL). 2013. Standardized catch rates of greater amberjack from the Gulf of Mexico 

recreational cand private boat fisheries (MRFSS) 1986 to 2012. North Charleston (SC)`: SEDAR. 

23 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR33-AW20 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution Number: 

SFD-2013-16.
116

Rios A, Matter VM, Walter JF, Farmer N, Turner SC (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL and Southeast Regional Office, St. 

Petersburg, FL). 2012. Estimated conversion factors for adjusting MRFSS Gulf of Mexico red 

snapper catch estimates and variances in 1981-2003 to MRIP estimates and variances. North 

Charleston (SC)`: SEDAR. 12 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-DW25 and Sustainable Fisheries

Contribution No SFD-2012-016.

Roberts CE, Szedlmayer ST. 2020. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in red snapper, Lutjanus 

campechanus, and sediment samples after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In: Bortone SA, 

Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red Snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. 

p. 97-121.

Rodriguez Estrada U, Yasumaru FA, Tacon AGJ, Lemos D. 2015. Cobia (Rachycentron canadum): a 

selected annotated bibliography on aquaculture, general biology and fisheries 1967–2015. Rev 

Fish Sci Aquacult. 24(1):1-97.

Rogers PH, Zeddies DG. 2009. Multipole mechanisms for directional hearing in fish. In: Webb JF, 

Popper AN, Fay RR, editors. Fish bioacoustics. New York (NY): Springer-Verlag. p. 233-252.

Rooker JR, Dokken QR, Pattengill CV, Holt GJ. 1997. Fish assemblages on artificial and natural reefs in 

the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, USA. Coral Reefs. 16:83-92.

Rothbach D. 2007. Rigs-to-reefs: refocusing the debate in California. Duke Environ Law Policy Forum. 

17:283-295.

Rountree RA. 1989. Association of fishes with fish aggregation devices: effect of structure size on fish 

abundance. Bull Mar Sci. 44(2):960-972.

Rountree RA, Gilmore RG, Goudey CA, Hawkins AD, Luczkovich JJ, Mann DA. 2006. Listening to fish: 

applications of passive acoustics to fisheries science. Fisheries. 31(9):433-446.

Rouse S, Kafas A, Catarino R, Peter H. 2017. Commercial fisheries interactions with oil and gas pipelines 

in the North Sea: considerations for decommissioning. ICES J Mar Sci. 

(2017):doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsx1121.

Rudstam LG, Jech JM, Parker-Stetter SL, Horne JK, Sullivan PJ, et al. 2012. Fisheries acoustics. In: Zale 

AV, Parrish DL, Sutton TM, editors. Fisheries techniques. Third ed. Bethesda (MD): American 

Fisheries Society. p. 1-40.

Rudstam LG, Parker-Stetter SL, Sullivan PJ, Warner DM. 2009. Towards a standard operating procedure 

for fishery acoustic surveys in the Laurentian Great Lakes, North America. ICES J Mar Sci. 

66(6):1391-1397.

Rummer JL. 2007. Factors affecting catch and release (CAR) mortality in fish: insight into CAR mortality 

in red snapper and the influence of catastrophic decompression. In: Patterson WF III, Cowan JH 

Jr, Fitzhugh GR, Nieland DL, editors. Red snapper ecology and fisheries in the US Gulf of 

Mexico. American Fisheries Society Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries 

Society. p. 113-132.

S51 Stock ID Working Group. 2017. SEDAR 51 stock ID working paper. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 12 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-09.
117

Saari CR. 2011. Comparison of the age and growth of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) amongst 

habitats and regions in the Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. Baton Rouge( LA): Louisiana State 

University. Report No. SEDAR31-RD39.

Saari CR (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center). 2013. Sampling 

history of the king mackerel commercial fisheries in the southeastern United States by the federal 

Trip Interview Program (TIP). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR38-

DW-09.

Saari CR, Cowan JH, Jr., Boswell KM. 2014. Regional differences in the age and growth of red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus) in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 112(4):261-273.

Sadovy de Mitcheson Y, Craig MT, Bertoncini AA, Carpenter KE, Cheung WWL, et al. 2012. Fishing 

groupers towards extinction: a global assessment of threats and extinction risks in a billion dollar 

fishery. Fish Fish. 14(2):119-136.

Sagarese S, Rios A (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 

2017. Using a censored regression modeling approach to standardize red snapper catch per unit 

effort using recreational fishery data affected by a bag limit. 27 p. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 27 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-13.

Saillant E, Bradfield SC, Gold JR. 2010. Genetic variation and spatial autocorrelation among young-ofthe-year red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) in the northern Gulf of Mexico. ICES J Mar Sci. 

67:1240-1250.

Saillant E, Gold JR. 2006. Population structure and variance effective size of red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 104:136-148.

Saint-Arnaud D, Pelletier P, Poe W, Fowler J. 2004. Oil platform removal using engineered explosive 

charges: in-situ comparison of engineered and bulk explosive charges - final report. Herndon 

(VA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service Technology Assessment and 

Research Program. Report No.: TAR Project No. 429.

Sakaguchi S, Fukuhara O, Umezawa S, Fujiya M, Ogawa T. 1976. The influence of underwater explosion 

on fishes. Bull Nansei Reg Fish Res Lab. 9:33-65.

Salz R, Miller T, Williams E, Walter J, Katie D, Bray G. 2012. MRFSS/MRIP Calibration Workshop Adhoc Working Group report. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-RD48.

Sánchez-Jerez P, Gillanders BM, Ruiz-Rodríguez S, Ramos-Esplá AA. 2002. Effect of an artificial reef in 

Posidonia meadows on fish assemblage and diet of Diplodus annularis. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S59-

S68.

SAS Institute Inc. 2016. SAS online documentation, version SAS 9.4 TS Level 1M5. [accessed 23 Jan 

2019]. https://support.sas.com/documentation/94/.

Saul S (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2013. 

Commercial indices of abundance for greater amberjack in the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 15 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR33-AW18 and Sustainable Fisheries Division 

Contribution No. SFD-2013-018.
118

Saul S, Walter J (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 

2012. Using a censored regression modeling approach to standardize red snapper catch per unit 

effort using recreational fishery data affected by a bag limit. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. p. 

69 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-DW33 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No. SFD2012-020.

Saul S, Walter JF, Shipp B, Powers S, Powers M (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center, Miami, FL and University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL). 2013. The effect of 

hook type on red snapper catch. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 11 p. Report Nos.: SEDAR31-

AW04 and Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No. SFD-2013-003.

Saul SE, Ingram GW Jr. 2007. A categorical approach to modeling catch at age for various sectors of the 

gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. Proceedings of the 58th Gulf 

and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. Ft. Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 199-207.

Saul SE, Walter JF III, Die DJ, Naar DF, Donahue BT. 2013. Modeling the spatial distribution of 

commercially important reef fishes on the West Florida Shelf. Fish Res. 143:12-20.

Sauls B (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL). 2012. Release 

mortality estimates for recreational hook-and-line caught red snapper derived from a large-scale 

tag-recapture study in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 19 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR31-DW23.

Sauls B (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL). 2012. A summary of 

data on the size distribution and release condition of red snapper discards from recreational 

fishery surveys in the Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 27 p. Report No.: 

SEDAR31-DW11.

Sauls B (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL). 2015. Size distribution 

of vermilion snapper discards observed from for-hire recreational vessels in the eastern Gulf of 

Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 9 p. Report No.: SEDAR45-WP-07.

Sauls B, Ayala O. 2012. Circle hook requirements in the Gulf of Mexico: application in recreational 

fisheries and effectiveness for conservation of reef fishes. Bull Mar Sci. 88(3):667-679.

Sauls B, Ayala O, Germeroth R, Solomon J, Brody R (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission, St. Petersburg, FL and Jacksonville, FL). 2017. Red snapper discard mortality in 

Florida’s recreational fisheries. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 15 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-

WP-09.

Sauls B, Cermak B (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL). 2013. 

Characterization of greater amberjack discards in recreational for-hire fisheries. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 22 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW04. 

Sawada K, Furusawa M, Williamson NJ. 1993. Conditions for the precise measurement of fish target 

strength in situ. J Mar Acoust Soc Japan. 20:15-21.

Sayer MDJ, Baine MSP. 2002. Rigs to reefs: a critical evaluation of the potential for reef development 

using decommissioned rigs. J Soc Underwater Technol. 25(2):93-97.
119

Scarborough Bull A, Kendal JJ Jr. 1992. Preliminary investigation: platform removal and associated 

biota. In: Cahoon LB, editor. Diving for science. Costa Mesa (CA): American Academy of 

Underwater Sciences. p. 31-38.

Scarborough Bull A, Love MS. 2019. Worldwide oil and gas platform decommissioning: a review of 

practices and reefing options. Ocean Coast Manage. 168:274-306.

Scarborough-Bull A, Kendall JJ Jr. 1994. An indication of the process: offshore platforms as artificial 

reefs in the Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 55:1086-1098.

