Cayos Miskitos

Enviromental Initiative of the Americas Fisheries Project October, 1995 to September, 1996

Recommendations and Reports for the Management of Fisheries in the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve of Nicaragua

Enviromental Initiative of the Americas

1996

Appendix X

Fishing Vessels and Gear used in the Miskito Coast Protected Area, Nicaragua; Jones

Appendix XI

Fisheries Enforcement in the Nicaraguan Miskito Coast Marine. Reserve; Vegas

Appendix XII

Mangroves; Melnyk and Benge I

Appendix XIII

Miskito Coast Marine Reserve; Coral Reef Ecosystem Survey and Management Recommendations; Jameson

PREFACE This document contains the results of the USAID Environmental initiative of the Americas (EIA) fisheries project in Nicaragua. The EIA projects were an outcome of the CONCAUSA Agreements, and were funded for one year only to address specific environmental problems in the area. Several EIA projects addressed marine and coastal issues, including this one. The northeast coast of Nicaragua, which obtained autonomous status after the recent civil war is unique for a number of reasons: it has a large indigenous population, which is primarily employed in fishing; it is blessed with a wide shallow coastal shelf which provides coral reef seagrass, and mangrove habitats the abundant living aquatic resources are increasingly being exploited both for food and export earnings. A unique opportunity to sustainably exploit the marine resources of the area was recognized, and a marine reserve was established by Presidential decree in 1991. The reserve consists of a circle around the Miskito Cays, a unique series of mangrove-topped coral islands and reefs, and a coastal strip encompassing brackish water lagoons. The former is an excellent habitat for lobsters and reef fish, while the latter is the principal nursery ground for fish and especially for shrimp. Both contribute in a large way to the economy of the area and indeed the country itself, as fisheries are the second largest export earner for Nicaragua. USAID has long recognized the unique and valuable natural resources of Nicaragua, and in 1991, concurrently with establishment of the reserve, established its Natural Resources Management Project (NRMP). This project assisted the natural resources ministry (MARENA) to develop its capabilities through a capacity building project with Tropical Research and Development, Inc.; and, through a project to develop an initial management plan for the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve, with the Caribbean Conservation Corporation. The draft management plan was completed in 1995, and addressed a number of issues, especially land tenure. However, less attention was paid to fisheries issues, which were recognized to need significant management reform NRMP funds were used to supplement this EIA project, through TR&D, Inc. and CCC. This EIA project was initiated, in order to provide direct technical assistance by United States I advisors, to address critical fisheries management issues. Major emphasis was placed primarily on the following fisheries: spiny lobster shrimp reef fish lagoon fisheries Other significant natural resource issues are extant. For instance, there are specific issues related to harvest of green turtles, and accidental mortality of dolphins, which are being addressed separately by non-USAID projects. Besides technical assistance, training was

specifically, it did not aggregate data so that harvest levels from within the reserve were measurable. Therefore, development of full management plans for each major fishery was not considered possible in the time allowed. Also, it was neither politically expedient nor possible in the time allowed to attempt management plans for the entire Atlantic coast, although eventually this would be logical. The agreed approach was therefore modified to development of sampling strategies, coordinating activities of MARENA and CIRH (the Research Center for Aquatic Biology) in the reserve area, and development of recommendations for use in management of fisheries within the reserve. In addition, one specialist was asked to review the draft reserve management plan and make recommendations on its enhancement and implementation. This report (Jain) also provides a review of mandates and responsibilities. Specialists were obtained for stock assessment, gear, lobster, shrimp, and fish, as well as I community, coastal, and enforcement strategies, plus coral and mangrove habitats. Each specialist produced an analysis and recommendations, often including options. These were discussed and pared to a final set of recommendations, utilizing a workshop approach, at the University of Washington, in August, 1996. These recommendations were discussed at a final workshop of stake holders in Managua, in November, 1996. This document is organized to focus first on the recommendations, then to include the report of each specialist, in appendices, concentrating first on the major purpose of the project, fisheries. There may be so me differences noted in recommendations between appendices, however the summary recommendations should be considered primary, as they were the outcome of group analysis. It is clear that considerable work is yet to be done to fully address management of the reserve. It is also clear that all stakeholders must actively take part in establishment of an entity to manage I the reserve, and properly staff and fund it as a management body, in order for sustainability to be realized. Otherwise, it is likely that over-harvesting will rapidly occur, resulting in major negative impact on an already fragile ecosystem and economy. Community involvement is essential, but government involvement, especially in regulation and enforcement, is critical. All elements of the government must work together, and they must properly involve the communities, and this must begin immediately. The project would like to gratefully acknowledge the considerable assistance of USAID staff in Nicaragua, especially Gerald Bauer, Jurij Homziak, Margaret Harritt, and George Carner; Tropical Research and Development, Inc., especially Mirette Seireg, Maria Marthe Cortez, and Bonnie Larson; Caribbean Conservation Corporation,

especially Lucinda Taft and Stern Robinson, Mr. Jose Robleto, of UCA and University of Mobile, was invaluable as local coordinator and translator.

Lamarr B. Trott Senior Fisheries Advisor Environment Center, Global Bureau Agency for International Development Washington, D.C.