Scarborough-Bull A, Love MS, Schroeder DM. 2008. Artificial reefs as fishery conservation tools: 

contrasting the roles of offshore structures between the Gulf of Mexico and the Southern 

California Bight. In: Nielsen J, Dodson JJ, Friedland K, Hamon TR, Musick J, et al, editors. 

Reconciling fisheries with conservation: proceedings of the Fourth World Fisheries Congress 

.Volume I. American Fisheries Society Symposium 49. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries 

Society. p. 899-915.

Scarcella G, Grati F, Fabi G. 2011. Temporal and spatial variation of the fish assemblage around a gas 

platform in the northern Adriatic Sea, Italy. Turkish J Fish Aquat Sci. 11(3):433-444.

Schirripa MJ, Legault CM. 1999. Status of the red snapper in U.S. waters of the Gulf of Mexico: updated 

through 1998. Miami (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center. 106 p. Report No.: Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution SFD-99/00-75.

Schirripa MJ, Legault CM. 2000. Status of the vermilion snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico: 

assessment update (version 4.5). Miami (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center. 34 p. Report No. Sustainable Fisheries Division Contribution No. SFD99/00-108.

Schirripa MJ, Methot R, SEDAR 33 IEA Working Group. 2013. Incorporating various Gulf of Mexico 

integrated ecosystem assessment products into the stock synthesis integrated assessment model 

framework. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 15 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW10.

Schobernd ZH, Bacheler NM, Conn PB. 2014. Examining the utility of alternative video monitoring 

metrics for indexing reef fish abundance. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 71(3):464-471.

Schrandt MN, Powers SP, Mareska JF. 2015. Habitat use and fishery dynamics of a heavily exploited 

coastal migrant, Spanish mackerel. N Am J Fish Manage. 35(2):352-363.

Schroeder DM, Love MS. 2004. Ecological and political issues surrounding decommissioning of offshore 

oil facilities in the Southern California Bight. Ocean Coast Manage. 47:21-48.

Schroeder WW, Schultz AW, Dindo JJ. 1988. Inner-shelf hard bottom areas, northeastern Gulf of 

Mexico. Gulf Coast Assoc Geol Soc Trans. 38:535-541.

Schroeder WW, Schultz AW, Pilkey OH. 1995. Late Quaternary oyster shells and sea-level history, inner 

shelf, northeast Gulf of Mexico. J Coast Res. 11(3):664-674.

Schroepfer RL, Szedlmayer ST. 2006. Estimates of residence and site fidelity for red snapper Lutjanus 

campechanus on artificial reefs in the northereastern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 78(1):93-101.
120

Schwartzkopf BD. 2014. Assessment of habitat quality for red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, in the 

northwestern Gulf of Mexico: natural vs. artificial reefs [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana 

State University.

Schwartzkopf BD, Langland TA, Cowan JH. 2017. Habitat selection important for red snapper feeding 

ecology in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish. 9(1):373-387.

Scott GP (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2004. 

Estimates of historical red snapper recreational catch levels using US Census data and 

recreational survey information. 12 p. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR31-

RD47.

Scott ME, Smith JA, Lowry MB, Taylor MD, Suthers IM. 2015. The influence of an offshore artificial 

reef on the abundance of fish in the surrounding pelagic environment. Mar Freshwater Res. 

66(5):429-437.

Scott-Denton E, Cryer PF, Gocke JP, Harrelson MR, Kinsella DL, et al. 2011. Descriptions of the U.S. 

Gulf of Mexico reef fish bottom longline and vertical line fisheries based on observer data. Mar 

Fish Rev. 73(2):1-26.

Seaman DE, Powell RA. 1996. An evaluation of the accuracy of kernel density estimators for home range 

analysis. Ecology. 77(7):2075-2085.

Seaman W Jr. 2002. Unifying trends and opportunities in global artificial reef research, including 

evaluation. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S14-S16.

Seaman W Jr, Lindberg WJ, Gilbert CR, Frazer TK. 1989. Fish habitat provided by obsolete petroleum 

platforms off southern Florida. Bull Mar Sci. 44(2):1014-1022.

SEAMAP Reef Fish Work Group. Proceedings of the Reef Fish Workshop for the Southeast Area 

Monitoring and Assessment Program (SEAMAP); 1995 November; Grande Terre (LA). Gulf 

States Marine Fisheries Commission. Ocean Springs (MS): Gulf States Marine Fisheries 

Commission. 80 p.

Seavy NE, Quader S, Alexander JD, Ralph CJ. 2005. Generalized linear models and point count data: 

statistical considerations for the design and analysis of monitoring studies. In: Ralph C, Rich TD, 

editors. Bird Conservation Implementation and Integration in the Americas: Proceedings of the 

Third International Partners in Flight Conference; 2002 March 20–24; Asilomar, CA. Volume 2. 

Albany (CA): US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwest Research Station. Report 

No.: Gen Tech Rep PSW-GTR-191. p. 744-753. 

Seber GAF. 2002. The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. Caldwell (NJ): Blackburn 

Press.

SEDAR 38 Indices Working Group. 2014. SEDAR standardized report cards used for review of indices 

of abundance for Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico king mackerel. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 47 

p. Report No.: SEDAR38-DW-05.

SEDAR [Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review]. 2003. Complete stock of yellowtail snapper in the 

Southeastern United States. SEDAR3 assessment report 1. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 330 

p.
121

SEDAR. 2005. Stock assessment report of SEDAR 7: Gulf of Mexico red snapper. SEDAR7 assessment 

report 1. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 480 p.

SEDAR. 2006. Stock assessment report of SEDAR 9: Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack stock assessment 

report. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 178 p.

SEDAR. 2008. SEDAR 15A – stock assessment report 3 (SAR 3): South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico 

mutton snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 410 p. 

SEDAR. 2009. SEDAR procedural guidance document 2: addressing time-varying catchability. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 32 p. Report No.: SEDAR24-RD48.

SEDAR. 2010. SEDAR 19 – stock assessment report: Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic black grouper. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 661 p. 

SEDAR. 2011. SEDAR 9 stock assessment update: Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack. No. SEDAR44-

RD02. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 190 p.

SEDAR. 2012. Gulf of Mexico red snapper management history.. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 14 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-RD09. 

SEDAR. 2005. Stock assessment report of SEDAR 7: Gulf of Mexico red snapper. Charleston, SC. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 408 p. Report No.: SEDAR 7 assessment report 1.

SEDAR. 2012. Stock assessment of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico–SEDAR update 

assessment.[SEDAR red snapper update (2009).] . North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 224 p.

SEDAR. 2013. SEDAR 28 – Gulf of Mexico cobia stock assessment report. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 616 p.

SEDAR. 2013. SEDAR 28 – Gulf of Mexico Spanish mackerel stock assessment report. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 444 p.

SEDAR. 2013. SEDAR 31 – Gulf of Mexico red snapper stock assessment report. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 1103 p.

SEDAR. 2014. SEDAR 38 – stock assessment report: Gulf of Mexico king mackerel. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 465 p.

SEDAR. 2014a. SEDAR 33 – Gulf of Mexico gag stock assessment report. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 609 p. 

SEDAR. 2014b. SEDAR 33 – Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack stock assessment report. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 499 p. 

SEDAR. 2015. SEDAR 43 – final stock assessment report: Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 193 p. 

SEDAR. 2016. SEDAR 33 stock assessment update report Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack (Seriola 

dumerili). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 499 p. 
122

SEDAR. 2016a. SEDAR 45 – stock assessment report: Gulf of Mexico vermilion snapper. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 88 p. 

SEDAR. 2016b. SEDAR 49 Gulf of Mexico data-limited species: red drum, lane snapper, wenchman, 

yellowmouth grouper, speckled hind, snowy grouper, almaco jack, lesser amberjack. Section II: 

data workshop report. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 619 p. 

SEDAR. 2017. SEDAR 62 Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish assessment terms of reference, January 2017. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 2 p.

SEDAR. 2018. SEDAR 52 – stock assessment report Gulf of Mexico red snapper. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 434 p. 

SEDAR. 2018. SEDAR 62 Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish schedule of events, January 2018. Updated: 

July 2018. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 1 p. 

SEDAR. 2018. SEDAR - 51 – stock assessment report: Gulf of Mexico gray snapper. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 428 p. 

SEDAR. 2019. Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review consolidated SEDAR workshop 

recommendations for research, monitoring, and SEDAR procedures, SEDAR 1 – SEDAR 63. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 377 p.

Sedberry GR, Cuellar N. 1993. Planktonic and benthic feeding by the reef-associated vermilion snapper, 

Rhomboplites aurorubens (Teleostei, Lutjanidae). Fish Bull. 91(4):699-709.