PREFACIO Este documento contiene los resultados del Proyecto de Pesquerías -Iniciativa Ambiental de las América (EIA) en Nicaragua. Los Proyectos EIA son un resultado de los Acuerdos CONCAUSA y fueron financiados por un período de un año para analizar problemas ambientales específicos en el área y proveer recomendaciones. Diversos Proyectos EIA enfocaron distintos tópicos marinos y costeros, incluyendo éste que nos ocupa. La costa noreste de Nicaragua, que obtuvo su status de autonomía después de la reciente guerra civil, es única por un número de razones: esta contiene una gran población indígena, cuya principal actividad económica es la pesca; esta área es favorecida por la existencia de una plataforma costera somera que provee una variedad de hábitats tales como arrecifes de coral, pastizales marinos, y manglares; el creciente nivel de explotación de los abundantes recursos acuáticos vivientes, tanto para alimentación como generación de divisas. Debido a que ésta área representa, una oportunidad única para la explotación sostenible de los recursos marinos, se estableció una Reserva Marina mediante decreto presidencial en 1991. La Reserva consiste de un círculo alrededor de los Cayos Miskitos, una serie única de islas de arrecifes coralinos cubiertas por manglares, que constituyen un excelente hábitat para langostas y peces de arrecifes, y una franja costera albergando una serie de lagunas de aguas salobres, que constituyen la principal área de reproducción y anidamiento para peces y especialmente camarones. Ambas áreas contribuyen a la economía del área y del país entero, debido a que la pesca representa el segundo producto de exportación de Nicaragua. La Agencia Internacional de Desarrollo de los Estados Unidos (USAID) ha reconocido por mucho tiempo la particularidad y riqueza de los recursos naturales de Nicaragua, así como el establecimiento de la Reserva Marina, en 1991, y su correspondiente Proyecto de Manejo de los Recursos Naturales (PMRN). Este proyecto proveyó asistencia al MARENA para desarrollar sus capacidades técnicas a través de la Oficina de Investigaciones Tropicales y Desarrollo (TR&D) ya través de un proyecto para el desarrollo de un Plan de Manejo inicial para la Reserva Biológica Marina Cayos Miskitos y Franja Costera Inmediata, con la Corporación para la Conservación del Caribe (CCC). La propuesta inicial de Plan de Manejo fue completada en 1995, y enfocada a una serie de tópicos, especialmente tenencia de la tierra. Sin embargo, menor atención fue prestada a los tópicos pesqueros, los cuales se reconocía necesitaban reformas considerables de manejo. Los fondos del PMRN fueron utilizados para financiar este proyecto EIA a través de TR&D, Inc. y CCC. Este proyecto EIA fue iniciado con el objetivo de proveer asistencia técnica directa por parte de expertos de los Estados Unidos, los que enfocarían tópicos críticos de manejo pesquero. Mayor énfasis fue dado principalmente a las siguientes pesquerías: x langosta espinosa x camarones x peces de arrecifes x pesquerías en lagunas

Otros tópicos significativos relativos a los recursos naturales no fueron considerados. Por ejemplo, existen tópicos específicos relacionados a la captura de tortugas verdes, y mortalidad incidental de delfines, que han sido enfocados independientemente por otros proyectos no financiados por USAID. Además de asistencia técnica, entrenamiento fue considerado un aspecto clave y se inició un I programa modesto de muestreo de campo. De forma inmediata se evidenció la existencia de muy pocos datos de pesquerías para la Reserva y que los pocos datos existentes fueron colectados en formatos nada prácticos, de modo que no pudieron ser utilizados para efectos de medir los niveles de captura al interior de la Reserva. Por lo tanto, el desarrollo de un Plan de Manejo completo para cada pesquería importante fue considerado imposible en el tiempo permitido. Los alcances acordados tuvieron que ser modificados para el desarrollo de estrategias de muestreo, actividades de coordinación de MARENA y CIRH en el área de la Reserva, y desarrollo de recomendaciones para el manejo de las pesquerías al interior de la Reserva. Además, se contrató un especialista que trabajó en la revisión de la propuesta de Plan de Manejo e hizo recomendaciones para su mejoramiento e implementación. Este reporte (Jain) también provee una revisión de mandatos y responsabilidades. Se obtuvieron especialistas para la evaluación de recursos pesqueros, artes de pesca, langostas, camarones y peces, además de hábitat coralinos y manglares, así como aspectos comunitarios, costeros, estrategias de control y cumplimiento de las regulaciones. Cada especialista presentó un informe que incluye el análisis y recomendaciones, así como sus respectivas opciones. Estos informes fueron discutidos e incorporados a un set final de recomendaciones, en un Taller Internacional, realizado en Seattle, en Agosto de 1996. Estas recomendaciones fueron discutidas con los principales grupos de interés, en el Encuentro Nacional Reserva Marina Cayos Miskitos, realizado en Managua, en el mes de Noviembre de 1996. Este documento está organizado de forma que las recomendaciones puedan ser analizadas primeramente, luego se incluyen el reporte de cada especialista, en los Anexos. Este documento se a concentra en los grandes objetivos del proyecto, las pesquerías. Quizás existan algunas diferencias localizadas en las recomendaciones entre Anexos, sin embargo, el resumen de las recomendaciones debería ser considerado primariamente, debido a que ellas representan el resultado y concenso del grupo de análisis. Es evidente que se necesita realizar un mayor trabajo para abarcar de forma global todos los aspectos relativos al manejo de la Reserva. Es también evidente la necesidad de que todos los grupos de interés tomen un rol más activo en el establecimiento de una entidad para el manejo de la Reserva, con un personal apropiado a fin de alcanzar los objetivos de sostenibilidad. De no hacerse esto, es muy seguro que los recursos van a ser sobre-explotados en un corto periodo de tiempo, impactando negativamente en la economía y los frágiles eco sistemas. La participación de la comunidad es esencial, pero el involucramiento del Gobierno es fundamental, especialmente en lo que respecta a regulación y control. Todos los elementos del Gobierno deben trabajar Juntos, involucrando a las comunidades y empezando a trabajar a lo inmediato. El Proyecto desea expresar su reconocimiento a la asistencia considerable del personal de USAID en Nicaragua, especialmente a Gerald Bauer, Jurij Homziak, Margaret Harrett, y George Carner; TR&D Inc., especialmente a Mirette Seireg, Maria Martha Cortez y Bonnie Larson; Corporación para la Conservación del Caribe (CCC), especialmente a Lucinda Taft y Stern Roberson. El Lic. José Robleto, anterior profesor de la Universidad Centroamericana

(UCA) y actual profesor de la Universidad de Mobile en Nicaragua fue de mucha utilidad tanto como coordinador local del proyecto y traductor.

Lamarr B. Trott Asesor Pesquero Centro Ambiental, Oficina Global Agencia Internacional para el Desarrollo (AID) Washington, D. C.

MAP OF MISKITO COAST AND CAYS PROTECTED AREA, AS ESTABLISHED IN 1991, SHOWING CIRCLE AROUND THE CAYS, AND COAST AL STRIP

MAP OF MISKITO CAYS, SHOWING BOTTOM (BENTHIC) HABITAT

Information derived from direct observation, aerial photographic and naval bathymetric charts.

PHOTOGRAPHIC SUMMARY SHEETS Prepared as general information about the four fisheries topics covered by this project, plus one sheet on marine turtles.

Cayos Miskitos The Lobster Fishery

The artisanal fishery is conducted in the Miskito Cays both by diver and trap boats. Lobster divers use small canoes (cayucas), supported by one person in the boat as a tender.

Harvest of lobsters is physically demanding, with little I training and no medical treatment available. As many as seven SCUBA tanks are used per day, with bends and other divers' injuries taking their foil There are no decompression facilities in the area.

Lobster harvests are sometimes plentiful, but the catch rate is typically two lobsters per tank. Lobster harvest size is smaller than desireable, and often prior to reproductive size.

The hook used to snare lobsters from their lairs. Such hooks are illegal in the USo (Florida) fishery. Lobsters bring U.S. $6 per pound to the fisherman, thereby making the lobster fishery a major economic factor for Miskito coast of Nicaragua.

the

Cayos Miskitos The Shrimp Fishery Shrimp are abundant along the Miskito Coast of Nicaragua due to numerous lagoon systems, a wide continental shelf, and a good bottom habitat. Offshore, the harvest is by bottom trawling; in the lagoons the catch is often by castnet. The major species is Penaeus schmitti, the white shrimp, wich is found close to shore and abundant in the lagoons. Fishing by foreign fleets, especially the United States, Honduras and Colombia, is allowed, through payment of permit fees. The product is frozen and mostly exported.

A typical offshore shrimp trawler at the Puerto Cabezas pier.

Processing shrimp at the Atlantor plant, near Puerto Cabezas. The plant is modem and clean, with most of the frozen shrimp being destined for U.S. and other foreign Markets. The fishery sector is the second largest export earner in Nicaragua.

A lagoon shrimping canoe nearly filled with juvenile white shrimp.

Cayos Miskitos The Coral Reef

Hard corals of the Miskito Cays support an abundant fish and invertebrate fauna

The reefs of the Miskito Cays are shallow, numerous, and productive. They are an excellent habitat for myriads of marine life, one of Nicaragua's major natural resources. The principal fishery of the reefs is based on the spiney lobster and fishermen often dive for them. Lobster are heavily fished, but finfish are not, as yet. Other natural resources are supported by the coral reef and sea grass system, such as marine turtles, manatees, conch, and crabs. Corals are actually colonies of many individuals, which come in many forms, such as round brain coral, branching elkhorn, and filamentous sea whips. They grow slowly and are easily damaged by anchors, divers, and storms. A worldwide effort to protect these animal systems, called the lnternational Coral Reef lnitiative, is addressing problems of coral reefs and associated sea grass beds and mangroves.

Large sea whip corals abound in the cays

C Coral and sea grasses make up the bottom habitat of the Miskito Cays .

Cayos Miskitos The Lagoons

Coastal lagoons from the air

Map of coastal area, showing lagoons

Lagoons of the Miskito coast are important for human habitation, and serve as a nursery ground for most species of marine life. Most shrimp, crabs, and fish live at least part of their lives in the lagoons, and serve as an important source of food and income for the villagers. Mangroves line the lagoons, and are an important part of the nursery, providing major habitat for small marine creatures as they grow. Lagoon systems are very delicate, and are often heavily polluted, which is not yet the case in Nicaragua.

The lagoon village of Karata

Snook are a major fish resource in the lagoons

Mangroves line the lagoons

Biologists sample for water conditions

Cayos Miskitos Marine Turtles The abundant sea grass beds of the Miskito Cays provide a major habitat for marine sea turtles. Four species are found in Nicaragua, with the green turtle , Chelonia mydas, being heavily used for food. Estimates are that 14,000 green turtles are harvested every year from the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua. Most of the turtles caught in the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve are landed in Puerto Cabezas, but many are also consumed in other villages, especially Sandy Bay. They are kept alive and upside down under houses for up to 10 days to keep them fresh for the market. Turtles grow slowly, and can reach a large size, to well over a meter in length. Many of the turtles harvested from the Cays are over 30 years of age. Turtle meat sells for half the price of beef, is presently more available, and is a traditional food source for the Miskito people living on the coast. Turtles are protected in most locations of the world, and major regulations protect them from heavy loss due to shrimp trawls. Turtle excluder devices must be installed in all trawls of nations that export shrimp to the United States, for example. Turtle jewelry also cannot be imported into the United States. It is made from a related species, the hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricata, also found in Nicaraguan waters.

Turtle landed on the beach at Puerto Cabezas

Green Turtle meat for sale at the market

Turtles await the market

Biologist and a four year old green turtle

FISHERIES RECOMMENDATIONS USAID EIA PROJECT BACKGROUND The CONCAUSA agreement between the Unite States and Latin American countries lead to a special one year program called the Environmental Initiative of the Americas (EIA), to be funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), though its missions in selected countries. The Nicaragua Mission has supported conservation enhancement through direct assistance to the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARENA), and specifically in development of the first Nicaraguan marine protected area, in the Miskito Keys. Work by the Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC) produced a Management Plan for the marine reserve in 1995, which addressed community concerns. An EIA project was developed to enhance that plan, primarily in addressing proper utilization of living marine resources of the marine reserve during 1996. That project was to address fisheries for lobsters, shrimp, reef fish and lagoon fisheries, primarily through technical assistance. It was not designed to interact significantly with communities, and did not include community development funds. It did provide for limited training of research staff. The Miskito Coast Marine Reserve was established in 1991, as a 20 km. wide coastal strip from the Honduran border to Wounta, and a 25 km. radius circle around the Miskito Cays. It was designated as a Protected Area, but artisanal fishing was not restricted. Nicaragua intends to pursue declaration of the designated afea as a Biosphere Reserve, which would provide international recognition. Technical assistance was provided in coastal zone management, coral reefs, lobster biology and fisheries, shrimp biology and fisheries, reef fishes, lagoon fishes, fisheries stock assessment, vessel and gear analysis, fisheries enforcement and computer use in fisheries management. Limited community interaction was added. Field studies included research on all four fisheries. Reports by all technical advisors are attached to this document as an Appendix. Interaction and assistance of the fisheries research laboratory - Center for Research on Aquatic Resources (CIRH) was an important aspect of the project, as it brought Nicaraguan scientists together for training and research. Near the end of the one year research period a workshop to discuss results and recommendations was held. The assembled recommendations are the result of considerable research and analyses, including options for management of the reserve and its living marine resources.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS MANAGEMENT OBJECTlVES x To conserve the biodiversity, endangered species and ecosystems found within the reserve. Nicaragua is fortunate to have a productive coastal system on its Northeast Atlantic coast. This. is due to a wide shallow continental shelf, and a series of coastal lagoons, which provide coral, seagrass and mangrove habitats critical for aquatic organisms. The Miskito Coast Marine Reserve was established to protect these systems, while concurrently utilizing them for limited fishery production. Conservation of biodiversity and endangered and threatened species is a world effort. Nicaragua must continue to aggressively address conservation issues, especially utilizing the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve as an example of committed direction toward rational utilization I of marine natural resources. At the same time, world efforts to protect endangered and threatened species must be adhered to~ this includes species that are presently abundant in the Reserve, but threatened by increasing fishing pressure. Regulations for protection of marine mammals (dolphins and manatees) and marine turtles need to be strengthened and enforced. A concentrated effort to determine and enforce a balance between allowable harvest of marine turtles by indigenous peoples and conservation efforts must be developed. Likewise, coastal runoff is damaging to coral reef, mangrove, and seagrass habitats. An understanding that upland activities, especially logging, is linked to coastal management needs to be instilled at all levels. The lagoon and reef monitoring effort begun by the project needs to be continued, in order to determine impacts over time. x To conserve the condition and abundance 01 natural resources so they might be used in traditional ways by future generations. Every effort to maintain a balance between natural resource removal and protection must be taken. Community, regional and national government mechanisms must be established (see Jain Report) to determine goals and implementation strategies to manage the Reserve in light of resource extraction desires and needs. Major new coastal activities that wi1l impact the Reserve and the health of marine resources must be carefully reviewed for impacts on natural resources as well as social and economic implications. A prime example would be offshore oil and gas exploration. Although living marine resources are renewable, they must have correct conditions to sustain population levels. The marine ecosystem is a delicate balance among organisms. Traditional harvesting methods are less damaging and need to be encouraged. x To improve the lives and economy of communities living in the Reserve. The communities in the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve are almost entirely dependent upon the harvests of the natural resources found in the reserve. At the present time, these resources are adequate to support the 38 communities, but there is evidence that they have already experienced many different types of decline. There is also information of great increases in pressure on the existing resources for immediate enhancement in the rates of harvest. 1t is unlikely that increases in natural production can occur beyond levels produced from the ecosystems when they are in balance and acting in a natural way. The situation is exacerbated when factors demonstrating increases in human population are included. Therefore, efforts to maintain the ecosystems, oceanic and lagoon, in their normal balance are directed at