Shaw RF, Lindquist DC, Benfield MC, Farooqi T, Plunket JT (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, 

LA). 2001. Offshore petroleum platforms: functional significance for larval fish across 

longitudinal and latitudinal gradients. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, 

Minerals Management Service. 122 p. Contract No.: 14-35-0001-30660-19961. Report No.: OCS 

Study MMS 2002-077. [accessed 2020 April 22] 

https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/60

Shepard K, Patterson WF III, Devries DA, Palmer C. 2008. Age and growth and stock mixing in Gulf of 

Mexico and Atlantic king mackerel (Scomberomorous cavalla). Proceedings of the 60th Gulf and 

Caribbean Fisheries Institute, November 5-9, 2007, Punta Cana, Dominican Republic. Marathon 

(FL): Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. p. 391-397.

Shepard KE. 2008. King mackerel population dynamics and stock mixing in the United States Atlantic 

Ocean and Gulf of Mexico [thesis]. [Pensacola (FL): University of West Florida.

Shepard KE, Patterson WF III, De Vries DA. 2010. Trends in Atlantic contribution to mixed-stock king 

mackerel landings in South Florida inferred from otolith shape analysis. Mar Coast Fish. 2:195-

204.

Shepard KE, Patterson WF III, DeVries DA, Ortiz M. 2010. Contemporary versus historical estimates of 

king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) age and growth in the U.S. Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of 

Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 86(3):515-532.
123

Sheridan P. 2008. Seasonal foods, gonadal maturation, and length-weight relationships for nine fishes 

commonly captured by shrimp trawl on the northwest Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. Panama 

City Beach (FL): Southeast Marine Fisheries Science Center. 37 p. Report No.: NOAA Technical 

Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-566.

Sherman RL, Gilliam DS, Spieler RE. 2002. Artificial reef design: void space, complexity, and 

attractants. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S196-S200.

Shinn EA. 1974. Oil structures as artificial reefs. Proceedings of an International Conference on Artificial 

Reefs; 20-22 March, 1974; Houston, TX. College Station (TX): Center for Marine Resources. 

National Sea Grant Program Grant No.: 04-3-158-18. Report No.: TAMU-SG-74-103. p. 91–96.

Shipley JB, Cowan JH Jr. 2010. Artificial reef placement: a red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, 

ecosystem and fuzzy rule-based model. Fish Manag Ecol. 18(2):154-167.

Shipp RL, Bortone SA. 2009. A perspective of the importance of artificial habitat on the management of 

red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. Rev Fish Sci. 17(1):41-47.

Shively JD, Culbertson JC, Peter DD, Embesi JA, Hammerschmidt PC. 2003. The Texas artificial reef 

program: over 50 years of marine habitat enhancement in the Gulf of Mexico. Austin (TX): Texas 

Parks and Wildlife Department. 45 p. Report No.: Management Data Series No. 196.

Shyue S-w, Yang K-c. 2002. Investigating terrain changes around artificial reefs by using a multi-beam 

echosounder. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S338-S342.

Simmonds J, MacLennan D. 2005. Fisheries acoustics: theory and practice. 2nd edition. Oxford (UK): 

Blackwell Publishing. 437 p.

Simmons CM. 2008. Gray triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, reproductive behavior, early life history, and 

competitive interactions between red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico [dissertation]. Auburn (AL): Auburn University.

Simmons CM, Rindone RR, Larkin MF. 2020. Management strategies influencing recreational Red 

Snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, effort in the Gulf of Mexico: why can’t we agree? In: Bortone 

SA, Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC 

Press. p. 233-248.

Simmons CM, Szedlmayer ST. 2011. Recruitment of age-0 gray triggerfish to benthic structured habitat 

in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 140:14-20.

Simmons CM, Szedlmayer ST. 2012. Territoriality, reproductive behavior, and parental care in gray 

triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, from the northern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 88(2):197-209.

Simmons CM, Szedlmayer ST. 2013. Description of reared preflexion gray triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, 

larvae from the northern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 89(2):643-652.

Simonsen KA. 2013. Reef fish demographics on Louisiana artificial reefs: the effects of reef size on 

biomass distribution and foraging dynamics [thesis]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State 

University.
124

Simonsen KA, Cowan JH, Jr., Boswell KM. 2014. Habitat differences in the feeding ecology of red 

snapper (Lutjanus campechanus, Poey 1860): a comparison between artificial and natural reefs in 

the northern Gulf of Mexico. Environ Biol Fish. 98(3):811-824.

Smart TI, Boylan J (South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Charleston, SC). 2013. King 

mackerel index of abundance in coastal US South Atlantic waters based on a fishery-independent 

trawl survey. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. p. 39. Contract No.: NA11NMF4350043. Report 

No.: SEDAR38-DW-11 and SEAMAP-SA Technical Report # 2013-xx.

Smith GH, Jr. 2011. Field based non-lethal sex determination and effects of sex ratio on population 

dynamics of greater amberjack, Seriola dumerili [thesis]. Gainesville (FL): University of Florida.

Smith GH, Murie DJ, Parkyn DC (University of Florida, Gainesville, FL). 2013. Non-lethal sex 

determination of greater amberjack with direct application to sex ratio analysis of the Gulf of 

Mexico stock. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 38 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-DW27. 

Smith GH, Murie DJ, Parkyn DC. 2018. Effects of sex-specific fishing mortality on sex ratio and 

population dynamics of Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack. Fish Res. 208:219-228.

Smith JW. 1995. Life history of cobia, Rachycentron canadum (Osteichthyes: Rachycentridae), in North 

Carolina waters. Brimleyana. 23:1-23.

Smith MS, Rios A (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL. 

2016. Catch per unit effort indices and effort timeseries for SEDAR 49 data limited species 

captured in the Gulf of Mexico recreational headboat fishery (1986–2015). North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report No.: SEDAR49-DW-02.

Smith MW. 2017. Standardized catch-per-unit effort index for Gulf of Mexico gray snapper Lutjanus 

griseus commercial handline fishery (1993 – 2015). North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 6 p. Report 

No.: SEDAR51-DW-1. 

Smith MW, Goethel D, Rios A, Isley J (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL). 2015. Standardized catch rate indices for Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish 

(Balistes capriscus) landed during 1981-2013 by the recreational and private boat fisheries. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 8 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-07.

Smith MW, Goethel D, Rios A, Isley J (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Miami, FL). 2015. Standardized catch rate indices for Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish 

(Balistes capriscus) landed during 1986-2013 by the headboat fishery. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. 18 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-06. Smith MW, Goethel D, Rios A, Isley J (National 

Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, FL). 2015. Standardized 

catch rate indices for Gulf of Mexico gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) landed during 1993-

2013 by the commercial handline fishery. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report No. 

SEDAR43-WP-05. 

Smith MW, Goethel DR (National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, FL). 2015. Standardized catch rate 

indices for Gulf of Mexico vermilion snapper (Rhomboplites aurorubens) commercial handline 

fishery, 1993-2014. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

Report No.: SEDAR45-WP-04. 
125

Smith-Vaniz WF. 1984. Carangidae. In: Fischer W, Bianchi G, editors. FAO species identification sheets 

for fishery purposes: western Indian Ocean fishing area 51. Volume 1. Rome (IT): Food and 

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). p. 1-8 [accessed 2020 April 22] 

http://www.fao.org/3/ad468e/ad468e00.htm

Smith-Vaniz WF. 2002. Carangidae (jacks and scads - bumpers, pompanos, leatherjacks, amberjacks, 

pilotfishes, rudderfishes). In: Carpenter KE, editor. The living marine resources of the western 

central Atlantic. Volume 3: bony fishes part 2 (Opistognathidae to Molidae), sea turtles and 

marine mammals. Rome (IT): Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 

p. 1426-1468.

Soldal AV, Svellingen I, Jørgensen T, Løkkeborg S. 2002. Rigs-to-reefs in the North Sea: hydroacoustic 

quantification of fish in the vicinity of a "semi-cold" platform. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S281-S287.

Solis D, Agar JJ, del Corral J. 2015. The impact of IFQs on the productivity of the US Gulf of Mexico red 

snapper fishery. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 37 p. Report No. SEDAR45-RD-12.

Soloway AG. 2014. Noise from shallow underwater explosions [thesis]. Seattle (WA): University of 

Washington.

Soloway AG, Dahl PH. 2014. Peak sound pressure and sound exposure level from underwater explosions 

in shallow water. J Acoust Soc Am. 136(3):EL218-EL223.

Sommer B, Fowler AM, Macreadie PI, Palandro DA, Aziz AC, et al. 2019. Decommissioning of offshore 

oil and gas structures - environmental opportunities and challenges. Sci Total Environ. 658:973-

981.

Song J, Mann DA, Cott PA, Hanna BW, Popper AN. 2008. The inner ears of northern Canadian 

freshwater fishes following exposure to seismic air gun sounds. J Acoust Soc Am. 124(2):1360-

1366.

Sonnier F, Teerling J, Hoese HD. 1976. Observations on the offshore reef and platform fish fauna of 

Louisiana. Copeia. 1976(1):105-111.

Southall BL, Bowles AE, Ellison WT, Finneran JJ, Gentry RL, et al. 2007. Marine mammal noise 

exposure criteria: initial scientific recommendations. Aquat Mamm. 33(4):411-521.

Stanley D. 1994. Seasonal and spatial abundance and size distribution of fishes associated with a 

petroleum platform in the northern Gulf of Mexico [dissertation]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana 

State University.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 1990. A fishery-dependent based study of fish species composition and 

associated catch rates around oil and gas structures off Louisiana. Fish Bull. 88:719-730.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 1991. Factors affecting the abundance of selected fishes near oil and gas 

platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 89:149-159.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 1995. Effect of scuba divers on fish density and target strength estimates from 

stationary dual-beam hydroacoustics. Trans Am Fish Soc. 124:946-949.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 1996. Abundance of fishes associated with a petroleum platform as measured 

with dual-beam hydroacoustics. ICES J Mar Sci. 53:473-475.
126

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 1997. Seasonal and spatial variation in the abundance and size distribution of 

fishes associated with a petroleum platform in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 

54:1166-1176.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2000a. Seasonal and spatial 

variation in the biomass and size frequency distribution of the fish associated with oil and gas 

platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans (LA): Department of the Interior, 

Minerals Management Service. 276 p. Contract No.: 14-35-30660-19915. Report No.: OCS Study 

MMS 2000-005. [accessed 2020 April 21] https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/13] 

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 2000b. Variation in the density and species composition of fishes associated 

with three petroleum platforms using dual beam hydroacoustics. Fish Res. 47:161-172.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 2003. Seasonal and spatial variation in the biomass and size frequency 

distribution of fish associated with oil and gas platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico. In:

Stanley DR, Scarborough-Bull A, editors. Fisheries, Reefs, and Offshore Development American 

Fisheries Society Symposium 36. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 123-153.

Stanley DR, Wilson CA. 2004. Effect of hypoxia on the distribution of fishes associated with a petroleum 

platform off coastal Louisiana. N Am J Fish Manage. 24(2):662-671.

Starck WA II, Schroeder RE. 1971. Investigations on the gray snapper, Lutjanus griseus. Studies in 

Tropical Oceanography No. 10. Robins CR, Leigh WH, de Sylva DP, editors. Coral Gables( FL): 

University of Miami Press. 227 p.

Steimle F, Foster K, Kropp R, Conlin B. 2002. Benthic macrofauna productivity enhancement by an 

artificial reef in Delaware Bay, USA. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S100-S105.

Stephan CD, Dansby BG, Osburn HR, Matlock GC, Riechers RK, et al. 1990. Texas artificial reef fishery 

management plan. Austin (TX): Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 26 p. Fisheries 

Management Plan Series Number 3. 

Stephen JA (National Marine Fisheries Service, St. Petersburg, FL). 2012. Brief overview on Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper IFQ program. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 4 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-

DW02. 

Stephens J, Jr., Pondella D, II. 2002. Larval productivity of a mature artificial reef: the ichthyoplankton of 

King Harbor, California, 1974-1997. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S51-S58.

Stierhoff K, Cutter G, Murfin D, Demer D. 2012. An overview of visual survey research and imaging 

technology development at the Southwest Fisheries Science Center. In: Williams K, Rooper C, 

Harms J, editors. Report of the National Marine Fisheries Service Automated Image Processing 

Workshop; September 4-7, 2010; Seattle, WA. Seattle (WA): National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFSF/SPO0121. p. 13-17.

Stone Jackson L, Drymon JM, Nelson TR, Powers SP. 2018. Biotelemetry based estimates of greater 

amberjack (Seriola dumerili) post-release mortality in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res. 

208:239-246.
127

Stoner AW, Ryer CH, Parker SJ, Auster PJ, Wakefield WW. 2008. Evaluating the role of fish behavior in 

surveys conducted with underwater vehicles. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 65:1230-1243.

Streever B, Raborn SW, Kim KH, Hawkins AD, Popper AN. 2016. Changes in fish catch rates in the 

presence of air gun sounds in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Arctic. 69(4):346-358.

Streich MK, Ajemian MJ, Wetz JJ, Shively JD, Shipley JB, et al. 2017. Effects of a new artificial reef 

complex on red snapper and the associated fish community: an evaluation using a before–after 

control–impact approach. Mar Coast Fish. 9(1):404-418.

Streich MK, Ajemian MJ, Wetz JJ, Stunz GW. 2017b. A comparison of fish community structure at 

mesophotic artificial reefs and natural banks in the western Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish. 

9(1):170-189.

Streich MK, Ajemian MJ, Wetz JJ, Stunz GW. 2018. Habitat-specific performance of vertical line gear in 

the western Gulf of Mexico: a comparison between artificial and natural habitats using a paired 

video approach. Fish Res. 204:16-25.

Streich MK, Ajemian MJ, Wetz JJ, Williams JA, Shipley JB, et al. 2017. A comparison of size structure, 

age, and growth of red snapper from artificial and natural habitats in the western Gulf of Mexico. 

Trans Am Fish Soc. 146(4):762-777.

Strelcheck AJ, Cowan JH Jr, Patterson WF III. 2007. Site fidelity, movement, and growth of red snapper: 

implications for artificial reef management. In: Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Fitzhugh GR, 

Nieland DL, editors. Red snapper ecology and fisheries in the US Gulf of Mexico. American 

Fisheries Society Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 135-148.

Strelcheck AJ, Cowan JH, Jr., Shah A. 2005. Influence of reef location on artificial-reef fish assemblages 

in the northcentral Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 77(3):425-440.

Stroup WW. 2013. Generalized mixed models: modern concepts, methods, and applications. Boca Raton 

(FL): CRC Press.

Stunz GW, Ajemian MJ, Streich MK, Brewton R, Downey C, Hall Q (Texas A&M University–Corpus 

Christi, Corpus Christi, TX). 2016. Investigation of the relative habitat value of oil/gas platforms 

and natural banks in enhancing stock building of reef fish in the western Gulf of Mexico. St. 

Petersburg (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office. 108 p. Grant No.: 

NA14NMF4330219. Report No.: SEDAR-RD-02. 

Stunz GW, Curtis J (Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, TX). 2012. Examining 

delayed mortality in barotrauma afflicted red snapper using acoustic telemetry and hyperbaric 

experimentation. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 13 p. Report No.: SEDAR31-DW21. 

Swisdak MM Jr, editor. 1978. Explosion effects and properties: part II–explosion effects in water. 

Dahlgren (VA): Naval Surface Weapons Center. 112 p. Contract No.: F33354. Report No.: 

NSWC/WOL TR 76-116.

Switzer TS, Chesney EJ, Baltz DM. 2015. Habitat use by juvenile red snapper in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico: ontogeny, seasonality, and the effects of hypoxia. Trans Am Fish Soc. 144(2):300-314.
128

Switzer TS, Keenan SF, McMichael RH Jr. 2012. Fisheries-independent data for red snapper from reeffish surveys on the West Florida Shelf, 2008-2011. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 11. Report 

No.: SEDAR31-DW24.

Switzer TS, Keenan SF, McMichael RH Jr, Ingram W. 2013. Fisheries-independent data for gag and 

greater amberjack from reef-fish video surveys on the West Florida Shelf, 2008-2012. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 19 p. Report No.: SEDAR33-AW01.

Syc, Szedlmayer. 2012. A comparison of the size and age of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, to the 

age of artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 31 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-DW12.

Syc TS, Szedlmayer ST. 2012. A comparison of size and age of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) with 

the age of artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull. 110:458-469.

Szedlmayer ST. 1997. Ultrasonic telemetry of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, at artificial reef sites 

in the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Copeia. (4):846-850.

Szedlmayer ST. 2007. An evaluation of the benefits of artificial habitats for red snapper, Lutjanus 

campechanus, in the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Proceedings of the 59th Gulf and Caribbean 

Fisheries Institute. Fort Pierce (FL): GCFI. p. 205-211.

Szedlmayer ST. 2011. The artificial habitat as an accessory for improving estimates of juvenile reef fish 

abundance in fishery management. In: Bortone SA, Pereira Brandini F, Fabi G, Otake S, editors. 

Artificial reefs in fisheries management. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 31-44.

Szedlmayer ST, Beyer SG. 2011. Validation of annual periodicity in otoliths of red snapper, Lutjanus 

campechanus. Environ Biol Fish. 91:219-230.

Szedlmayer ST, Brewton RA. 2020. Diet analyses of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, based on DNA 

barcoding from artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, 

editors. Red snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 143-165.

Szedlmayer ST, Fedewa EJ, Paris ML. 2020. Timing of opaque band formation and validation of annular 

increments in otoliths of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, 

editors. Red snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 167-183.

Szedlmayer ST, Grundy DJ. 2020. A comparison of age determination between whole and sectioned 

otoliths in red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red 

snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 185-198.

Szedlmayer ST, Lee JD. 2004. Diet shifts of juvenile red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) with changes 

in habitat and fish size. Fish Bull. 102:366-375.