maintaining or increasing the standard s of living in the communities of the Reserve on a long term, sustainable basis. x The establishment of the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve was an important first step in meeting these objectives. The EIA Team agrees that it was timely and proper to establish the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve. Every effort to maintain the objectives of its establishment must be maintained. Proper management requires dedication of all stakeholders, and sufficient financing. National and regional governments must take responsibility to establish mechanisms for management of the Reserve, but guarantee community involvement in management decisions, e.g. comanagement.

LOBSTER RECOMMENDATIONS (See recommendations of Childress and Herrnkind in Appendix) x Set minimum size 0f 135 mm tail length, 75 mm carapace length, 5 ounce tail weight . Caribbean spiny lobsters begin to mature at 75 mm carapace length although many individual do not successfully mate until they are much larger. A minimum size limit will protect juvenile lobsters in the Reserve until they have an opportunity to reproduce. It will also have an economic benefit by allowing smaller lobsters to attain a larger size and thus a greater market value. These three size measures are approximately equivalent and allow measurements to be made in the water, on board a boat or at the processor. x Prohibit collection of gravid females. Female spiny lobsters carry their developing offspring on their abdominal swimmerets. A single female may carry as many as one million developing larvae. These larvae are I the next generation of lobsters. If these embryos are removed from the female they will die. To protect the future generations of lobsters, gravid (egg-carrying) females must be released unharmed, therefore harvest of gravid female lobsters must be prohibited. A community education program coupled with enforcement at the processor is necessary. x Prohibit fishing in the nursery habitat surrounding Big Miskito Cay including the mangroves, seagrass, and fringing coral reefs to an approximate depth of 10 m. Postlarval spiny lobsters settle in dense beds of seagrass or red algae. As the juvenile lobsters grow they move from the seagrass and mangroves to the coral reef. Reefs found near large seagrass beds often contain many juvenile lobsters. If juvenile lobsters are caught in traps or hassled by divers they often are injured or killed. Injured lobsters grow slower taking much longer to reach maturity. The best way to protect juveniles I and assure fast growth is to prohibit fishing in their nursery habitat. The habitats surrounding Big Miskito Cays are ideal for juvenile lobsters, and only minimal harvesting is presently practiced in that specific area. Postlarval lobsters settle in the I mangrove roots and seagrass beds. As the lobsters grow they move into the shallow coral reef surrounding the island. Once the juvenile reach maturity (75 mm carapace length) they will begin to disperse from Big Miskito Cay to other nearby reefs.

The shallow reefs surrounding Big Miskito Cay should not be fished so that juvenile lobsters can reach maturity and migrate to other reefs in the Reserve. x Prohibit the use of hooks and spears by divers. Divers fishing for lobsters must have a tool for removing lobsters from the coral crevices. Hooks and spears currently in use are effective in catching lobsters but usually kill the lobster in the process. This method leads to the loss of many juveniles and gravid females which deserve protection. Divers can use alternative tools for removing lobsters from coral without killing them. Snares capture lobsters by grasping their tail. The snared lobster can then be removed from the coral. Divers can also use a long stick to stimulate lobsters to leave a crevice then capture the individual in a hand-held net Since these methods do not kill the lobster, the diver can check for eggs and can measure the carapace length to make sure the lobster is of legal size. Juveniles or gravid females can then be released unharmed while still underwater. x Traps must be made of wood and contain an escape gap of not less than 2.125 inches. Occasionally, lobster traps are lost, especially following strong storms. These lost or "ghost" traps may continue to capture lobsters, holding them until they starve. These lost traps may also physically damage fragile corals. If the lobster traps are made of wood they will decompose much faster than those made of metal wire. Lost wooden traps are less destructive than lost wire traps. Since traps are not selective of the size of lobsters they capture, many juveniles are caught among the legal sized adult lobsters. Escape gaps are slots at the base of the trap large enough to allow juvenile lobsters to escape yet small enough to retain legal adult lobsters. One side of the wood traps should have a gap between slats of 2.125 inches. Ideally, the gap should be near the base of the trap. Escape gaps will also reduce the work of the fishermen who must measure and sort the lobsters from each trap.

x Traps may not be baited with turtle meat or sub - legal sized lobsters. Spiny lobsters usually do not enter traps looking for food; rather, they are looking for shelter. Baiting traps with turtle or other meat is a wasteful practice which will not always increase the number of lobsters caught. Likewise, the retention of juvenile lobsters in traps without escape gaps causes starvation and death among juveniles and will not always increase the number of lobsters caught. A regulation has been established by MARENA to restrict the use of turtle meat in lobster traps has been established; enforcement may also be necessary. x Traps should be placed only on sandy bottoms. Traps placed on seagrass or coral s will kill them by blocking the sunlight and by physical abuse. Traps placed on sandy bottoms cause the least damage to the habitat and offer the lobsters shelter in areas where natural shelters are scarce. SHRIMP RECOMMENDATIONS (See recommendations by K1ima in the Appendix). x Prohibit shrimp trawling within the reserve.