Szedlmayer ST, Mudrak PA. 2014. Influence of age-1 conspecifics, sediment type, dissolved oxygen, and 

the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on recruitment of age-0 red snapper in the northeast Gulf of 

Mexico during 2010 and 2011. N Am J Fish Manage. 34:443-452.

Szedlmayer ST, Mudrak PA, Jaxion-Harm J. 2020. A comparison of two fishery-independent surveys of 

Red Snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, from 1999–2004 and 2011–2015. In: Bortone SA, 

Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red Snapper biology in a changing world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. 

p. 249-274.
129

Szedlmayer ST, Schroepfer RL. 2005. Long-term residence of red snapper on artificial reefs in the 

northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc. 134:315-325.

Szedlmayer ST, Shipp RL. 1994. Movement and growth of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, from an 

artificial reef area in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 55(2-3):887-896.

Tarnecki JH, Patterson WF, III. 2015. Changes in red snapper diet and trophic ecology following the 

Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Mar Coast Fish. 7(1):135-147.

Teleki GC, Chamberlain AJ. 1978. Acute effects of underwater construction blasting on fishes in Long 

Point Bay Lake Erie. J Fish Res Bd Can. 35:1191-1198.

Thomas GL, Thorne RE. 2003. Acoustical-optical assessment of Pacific herring and their predator 

assemblage in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Aquat Liv Res. 16:247-253.

Thompson BA, Wilson CA, Render JH, Beasley M, Cauthron C (Coastal Fisheries Institute, Louisiana 

State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 1992. Age, growth, and reproductive biology of greater 

amberjack and cobia from Louisiana waters. Washington (DC): National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. 80 p. Cooperative Agreement 

No.: NA90AA-H-MF722 (MARFIN). Report No.: SEDAR28-RD26.

Thompson KA, Switzer TS, Christman MC, Keenan SF, Gardner C, et al. 2017. Indices of abundance for 

red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) using combined data from three independent video surveys. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 19 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-01.

Thompson KA, Switzer TS, Christman MC, Keenan SF, Gardner C, et al. 2017. Indices of abundance for 

gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) using combined data from three independent video surveys. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 20 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-15. 

Thompson KA, Switzer TS, Keenan SF (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. 

Petersburg, FL). 2015. Indices of abundance for gray triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) from the 

Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) video survey on the West Florida Shelf. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 21 p. Report No.: SEDAR43-WP-08.

Thompson KA, Switzer TS, Keenan SF (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. 

Petersburg, FL). 2017. Indices of abundance for gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) from the Florida 

Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) video survey on the West Florida Shelf. North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 22 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DP-10. 

Thompson KA, Switzer TS, Keenan SF (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. 

Petersburg, FL). 2017. Indices of abundance for red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) from the 

NFWF-expanded Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) video survey in the eastern 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 16 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-WP-04.

Thompson KA, Switzer TS, Keenan SF, McDermott JP. 2017. Indices of abundance for red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus) from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) video 

survey on the west Florida shelf. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 24 p. Report No.: SEDAR52-

WP02.

Thompson NB. 1995. An assessment of cobia in southeast U.S. waters. Miami (FL): National Mrine 

Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Report No.: MIA-94/95-31.
130

Thornton L, Palmer C, Lombardi L, Allman R. 2015. Utilizing paired readings and an otolith reference 

collection to determine ageing precision of vermilion snapper, (Rhomboplites aurorubens). North 

Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 11 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW08.

Thornton LA, Lombardi LA, Allman RJ (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center, Panama City, FL). 2017. Description of age data and estimated growth of gray snapper 

from the northern Gulf of Mexico: 1982-1983 and 1990-2015. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 

29 p. Report No.: SEDAR51-DW-08.

Tolan JM. 2001. Patterns of reef fish larval supply to petroleum platforms in the northern Gulf of Mexico 

[dissertation]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University.

Tolan JM, Fisher M. 2009. Biological response to changes in climate patterns: population increases of 

gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) in Texas bays and estuaries. Fish Bull. 107(36-44):36.

Topping DT, Szedlmayer ST. 2011. Home range and movement patterns of red snapper (Lutjanus 

campechanus) on artificial reefs. Fish Res. 112:77-84.

Topping DT, Szedlmayer ST. 2011. Site fidelity, residence time and movements of red snapper Lutjanus 

campechanus estimated with long-term acoustic monitoring. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 437:183-200.

Topping DT, Szedlmayer ST (Auburn University, Fairhope, AL). 2012. Use of ultrasonic telemetry to 

estimate natural and fishing mortality of red snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 43 p. 

Report No.: SEDAR31-DW13.

Topping DT, Szedlmayer ST. 2013. Use of ultrasonic telemetry to estimate natural and fishing mortality 

of red snapper. Trans Am Fish Soc. 142(4):1090-1100.

Trenkel VM, Lorance P, Mahévas S. 2004. Do visual transects provide true population density estimates 

for deepwater fish? ICES J Mar Sci. 61:1050-1056.

Trenkel VM, Ressler PH, Jech M, Giannoulaki M, Taylor C. 2011. Underwater acoustics for ecosystembased management: state of the science and proposals for ecosystem indicators. Mar Ecol Prog 

Ser. 442:285-301.

Truchon SP, Brzuzy LP, Fawcett D, Fonseca M. 2015. Innovative assessments for selecting offshoreplatform-decommissioning alternatives. Oil Gas Facil. 4(5):47-55.

Tupper M, Hunte W. 1998. Predictability of fish assemblages on artificial and natural reefs in Barbados. 

Bull Mar Sci. 62(3):919-935.

Turner SC, Cummings NJ, Porch CE. 2000. Stock assessments of Gulf of Mexico greater amberjack 

using data through 1998. Miami (FL): National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center. 27 p. Report No.: SFD 99/00-100.

Turpin RK, Bortone SA. 2002. Pre- and post-hurricane assessment of artificial reefs: evidence for 

potential use as refugia in a fishery management strategy. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S74-S82.

Tusting RF, Davis DL. 1992. Laser systems and structured illumination for quantitative undersea 

imaging. Mar Tech Soc J. 26(4):5-12.
131

Tzeng MW, Hare JA, Lindquist DG. 2003. Ingress of transformation stage gray snapper, Lutjanus griseus

(Pisces: Lutjanidae) through Beaufort Inlet, North Carolina. Bull Mar Sci. 72(3):891-908.

US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 2005. Structure-removal operations on the 

Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf—programmatic environmental assessment. New Orleans 

(LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 333 p. Report No.: OCS 

EIS/EA MMS 2005-013.

US Department of the Navy. 2001. Final environmental impact assessment: shock trial of the Winston S. 

Churchill (DDG 81). Washington (DC): Department of the Navy.

Uchupi E. 1967. Bathymetry of the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Coast Assoc Geol Soc Trans. 17:161-172.

Valle M, Legault CM, Ortiz M. 2001. A stock assessment for gray triggerfish, Balistes capriscus, in the 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SFD-00/01-124.

VanderKooy S, editor. 2009. A practical handbook for determining the ages of Gulf of Mexico fishes. 2nd 

edition. Ocean Springs (MS): Gulf States Marine Commission. 157 p. Award No.: 

NA05NMF4070005. Report No.: GSMFC Publication No. 167.

Vaught Shaffer R, Nakamura EL. 1989. Synopsis of biological data on the cobia Rachycentron canadum

(Pisces: Rachycentridae). Washington (DC): National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

and National Marine Fisheries Service. 30 p. Report No.: No. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 82 

and FAO Fisheries Synopsis 153.

Venables WN, Dichmont CM. 2004. GLMs, GAMs and GLMMs: an overview of theory for applications 

in fisheries research. Fish Res. 70:319-337.

Venables WN, Ripley BD. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S. New York (NY): Springer-Verlag.

Venables WN, Ripley BD. 2002. Random and mixed effects. Modern applied statistics with S Statistics 

and computing. New York (NY): Springer Science. p. 271-300.

Versar, Inc. (Columbia, MD). 2008. Literature search and data synthesis of biological information for use 

in management decisions concerning decommissioning of offshore oil and gas structures in the 

Gulf of Mexico. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 129 p. Contract No. 1435-01-05-39082. Report 

No. SEDAR31-RD43.

Versar, Inc. (Columbia, MD). 2009. Review and synthesis of biological information for use in 

management decisions concerning decommissioning offshore oil and gas structures in the Gulf of 

Mexico. DRAFT Final Report. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. Contract No. 1435-01-05-39082. Report No. OCS Study MMS 2009-

_____.

Vincent MT (Virginia Polytechnic and State University, Blacksburg, VA). 2013. Accounting for changes 

in fishing mortality when comparing density-dependent to density-independent mortality in Gulf 

of Mexico red snapper. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR31-AW02. 5 p.

Vincent MT. 2014. Comment: accounting for fishing mortality when comparing density-dependent with 

density-independent mortality in Gulf of Mexico red snapper. N Am J Fish Manage. 34(2):349-

351.
132

Walker BK, Henderson B, Spieler RE. 2002. Fish assemblages associated with artificial reefs of concrete 

aggregates or quarry stone offshore Miami Beach, Florida, USA. Aquat Liv Res. 15:95-105.

Walsh HJ, Richardson DE, Marancik KE, Hare JA (National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast 

Fisheries Science Center, Narragansett, RI). 2014. King mackerel and Spanish mackerel larval 

data on the northeast U.S. Shelf. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR38-RW05. 8 p.

Walter J. 2014. Addendum to “SEDAR 38-10”: New South Atlantic logbook index based upon revised 

mixing zone definition and new indices for the Gulf and South Atlantic using only trolling gear. 

North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR38-AW-02. 35 p.

Walter J, Drymon M, Gardner C, Hightower C, Patterson W, et al. 2017. A multinomial predictive model 

to incorporate visual surveys of red snapper lengths. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No.: 

SEDAR52-WP-22. 21 p.

Walter J, Drymon M, Patterson W, Powers S, Williams J. 2013. A proposed methodology to incorporate 

ROV length data into red snapper stock assessments. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. Report No. 

SEDAR31-AW-08. 14 p.

Walter J, Isley J. 2014. South Atlantic shrimp fishery bycatch of king mackerel. North Charleston (SC): 

SEDAR. Report No. SEDAR38-RW-01. 18 p.

Walter J, McCarthy K (National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Miami, 

FL). 2014. Standardized catch rates of from commercial logbook data for king mackerel from the 

United States Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Mixing Zone, 1993-2013. North Charleston 

(SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR38-DW-10. 47 p.

Walter JF, McInerny S. 2013. Standardized catch rates of Atlantic king mackerel (Scomberomorus 

cavalla) from the North Carolina Commercial fisheries trip tickets 1994-2013. North Charleston, 

(SC): SEDAR. Report No.: SEDAR38-DW-06. 18 p.

Ward CH, Bender ME, Reish DJ. 1980. The offshore ecology investigation: effects of oil drilling and 

production in a coastal environment. Rice University Studies Vol. 65, Nos. 4 & 5. In: Drew KF, 

editor. Rice University Studies. Houston (TX): William Marsh Rice University.

Ward PD. 2015. Assessing the impact of explosive blast on marine life. Soundings. 64:27-29.

Watterson JC, Patterson WF III, Shipp RL, Cowan JH Jr. 1998. Movement of red snapper, Lutjanus 

campechanus, in the north central Gulf of Mexico: Potential effects of hurricanes. Gulf Mex Sci. 

1998(1):92-104.

Wells RJD. 2007. The effects of trawling and habitat use on red snapper and the associated community 

[dissertation]. Baton Rouge (LA): Louisiana State University.

Wells RJD, Boswell KM, Cowan JH Jr, Patterson WF III. 2008. Size selectivity of sampling gears 

targeting red snapper in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res. 89:294-299.

Wells RJD, Cowan JH Jr, Fry B. 2008. Feeding ecology of red snapper Lutjanus campechanus in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 361:213-225.
133

Wells RJD, Cowan JH Jr, Patterson WF III. 2008. Habitat use and the effect of shrimp trawling on fish 

and invertebrate communities over the northern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. ICES J Mar 

Sci. 65:1610-1619.

Wells RJD, Cowan JH Jr, Patterson WF III, Walters CJ. 2008. Effect of trawling on juvenile red snapper 

(Lutjanus campechanus) habitat selection and life history parameters. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 

65:2399-2411.

Wells RJD, Rooker JR. 2004a. Distribution, age, and growth of young-of-the-year greater amberjack 

(Seriola dumerili) associated with pelagic Sargassum. Fish Bull. 102:545-554.

Wells RJD, Rooker JR. 2004b. Spatial and temporal patterns of habitat use by fishes associated with 

Sargassum mats in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Bull Mar Sci. 74(1):81-99.

Westmeyer MP, Wilson CA III, Nieland DL. 2007. Fidelity of red snapper to petroleum platforms in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico. In: Patterson WF III, Cowan JH Jr, Fitzhugh GR, Nieland DL, editors. 

Red snapper ecology and fisheries in the US Gulf of Mexico. American Fisheries Society 

Symposium 60. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society. p. 105-121.

White GC. 2014. Introduction to program MARK. [accessed 22 Nov 2019]. 

http://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/gwhite/introduction-program-mark/.

Wiggers RK (South Carolina Department of Natural Resources). 2010. South Carolina marine game fish 

tagging program 1978–2009. North Charleston (SC): SEDAR. 62 p. Report No.: SEDAR28-

RD21.

Wilding TA, Sayer MDJ. 2002. Evaluating artificial reef performance: approaches to pre- and postdeployment research. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S222-S230.

Wiley ML, Gaspin JB, Goertner JF. 1981. Effects of underwater explosions on fish with a dynamical 

model to predict fishkill. Ocean Sci Eng. 6:223-284.

Williams EH. 2001. Assessment of cobia, Rachycentron canadum, in the waters of the U.S. Gulf of 

Mexico. Beaufort (NC): National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Center for Coastal 

Fisheries and Habitat Research. 61 p. Report No.: NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFSSEFSC-469.

Williams LJ, Herbig JL, Szedlmayer ST. 2015. A cage release method to improve fish tagging studies. 

Fish Res. 172:125-129.

Williams-Grove LJ. 2015. Red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, mortality, movements, and habitat use 

based on advanced telemetry methods [dissertation]. Auburn (AL): Auburn University.

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2016. Acoustic positioning and movement patterns of red snapper 

Lutjanus campechanus around artificial reefs in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 

553:233-251.

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2016. Mortality estimates for red snapper based on ultrasonic 

telemetry in the northern Gulf of Mexico. N Am J Fish Manage. 36:1036-1044.
134

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2017. Depth preferences and three-dimensional movements of red 

snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, on an artificial reef in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res. 

190:61-70.

Williams-Grove LJ, Szedlmayer ST. 2020. A review of Red Snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, acoustic 

telemetry studies. In: Bortone SA, Szedlmayer ST, editors. Red snapper biology in a changing 

world. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 49-74.

Wilson CA, Miller MW, Allen YC, Boswell KM, Nieland DL. 2006. Effects of depth, location, and 

habitat type on relative abundance and species composition of fishes associated with petroleum 

platforms and Sonnier Bank in the northern Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans (LA): US Department 

of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. 97 p. Contract No.: 1435-0001-30660-19947. 

Report No.: OCS Study MMS 2006-037. [accessed 20 April 2020] 

https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/48

Wilson CA, Nieland DL. 2001. Age and growth of red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, from the northern 

Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana. Fish Bull. 99:653-664.

Wilson CA, Nieland DL. 2004. The role of oil and gas platforms in providing habitat for northern Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus. Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Gulf 

and Caribbean Fisheries Institute; Quintana Roo, Mexico; 11–16 November 2002 Fort Pierce 

(FL): Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute. p. 757–764.

Wilson CA, Pierce A, Miller MW (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2003. Rigs and reefs: a 

comparison of the fish communities at two artificial reefs, a production platform, and a natural 

reef in the northern Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans (LA): US Department of the Interior, Minerals 

Management Service. 105 p. Contract No.: 14-35-0001-30660-119960. Report No.: OCS Study 

MMS 2003-009. [accessed 20 April 2020] https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/59

Wilson CA, Stanley DR. 1989. Utilization of offshore platforms by recreational fishermen and SCUBA 

divers off the Louisiana coast. Bull Mar Sci. 44(2):767-775.

Wilson CA, Van Sickle VR (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 1987. Louisiana artificial 

reef plan. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Technical Bulletin No. 41. Baton 

Rouge (LA): Louisiana Sea Grant College Program. 166 p.

Wilson J, Osenberg CW, St. Mary CM, Watson CA, Lindberg WJ. 2001. Artificial reefs, the attractionproduction issue, and density dependence in marine ornamental fishes. Aquarium Sci Conserv. 

3:95-105.

Wilson KDP, Leung AWY, Kennish R. 2002. Restoration of Hong Kong fisheries through deployment of 

artificial reefs in marine protected areas. ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S157-S163.

Worcester T. 2006. Effects of seismic energy on fish: a literature review; Effets de l’energie sismique sur 

les poissons–examen de la litterature. Ottawa (CA): Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. 70 p.

Workman I, Shah A, Foster D, Hataway B. 2002. Habitat preferences and site fidelity of juvenile red 

snapper (Lutjanus campechanus). ICES J Mar Sci. 59:S43-S50.
135

Workman IK, Foster DG. 1994. Occurrence and behavior of juvenile red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus, 

on commercial shrimp fishing grounds in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Fish Rev. 

56(2):9-11.

Worton BJ. 1989. Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies. 

Ecology. 70(1):164-168.

Wuenschel MJ, Hare JA, Kimball ME, Able KW. 2012. Evaluating juvenile thermal tolerance as a 

constraint on adult range of gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus): a combined laboratory, field and 

modeling approach. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 436-437:19-27.

Yelverton JT, Richmond DR, Fletcher ER (Lovelace Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 

Albuquerque, NM). 1973. Safe distances from underwater explosions for mammals and birds. 