Trawling inside the lagoons by industrial vessels or even by traditional fishermen using trawl gear developed for artisanal vessels is prohibited and must be enforced, largely by the cornmunities themselves. Trawling has a high incidental catch (by-catch) and could seriously damage the populations of juvenile fish and crustaceans that use the lagoons as a rearing area and would have detrimental impacts on adults that use the lagoons for spawning aggregations. The methods now used by the traditional fishermen are suitable for full sustainable exploitation of the resources and can better be directed toward target species while avoiding or releasing fish that have low value. x Set minimum size of tails / pound within the reserve lagoons Setting a minimum sizes of 60 tails per pound for shrimp harvests in the lagoons is recommended to avoid the very wasteful practice of capturing very small shrimp with low value. .If all harvest is delayed until the shrimp reach an average of 60 per pound or larger, significantly greater income can be gained from the shrimp fishery in the lagoons. It is likely that the date on which the shrimp reach this size will vary from year to year and setting a fixed date for starting will be difficult. Therefore, community education and enforcement is necessary. Without a substantial research program to establish the date at which fishing could commence, it will be more practical to enforce the limit at the marketing point. It is recommended that the focus of the enforcement effort be made at the comprador, processor, retail and restaurant sectors; assessment of a large fine for buying or possessing undersize shrimp may be necessary. x Preserve the lagoon environment No fishery resource management practice can improve the sustainability of the shrimp and other resources more effectively than protection of the lagoon environment itself. The potential loss is not only to lagoon fisheries, but to many of Nicaragua' s most valuable industrial fisheries --shrimp trawling and lobsters harvest. Deterioration of the productive capacity of the lagoons and coral reef areas in Nicaraguan waters is already seen in the high level of silt washing clown from upland areas, primarily a result of logging practices. It is difficult for regulators of logging to understand the high environmental and economic cost of allowing logging practices that do not minimize soil runoff into streams. Each activity is incremental and foresters and timber resource managers are not concerned with the consequences of improper logging methods. MARENA and others responsible for monitoring of logging practices must implement and enforce regulations that protect downstream waters. In addition to logging, there are other threats to the lagoon environment that must be monitored, such as excessive untreated sewage and chemical runoff into lagoon waters from adjacent communities and from possible toxic chemicals from the mining industry. Aquaculture of shrimp is I intensive on the Pacific coast, and may likely be attempted on the Atlantic side, in association with the lagoons. Mangrove destruction for this activity must be limited, and strict oversight of the activity must be maintained by MARENA. These threats should be monitored as the population of the area increases and additional regulations should be enacted, as necessary.

LAGOON FISH RECOMMENDATIONS (See recommendations by Marshall in Appendix) x Set minimum mesh size of 5 inches for gill nets. The purpose of this recommendation is to attempt to ensure that most if not all important lagoon fish species reach reproductive maturity. A mesh size of 5-inches is recommended starting point for immediate implementation, phasing out smaller mesh over a reasonable period of time, but a research and monitoring effort should be pursued that will more closely resolve the relationship between mesh size and reproduction. Some consideration should be given to determining if productivity is reduced by gillnet fishing and whether equally effective fishing methods, those which can release non-target fish such as hooks and traps, can replace most or all gillnet fisheries in the lagoons over time. x Prohibit block netting methods across lagoon passes. At unpredictable times, the lagoon passes are likely to be occupied by aggregations of spawning populations of a variety of fish and crustacean species. Reproduction of these species could be seriously diminished by fishing activities that block a significant part of the narrow passages between the sea and the lagoons. During times of major spawning migrations of the larger species, no gillnet fishing or other non-selective harvest gear should be permitted in any narrow passage or a lagoon entrance. At all other times, use of gillnets should be greatly restricted in the lagoon mouths and narrow channels with maximum blocking of ten percent or less. This will protect spawning migrations that fall outside the predicted peak times. The actual timing of spawning in the APCM lagoons of the many species of fish is poorly studied and should receive further attention in the research program Community education to explain the value of this restriction will be necessary. x Conduct studies to determine if closed seasons are necessary for some species. As addressed in the above recommendation, a program of studies of lagoon fish should be undertaken to assess the possibility if closed seasons can increase the productivity and sustainability of lagoon fisheries. Short-term closures during peak spawning migrations could increase reproduction and therefore make greater numbers of fish available during open seasons. At this time, it does not appear that fishing pressure by traditional fishing is having an excessive impact on reproduction, but there is little data to support this. The situation is complicated by the multiple species involved which mar have different timing of reproduction. 1t is likely, however, that spawning timing of many species occurs in a relatively condensed time period due to seasonal wet/dry weather cycles.

x Develop additional or alternative fisheries, such as crabs or prawns. Fisheries for lobster and shrimp are likely to peak and decline in the short term. As these traditional fisheries decline, alternative income sources will be sought. Early determination of logical underdeveloped fisheries needs attention. This would include an assessment of mollusk, fish, and crustacean resources of the Reserve. Conch and reef fish are presently under-exploited in the cays and grass beds; and, crabs and fresh water prawns (Macrobrachium) are presently under-exploited in the lagoons. Developed fisheries for these alternative species can offer some additional income and food opportunities. They can utilize

traditional methods already available. A shift to alternative fisheries will take pressure off of the lobster fishery in the cays and snook and juvenile shrimp in the lagoons, allowing greater sustainability of those fisheries.

REEF FISH RECOMMENDATIONS (See Marshall recommendations in the Appendix) x Encourage hook and line fishing methods, and discourage destructive methods, especially chemical and explosive. Every effort to maintain traditional methods of fishing within the Reserve should be adhered to. Methods of large scale extraction are not sustainable, especially with slower growing species (e.g. grouper). Some methods, such as use of dynamite and poisons, cause major habitat damage. Other methods, such as Z traps and long lines, can rapidly over-harvest an area. Traditional hook and line gives the best balance of harvest and sustainability. x Prohibit the collection of aquarium trade reef fish and corals within the reserve. Collection of juvenile fish for the aquarium trade can be a lucrative business and can be encouraged in other Nicaraguan locations, provided that proper collection methods are used. However, the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve should be treated as a restricted area for such endeavors, thereby providing the best conditions for growth of reef fish species to adult, therefore spawning, size. Extraction of all corals, regardless of species, within the Reserve, must be prohibited. This will not largely affect traditional coral fishers and jewelers, as the valuable species (black coral) are mostly I found in deeper water outside the reserve. Exporting of corals to some countries (e.g. the United States) is already prohibited, so compliance with international trends is appropriate as early as possible.

x Conduct studies to determine if closed seasons are necessary for some species. For many reef-dwelling species, life histories are known. For many others, this is not the case. In either case, Nicaraguan conditions for growth need further investigation, and to be linked to physical and chemical conditions, such as rainfall, runoff and ocean circulation. CIRH should playa major role in this research. Critical spawning seasons and areas should be closed for fishing during -major spawning peaks. This should be done even before reef species are over-fished. As seen in other nations, all significant adult fish could be removed in one year by some fishing methods. Protection during spawning is a major technique used for maintaining sustainability. x Consider the establishment of a no-take protected area for reel fish. Nicaragua has appropriately established the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve. It is not a preserve, as fishing is allowed, and traditional fishing is encouraged. As ecotourism is being considered, and as heavier fishing pressure is expected, regardless of regulations, it is highly appropriate to establish a fully protected specific coral reef prior to damage to reefs or fish stocks. In this regard, Nicaragua has a unique opportunity. Further study mar be necessary, however initial investigations and considerations indicate that Whittie´s Reef mar be a logical site. This is due to its relative abundance of life, cleaner water, relative isolation, and closer proximity to Puerto Cabezas. Discussion with community leaders as to the selection of site and agreement to restrict activities will be necessary. Then, the specific reef will need to be delineated and full announcement and rationale provided to all parties with interest in the area. Specific absolute restriction of all fishing is a must. Encouragement of diving ecotourism at the site would then be encouraged, with mooring buoys established to avoid anchor damage.

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS x While it is desirable to have input from of all stakeholders, management decisions should be made by a small decision-making body. The EIA team has concluded that in the ACPM a relatively small decision-making body should be established that will have final authority on resource management regulations and other actions that affect the fishery resources in the protected area. It is also vitally important that all stakeholders are given a thorough opportunity to participate in the decision making process and that their needs and views are fully considered prior to any new or changed regulation. The report by Jain (see Appendix), suggests participation of all stakeholders in the management process, including final decision-making. Other opinions are that a smaller group must be empowered with decision-making. However, the consensus of the EIA team was that it would be impossible to create a large group that could be balanced in a way that all management considerations could receive appropriate weight. There would be no practical way for such a group to have a weighted voting system. The EIA Team recommends that membership of the decision-making council might include seven to nine members, an should represent national, regional, and community perspectives. As much as possible, all members should have extensive training or experience in fisheries and resource management. As an example, there might be representatives from MARENA, :MEDE-Pesca, RAAN, the processing industry, and environmental NGOs and communities,

acting on scientific information provided by a scientific and statistical group composed of CIRH, MARENA, and MEDE Pesca scientist. x Establish a method to limit fishing effort In view of the fact that the population of the region is growing rapidly (perhaps doubling each 15 or 20 years) and economic development m the region is increasing, mechanisms that will limit the amount of fishing effort to a level that can be sustained -. by the reserve's fishery resources must be implemented soon. It is a fisheries management axiom that there are two times when it is politically possible to establish reasonable limits to fishing effort: first, when there is relatively low participation and pressure on the resource; and second, when the resource has been so seriously damaged that all recognize the need to reduce the combined capacity to harvest the resource. In the ACPM there is an unusual opportunity to place limits on the total fishing effort which would be considerably above the current level of fishing. Establishment of reasonable limits to the harvest capacity of traditional fishing within the protected area will help guarantee that a reasonable income can be sustained by participants and would benefit future generations of community residents. Although a monitoring and research program will be necessary to set the upper level of fishing effort that can be permitted in the lagoons and in the Cayos Miskitos area, a reasonable starting point mar be setting a cap at double the current level of fishing effort for so me species. Research is needed to determine the level for each species or group.

x Prohibit industrial fishing vessels. Fishing by industrial vessels is prohibited in the ACPM area, but enforcement is necessary, but there mar be some disagreement on this. The ACPM is too environmentally fragile to permit the large-scale and intensive harvest by industrial vessels if the objectives of the establishment of the reserve are to be met. The definition of industrial vs. artisanal vessels should follow UNFAO guidelines. The proposed new fisheries law should incorporate specific regulations on this point pertaining to the reserve. x Establish sources of financial support It is essential that a regular and dependable source of funds be obtained for the necessary monitoring and management functions required for the reserve. The EIA team recommends that a strong effort be made to take necessary steps to designate a fixed portion of the Fondo de la Pesca, an apparent requirement under Nicaraguan law, to be used to provide operating funds for reserve management. Other sources of funds that should be investigated include a portion of the funds that are collected from industrial and foreign fishing license fees, and from taxes collected from landings from reserve fisheries. These funds should be considered separate from MARENA ACPM operations and could be administered through the GRAAN. In addition, funds to improve the fishing capacity and safety of the traditional fishermen using the reserve should also be established. This fund should remain separate from the funds used for the management of the reserve. Grants from external donors and NGOs can also be sought, but these will almost always be for specified purposes and will not substitute for infernal funds.