Washington (DC): Defense Nuclear Agency. 67 p. Contract Nos.: DASA 01-70C-0075 and 

DASA 01-71C-0013. Report No. DNA 3114T.

Yelverton JT, Richmond DR, Hicks W, Saunders K, Fletcher ER (Lovelace Foundation for Medical 

Education and Research, Albuquerque, NM). 1975. The relationship between fish size and their 

response to underwater blast. Washington (DC): Defense Nuclear Agency.42 p. Contract No. 

DNA 001-74-C-0120. Report No.: DNA 3677T.

Young GA. 1991. Concise methods for predicting the effects of underwater explosions on marine life. 

Dahlgren (VA): Naval Surface Warfare Center . 19 p. Report No.: NAVSWC MP 91-220.

Yule DL, Adams JV, Hrabik TR, Vinson MR, Woiak Z, Ahrenstorff TD. 2013. Use of classification trees 

to apportion single echo detections to species: application to the pelagic fish community of Lake 

Superior. Fish Res. 140:123-132.

Yurista PM, Yule DL, Balge M, VanAlstine JD, Thompson JA, et al. 2014. A new look at the Lake 

Superior biomass size spectrum. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 71:1324-1333.

Zapp Sluis M, Cowan JH Jr (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA). 2013. Platform recruited reef 

fish, phase II: do platforms provide habitat that increases the survival of reef fishes? New Orleans 

(LA): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 50 p. Contract No.: 

M08AX12679. Report No.: OCS Study BOEM 2013-0120. [accessed 20 April 2020] 

https://marinecadastre.gov/espis/#/search/study/23147 

Zhang H, Ludsin SA, Mason DM, Adamack AT, Brandt S, et al. 2009. Hypoxia-driven changes in the 

behavior and spatial distribution of pelagic fish and mesozooplankton in the northern Gulf of 

Mexico. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 381:S80-S91.
136

Appendix 2. Data Tables
1

Appendix Table 2.1 Model estimates of the abundance of fish at the “average platform” in the four 

depth zones defined in this study

Provides detail for Table 5.

Common Name Scientific Name

Almaco Jack Seriola rivoliana 5 (1-25) 16 (8-32) * 129 (90-183) * 111 (-) *

Angelfish sp. Pomacanthidae sp. 0.4 (0-5) 2 (1-6) * 47 (18-122) * 0.7 (0-3)

Atlantic Bumper Chloroscombrus chrysurus 4,362 (1105-17216) * 6,227 (3507-11054) * 841 (585-1210) * 324 (171-612)

Atlantic Moonfish Selene setapinnis 19 (4-82) 514 (261-1011) * 97 (68-138) * 23 (11-47)

Atlantic Spadefish Chaetodipterus faber 1,815 (463-7117) * 926 (457-1876) * 481 (323-716) * 60 (31-115)

Bar Jack Carangoides ruber 1 (0-9) 4 (2-10) 13 (7-24) * 178 (42-745) *

Bermuda Chub Kyphosus sectatrix 39 (8-179) 162 (89-293) * 838 (545-1288) * 1,405 (521-3787) *

Black Jack Caranx lugubris 0.1 (0-4) 0.2 (0-2) 0.1 (0-1) 23 (10-55) *

Blue Runner Caranx chrysos 622 (152-2539) * 1,712 (956-3063) * 3,971 (2805-5622) * 691 (343-1390) *

Bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix 2 (0-14) 4 (2-9) * 0.6 (0-1) 0.6 (0-2)

Butterflyfish sp. Chaetodontidae sp. 0.1 (0-3) 0.4 (0-2) 8 (-) * 0.2 (0-2)

Cobia Rachycentron canadum 57 (14-230) * 13 (6-26) * 24 (16-36) * 1.4 (0-5)

Crevalle Jack Caranx hippos 16 (3-76) 148 (83-263) * 326 (234-456) * 2,074 (941-4571) *

Dog Snapper Lutjanus jocu 0.2 (0-5) 0.1 (0-1) 0.5 (0-2) * 0.05 (0-1)

Filefish sp. Monacanthidae sp. - (-) - (-) 0.2 (0-1) * - (-)

Gray Snapper Lutjanus griseus 137 (35-528) * 400 (255-710) * 491 (345-698) * 37 (19-70)

Gray Triggerfish Balistes capriscus 1.3 (0-11) 13 (6-26) * 63 (40-101) * 2 (1-6)

Great Barracuda Sphyraena barracuda 4 (1-24) 27 (14-51) * 75 (50-113) * 478 (206-1107) *

Greater Amberjack Seriola dumerili 14 (3-60) 32 (17-59) * 487 (176-1347) * 587 (313-1099) *

Grouper sp. Epinephelinae sp. 0.2 (0-5) 0.7 (0-3) 16 (-) * 0.3 (0-2)

Guaguanche Sphyraena guachancho 3 (0-19) 32 (17-60) * 22 (14-33) * 2 (1-8)

Gulf Menhaden Brevoortia patronus 67 (17-266) 2,876 (1642-5039) * 169 (120-239) 105 (56-197)

Horse-eye Jack Caranx latus 3 (1-20) 19 (10-37) * 86 (56-133) * 416 (187-925) *

King Mackerel Scomberomorous cavalla 4 (1-23) 81 (45-146) * 38 (26-57) * 5 (2-12)

Leatherjack Oligoplites saurus 26 (6-106) 105 (59-187) 706 (475-1051) * 45 (23-86)

Lookdown Selene vomer 3 (1-16) 26 (14-50) * 107 (72-159) * 8 (5-13)

Ocean Triggerfish Canthidermis sufflamen 0.6 (0-9) 1 (0-4) 10 (5-17) * 20 (10-42) *

Rainbow Runner Elagatis bipinnulata 13 (3-67) 266 (133-529) * 53 (36-78) * 405 (178-924) *

Red Drum Sciaenops ocellatus 0.1 (0-2) 4 (1-13) * 0.2 (-) 0.2 (-)

Red Snapper Lutjanus campechanus 359 (94-1367) * 1,015 (541-1904) * 2,980 (875-10152) * 133 (72-246) *

Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephalus 0.3 (0-3) 19 (9-39) * 6 (-) * 1 (-)

Spanish Hogfish Bodianus rufus 0.1 (0-2) 0.3 (0-1) 2 (-) * 0.1 (0-1)

Spanish Mackerel Scomberomorous maculatus 0.2 (0-6) - (-) * 0.1 (0-1) * - (-)

Unidentified Fish 142 (39-520) * 250 (140-446) * 276 (196-389) * 13,090 (5363-31952) *

Vermilion Snapper Rhomboplites aurorubens 45 (11-180) 118 (67-210) 3,506 (428-28743) * 57 (30-109)

Yellow Jack Carangoides bartholomaei 0.8 (0-11) 0.9 (0-3) * 7 (4-13) * 0.5 (0-3)

Total 

Confidence Intervals

Total Taxa Verified by SRV Observation

Total Number Verified by SRV Observation

Percent of Model Abundance Verified by SRV 96.5 96.7

26

14,784

98.5

32

15,707

98.9

7,494 19,611

(1975-30517) (8593-26234) (6349-39700) (10169-40459)

7 13

Depth zone (m)

7,764 15,014 15,877 20,284

10 - 17 18 - 30 31 - 90 91 - 300
2

Appendix Table 2.2. The 47 platform sites with water depth, number of explosions, and the mean 

number of fish placed at each site (in 10,000 simulated runs) 

Site Depth (m) Number of 

Explosions

Mean 

Number 

of Fish 

Placed

Exposure 

Count

Range for 

Survival 

(m)

Average 

Count of 

Unexposed

Exposure 

Count

Range for 

Survival 

(m)