x License all vessels that operate within the reserve. A simple and practical method should be developed to register and license all artisanal and other vessels (except very small vessels such as traditional cayucos) that harvest marine resources in the ACPM area. In the short term, this will greatly enhance the ability of monitoring and enforcement officials to distinguish between legal and non- legal vessels. In the longer term, if a cap on fishing effort is to be established, such a system will need to be in place over a significant period of time, so that a full evaluation can be made of the numbers and types of vessels that have been fishing in the Cayos Miskitos reserve and in the lagoons. x Apply for recognition as a lnternational Biosphere Reserve. The EIA Team agrees with efforts to establish international recognition as a biosphere reserve. To that end, a report by Jameson (see Appendix) includes all pertinent aspects and applications for furthering that goal. x Formalize the boundaries and policies to reduce fishing effort within the Marine I Reserve Buffer Zone, in cooperation with Mede Pesca. Buffer zones are a means of restricting human activity, especially farming. surrounding terrestrial protected areas. Marine species are a common property resource with migratory habits, therefore harder to protect. The Miskito Coast Marine Reserve was established as a protected area, with no buffer zones. The new Environmental Law allows establishment of such zones around any protected area. For the Marine Reserve, there are three buffer zones worth considering: 1) the three mile coastal zone, 2) terrestrial and riverine areas inland from the Reserve, and 3) areas beyond the Cays I reserve circle. The EIA Team's advice on these is as follows: 1) National law regulates the three mile zone, specifically excluding industrial fishing. This therefore essentially serves as a "buffer zone", if enforced. It is therefore not necessary to declare this area a buffer zone, but enforcement efforts must be significantly enhanced. 2) National law already regulates activities surrounding coastal streams. The primary problem with maintaining lagoon ecology is runoff from upland logging, far beyond what could be included in a buffer zone. Declaration of an inland buffer zone is therefore considered unworkable. 3) Heavy foreign and industrial fishing occurs to the north and east of the declared reserve around the cays. Declaration of a buffer zone, or area of restricted fishing, I would be appropriate. This would serve to protect lobsters from massive over-fishing in their daily migrations into and out of the Reserve. Enforcement, by permanent placement of a naval vessel in the area, is the only means of control. If such enforcement is not done, establishment of a buffer zone would be to no avail. Also considered was the full area from 15 degrees to 13 degrees 30 minutes longitude and from the coast to 82 degrees latitude, a square fully surrounding the reserve. Shrimping is the major activity in the non-reef and non-lagoon area. National regulations should be enforced for this area. Special declaration as a buffer zone is not considered workable, due to enforcement restrictions.

Consider that the reserve also acts as a sanctuary and deserves extra protection (e.g. exclusion of industrial vessels) on that basis, since a sanctuary will provide benefit to industrial as well as traditional fishers. There is no reason to exclude industrial vessels from areas near the Reserve; the idea is to ensure that they 1) fish using currently legal methods (traps only, size limit etc.) and 2) that there is a way to prevent excess numbers of them from fishing in the area adjacent to the Reserve if or when stocks become depleted in other areas and the Reserve becomes the single refuge that can maintain a viable fishery. x Implement programs in resource education, technical training, economic alternatives, scientific research, and control and surveillance. Public compliance with rules and regulations follows from involvement in the making of those rules and regulations. But, it is only an educated public with a sense of obligation to the environment and to their neighbors who become involved. This is the background of the practicality of this recommendation. Scientific research leads the way to help define the alternatives. in the legislation required and the types of enforcement necessary. Education in importance of resource conservation and in technical training lead to appreciation of the research and for alternatives in implementation. If the above educational and social objectives are accomplished, control and surveillance become minor factors for the local community, but contribute greatly to the guidelines for interactions with those from outside of the community. x Continue and expand monitoring programs, in cooperation with CIRH, to collect data on catch and effort for lobsters, shrimp and lagoon fish. Cooperative monitoring programs contribute to understanding and capability on both sides of the program. The scientists in CIRH have made major contributions to the scientific understanding and management of the crustacean and fish resources in Nicaragua. The biologists at the MARENA Puerto Cabezas facility have been critical for performing the initial monitoring effort. It is essential that they or their function continue, in order to develop a time line of data for management of the Reserve and surrounding area. As the management issues become more complicated and scientific knowledge more sophisticated, it becomes critical to develop cooperative programs with scientists in other countries as well. x Develop education programs to educate fishermen regarding the relationship between the proposed management measures and the biology of the fishery species. Although fishermen are well versed in locating and basic understanding of the fishery species they target, relationships between the species, their life cycles, and habitat requirements are essentially not understood. It is therefore important to develop community education programs, e.g. through programs like PRO ARCA, that explaining these relationships. Otherwise co-management and community cooperation are unlikely to succeed. x Consider the development of eco-tourism activities. Eco-tourism can be a major means of gaining income for a local area. Major economic gain is already accomplished in neighboring countries, such as Belize and more recently Honduras. Water clarity and infrastructure are better in these locations than in northeast Nicaragua, however, eco-tourism could be developed in Puerto Cabezas on a small scale. A fully protected reef (e.g. Whittie's Reef, above) should be a focus site, which would not interfere

with fishing activities. Some tourist activities in the Cays could be accomplished also, with as much attention to human activities (e.g. casitas) as marine life. Infrastructure needs to be developed to support even a small tourist industry. Initially, a live-aboard dive boat operation might be encouraged to operate in and near the Reserve. Additional potential may be gained from contact with United States fishing groups, which could be encouraged to fish for bonefish, shallow reef fish, etc.. The larger pelagic fishes (e.g. marlin) are too far from shore, due to the wide shelf. x Comply with the national recommendations regarding the harvest of marine turtles. Nicaragua has regulations regarding harvest of marine turtles, and is signatory to international endangered species agreements. However, a major indigenous fishery for I green turtles exists in the Reserve. Alternative fisheries need to be developed (e.g. reef fish), or alternative animal protein sources need to be made available at a similar price. Enforcement of strict no-fishing regulations for marine turtles would cause undue local hardship until such alternatives are in place. International pressure to restrict. marine turtle harvest may come soon, so determination of enforceable regulations needs early consideration by local and national leaders. x Create regulations under the "Ley General del Medio Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales" to accomplish these recommendations. The regulations regarding harvest of marine turtles, for example, are international, but there must be national legislation to impress the Nicaraguan people with the concept that compliance with the laws are in Nicaragua' s best interest. Legislation would be written that applies to the harvest of turtles or other protected species, as well as I illegal harvests of both lobster and shrimp. Illegal activities occur in both of these major fisheries that range from "pirate" activities from foreign vessels, to the transfer of catch at sea to other vessels, to illegal harvesting inside the Reserve.

x Enforcement of these regulations, with cooperation from the Nary, is critical to the welfare of the reserve. The Reserve is not an island, but is connected to its surroundings. The fishery in the Reserve is not isolated from the fishery outside the Reserve, through the fact that the lobsters in the Reserve ignore the boundary separating it from the other areas. Therefore, if lobster abundance outside the Reserve is too low, harvests within the Reserve will also be significantly decreased. Therefore, natural resource legislation for outside and inside the Reserve that furthers conservation and national interest is in the best interests of sustainable resource harvesting everywhere. The Navy is the natural lead agency to deal with enforcement, with close cooperation with Reserve communities, MARENA, :MEDE PESCA, etc..