Average 

Count of 

Unexposed

A1_2017 15.2 15 380 380 462 0 380 256 0

A2_2017 15.2 3 380 380 506 0 380 253 0

A3_2017 11.6 4 311 311 458 0 311 253 0

B1_2017 25.9 16 969 969 458 0 969 253 0

B2_2017 30.5 8 1123 1123 506 0 1123 285 0

B3_2017 29 1 1072 1072 506 0 1072 285 0

B4_2017 28.3 2 1052 1052 506 0 1052 285 0

B5_2017 26.8 12 1000 1000 374 0 1000 207 0

B6_2017 25.9 8 969 969 398 0 969 220 0

B7_2017 21.6 10 806 806 442 0 806 244 0

B8_2017 21 4 772 772 420 0 772 231 0

B9_2017 21.3 6 789 789 423 0 789 233 0

B10_2017 22.3 15 841 841 439 0 841 239 0

B11_2017 21.3 4 789 789 440 0 789 243 0

B12_2017 25.9 6 969 969 506 0 969 285 0

C1_2017 35.4 3 2897 2897 506 0 2897 285 0

C2_2017 39.9 4 3319 3319 503 0 3319 279 0

C3_2017 50.6 8 4131 4131 436 0 4131 241 0

C4_2017 64 20 5928 5928 481 0 5928 267 0

C5_2017 64 4 5928 5928 356 0 5928 194 0

C6_2017 50.9 4 4153 4153 453 0 4153 250 0

C7_2017 42.7 2 3568 3568 293 0 3568 154 0

C8_2017 48.8 10 4001 4001 453 0 4001 250 0

D1_2017 91.4 4 669 669 300 0 668 157 1

A1_2018 15.8 2 388 388 413 0 388 225 0

A2_2018 12.2 4 333 333 453 0 333 250 0

A3_2018 16.8 1 400 400 291 0 400 160 0

A4_2018 17.4 10 408 408 388 0 408 214 0

A5_2018 13.1 15 352 352 296 0 352 162 0

A6_2018 12.8 4 348 348 293 0 348 161 0

A7_2018 12.8 8 348 348 503 0 348 279 0

A8_2018 13.4 15 356 356 440 0 356 243 0

A9_2018 10.7 1 278 278 449 0 278 231 0

A10_2018 10.7 5 278 278 449 0 278 227 0

A11_2018 10.1 21 256 256 356 0 256 194 0

B1_2018 27.4 6 1021 1021 297 0 1021 163 0

C1_2018 50.3 9 4110 4110 356 0 4110 194 0

C2_2018 60 4 5368 5368 312 0 5368 172 0

C3_2018 68.6 6 6537 6537 312 0 6537 172 0

C4_2018 64 8 5928 5928 307 0 5928 169 0

C5_2018 64 4 5928 5928 449 0 5928 249 0

C6_2018 59.1 3 5235 5235 309 0 5235 160 0

C7_2018 68 4 6456 6456 356 0 6456 194 0

C8_2018 45.7 8 3785 3785 356 0 3785 197 0

C9_2018 31.1 3 2423 2423 458 0 2423 253 0

C10_2018 44.8 7 3720 3720 440 0 3720 243 0

D1_2018 92.7 8 671 671 444 0 671 246 0

More Conservative Model Input 

Parameters

Less Conservative Model Input 

Parameters
3

Appendix Table 2.3. Red snapper median abundance by age on explosively removed platforms in 

2017 (24 platforms removed) and 2018 (23 platforms removed). 

Provides detail for Table 13.

East GOM

Depth Zone (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

18_30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

31_90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

91_300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Biomass (lbs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

West GOM

Depth Zone (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 0 646 323 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,077

18_30 161 1768 4790 1704 3279 321 96 32 0 0 32 0 12,183

31_90 0 258 2384 2899 11533 3801 1675 1095 129 0 0 64 23,839

91_300 0 1 13 16 64 21 9 6 1 0 0 0 133

Total 161 2673 7510 4727 14876 4144 1781 1134 130 0 32 65 37,232

Biomass (lbs) 46 2829 17219 18029 81335 29601 15588 11596 1497 0 470 994 179,202

Total GOM

Depth Zone (m) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 0 646 323 108 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,077

18_30 161 1768 4790 1704 3279 321 96 32 0 0 32 0 12,183

31_90 0 258 2384 2899 11533 3801 1675 1095 129 0 0 64 23,839

91_300 0 1 13 16 64 21 9 6 1 0 0 0 133

Total 161 2673 7510 4727 14876 4144 1781 1134 130 0 32 65 37,232

Biomass (lbs) 46 2829 17219 18029 81335 29601 15588 11596 1497 0 470 994 179,202

East GOM

Depth Zone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 29 223 91 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 359

18_30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

31_90 0 97 373 864 560 771 214 66 24 3 3 3 2,980

91_300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

Total 29 320 464 877 564 771 214 66 24 3 3 3 3,339

Biomass (lbs) 8 338 1064 3343 3084 5506 1876 672 280 47 51 53 16,323

West GOM

Depth Zone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 318 2451 998 136 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,948

18_30 11 216 296 403 52 32 2 2 0 0 0 0 1,015

31_90 0 774 2987 6914 4480 6167 1715 525 194 28 28 28 23,839

91_300 0 4 17 39 25 34 10 3 1 0 0 0 133

Total 329 3446 4298 7492 4603 6233 1726 531 195 28 28 28 28,936

Biomass (lbs) 94 3646 9854 28573 25166 44525 15111 5428 2249 382 406 427 135,862

Total GOM

Depth Zone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 347 2674 1089 149 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,307

18_30 11 216 296 403 52 32 2 2 0 0 0 0 1,015

31_90 0 871 3360 7778 5040 6938 1929 591 218 31 31 31 26,819

91_300 0 4 17 39 25 34 10 3 1 0 0 0 133

Total 358 3765 4762 8368 5167 7004 1941 596 219 31 31 31 32,275

Biomass (lbs) 103 3984 10918 31916 28251 50032 16987 6100 2528 429 457 480 152,185

Age 

Year 2017

2018

Age 

Age 

Age 

Age 

Age
4

Appendix Table 2.4. Median abundance of red snapper by age on the 1,171 standing platforms 

present in federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico in 2018 

Provides detail for Table 14.

Depth Zone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 1,300 10,026 4,085 557 186 - - - - - - - 16,153

18_30 228 4,325 5,919 8,059 1,047 637 46 46 - - - - 20,306

31_90 - 7,840 30,241 70,003 45,362 62,442 17,361 5,320 1,960 280 280 280 241,369

91_300 - 91 350 810 525 723 201 62 23 3 3 3 2,794

Total 1,527 22,282 40,595 79,429 47,120 63,803 17,607 5,427 1,983 283 283 283 280,622

Biomass (lbs) 438 23,579 93,075 302,940 257,625 455,741 154,104 55,519 22,905 3,890 4,140 4,346 1,378,303

Depth Zone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 8,693 67,061 27,321 3,726 1,242 - - - - - - - 108,043

18_30 2,379 45,198 61,850 84,212 10,943 6,661 476 476 - - - - 212,194

31_90 - 39,008 150,459 348,285 225,689 310,670 86,375 26,470 9,752 1,393 1,393 1,393 1,200,888

91_300 - 393 1,517 3,512 2,276 3,132 871 267 98 14 14 14 12,108

Total 11,072 151,661 241,148 439,734 240,149 320,464 87,721 27,212 9,850 1,407 1,407 1,407 1,533,233

Biomass (lbs) 3,173 160,490 552,905 1,677,143 1,313,005 2,289,062 767,768 278,367 113,793 19,327 20,568 21,592 7,217,193

Depth Zone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 9,993 77,087 31,406 4,283 1,428 - - - - - - - 124,195

18_30 2,606 49,523 67,769 92,270 11,990 7,298 521 521 - - - - 232,500

31_90 - 46,848 180,700 418,288 271,051 373,113 103,735 31,790 11,712 1,673 1,673 1,673 1,442,257

91_300 - 484 1,867 4,322 2,801 3,855 1,072 328 121 17 17 17 14,903

Total 12,599 173,942 281,742 519,163 287,269 384,266 105,329 32,640 11,833 1,690 1,690 1,690 1,813,855

Biomass (lbs) 3,611 184,069 645,980 1,980,083 1,570,630 2,744,803 921,872 333,885 136,698 23,218 24,709 25,938 8,595,497

Age

East GOM:

West GOM:

Total GOM:

Age

Age

Appendix Table 2.5. Median abundance of red snapper by age on the 1,115 standing platforms 

within 100 miles of major fishing ports in 2018

(Provides detail for Table 19)

Depth Zone (m) Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 Total

10_17 9,993 77,087 31,406 4,283 1,428 - - - - - - - 124,195

18_30 2,606 49,523 67,769 92,270 11,990 7,298 521 521 - - - - 232,500

31_90 - 45,106 173,980 402,732 260,970 359,237 99,877 30,608 11,276 1,611 1,611 1,611 1,388,619

91_300 - 320 1,234 2,856 1,850 2,547 708 217 80 11 11 11 9,846

Total 12,599 172,036 274,388 502,140 276,238 369,082 101,107 31,346 11,356 1,622 1,622 1,622 1,755,161

Biomass (lbs) 3,611 182,051 629,119 1,915,159 1,510,320 2,636,343 884,923 320,651 131,192 22,283 23,713 24,894 8,284,260
Department of the Interior (DOI)

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the Nation's natural 

resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about 

those resources; and honors the Nation’s trust responsibilities or special 

commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island 

communities.

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)

The mission of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is to manage 

development of U.S. Outer Continental Shelf energy and mineral resources in 

an environmentally and economically responsible way.

BOEM Environmental Studies Program

The mission of the Environmental Studies Program is to provide the 

information needed to predict, assess, and manage impacts from offshore 

energy and marine mineral exploration, development, and production activities 

on human, marine, and coastal environments. The proposal, selection, research, 

review, collaboration, production, and dissemination of each of BOEM’s 

Environmental Studies follows the DOI Code of Scientific and Scholarly 

Conduct, in support of a culture of scientific and professional integrity, as set 

out in the DOI Departmental Manual (305 DM 3).