RECOMENDACIONES PESQUERAS PROYECTO EIA -USAID ANTECEDENTES El acuerdo CONCAUSA entre los Estados Unidos y los países latinoamericanos condujo al establecimiento de un programa especial de un año, conocido como la Iniciativa Ambiental de las Américas (EIA), el cual fue financiado con fondos de la Agencia Internacional para el Desarrollo (USAID) a través de sus misiones en países seleccionados. La Misión en Nicaragua ha apoyado el fortalecimiento de los programas de conservación a través de asistencia directa al Ministerio del Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales (MARENA), y específicamente en el desarrollo de la primer área protegida marina nicaragüense en los Cayos Miskitos. En 1995, la Corporación Caribeña para la Conservación (CCC) elaboró un Plan de Manejo para la reserva marina, enfocando las principales preocupaciones de las comunidades. El Proyecto Pesquero EIA fue desarrollado para mejorar este plan, principalmente en lo concerniente a la utilización apropiada de los recursos biológicos marinos de la reserva marina durante 1996. A través de asistencia técnica, este proyecto concentró sus esfuerzos en las pesquerías de langostas, camarones, peces de arrecifes y lagunas. No fue diseñado para interactuar significativamente con las comunidades y tampoco se incluyeron fondos para el desarrollo de las mismas. Este proyecto proveyó fondos para el entrenamiento del personal de investigación. La Reserva Biológica Marina Cayos Miskitos y Franja Costera Inmediata fue establecida en 1991 como una franja costera de 20 km. de ancho, desde la frontera con Honduras hasta Wounta, y un círculo con un radio de 25 km. alrededor de los Cayos Miskitos. A pesar de haber sido designada como Área Protegida, la pesca artesanal no está restringida. Nicaragua tiene intenciones de declarar esta área designada como una Reserva de la Biosfera que le conferiría el reconocimiento internacional. A lo largo de este año se proveyó asistencia técnica en manejo de zonas costeras, arrecifes de corales, biología y pesquería de langostas, camarones, peces de arrecifes y lagunas, evaluación de poblaciones pesqueras, análisis de barcos y artes de pesca, cumplimiento de regulaciones pesqueras y uso de computadoras en el manejo de pesquerías. A lo largo del proceso se dio un poco de interacción comunitaria. Estudios de campo incluyeron investigaciones en todas las cuatro pesquerías. Los reportes de todos los asesores técnicos se encuentran incluidos en este documento en la sección de Anexos. Un importante componente en este proyecto fue la interacción y asistencia del Centro de Investigaciones de los Recursos Hidrobiológicos (CIRH), lo que hizo posible la participación de cientistas y técnicos nicaragüenses en las diferentes actividades de entrenamiento e investigación. Próximo al período de culminación de este proyectos realizó un taller para discutir los resultados y recomendaciones preliminares. Estas recomendaciones son el resultado de investigaciones y análisis considerables, que incluyen la identificación de opciones para el manejo de la reserva y los organismos biológicos marinos.

RESUMEN DE LAS RECOMENDACIONES OBJETIVOS DE MANEJO x Conservar la biodiversidad, especies amenazadas y ecosistemas existentes en la reserva. Nicaragua es afortunada al tener un sistema costero productivo en la región Noreste del Caribe. Esto es debido a la extensa plataforma continental, y a la serie de lagunas costeras que proveen una diversidad de hábitat como corales, pastos marinos y manglares, todos ellos críticos para los organismos acuáticos. La Reserva Biológica Marina Cayos Miskitos y Franja Costera Inmediata fue establecida para proteger estos sistemas a la vez que son utilizados para una producción pesquera limitada. La conservación de la biodiversidad, de las especies amenazadas y en peligro es parte de un esfuerzo mundial. Nicaragua debe continuar concentrando enérgicamente sus esfuerzos en la conservación, utilizando especialmente esta Reserva Marina como ejemplo de un compromiso dirigido hacia la utilización racional de los recursos marinos naturales. Al mismo tiempo, los esfuerzos mundiales para proteger las especies amenazadas y en peligro deberían adherirse a los objetivos de la Reserva. Esto incluye especies que actualmente son abundantes en la Reserva pero amenazadas por el creciente esfuerzo de pesca. Se necesitan fortalecer y hacer cumplir las regulaciones para la protección de mamíferos (delfines y manatíes) y tortugas marinas. Debe desarrollarse un esfuerzo concentrado para establecer en primera instancia, un balance entre la captura permitida de tortugas marinas por los grupos indígenas y los esfuerzos de conservación, y por otro lado los mecanismos para hacer cumplir estos esfuerzos. Es importante tener presente el hecho de que la escorrentía costera está dañando hábitat muy importantes como son los arrecifes de corales, manglares, y pastos marinos. El hecho de que las actividades que se realizan en las tierras altas, especialmente la extracción de madera, están íntimamente vinculadas al manejo de las zonas costeras es algo que necesita ser entendido a todos los niveles. Los esfuerzos de monitoreo de las lagunas y los arrecifes se inició como la necesidad de continuar el proyecto a fin de poder determinar los , diferentes impactos en el tiempo. x Conservar la condición y abundancia de los recursos naturales de modo que puedan ser utilizados de forma tradicional por las generaciones futuras. Deben realizarse todos los esfuerzos para mantener un balance entre la remoción y protección de los recursos naturales. Deben establecerse mecanismos a nivel de las comunidades, gobiernos regional y nacional para determinar las metas e implementar las estrategias de manejo de la reserva la luz de la extracción necesitada y deseada de estos recursos. Todas aquellas actividades costeras importantes que impactaran la reserva y la salud de los recursos marinos deben ser cuidadosamente revisadas para establecer los impactos que estas actividades tendrán tanto en los recursos naturales así como las implicaciones socioeconómicas. Un ejemplo de esto sería las exploraciones petroleras fuera de las costas. A pesar de que los recursos marinos son renovables ellos necesitan tener las condiciones apropiadas para sostener los niveles de población. El ecosistema marino es un balance delicado entre los organismos. Métodos tradicionales de pesca son menos dañinos y su uso necesita ser estimulado. x Mejorar las condiciones de vida y la economía, de las comunidades en la reserva.

Las comunidades en la Reserva dependen casi enteramente de la explotación de los recursos naturales localizados al interior de la misma. Actualmente, estos recursos son adecuados para el sostenimiento de las 38 comunidades, sin embargo, existe alguna evidencia de que estos han experimentado diferentes tipos de decrecimiento. Existe también información de un gran aumento en la presión sobre los recursos existentes a través de un crecimiento en la tasa de captura. Es poco probable que un incremento en la producción natural pueda ocurrir más allá de los niveles producidos por los ecosistemas cuando éstos están en balance con los mecanismos naturales. La situación se toma más dramática cuando algunos indicadores demuestran incrementos en las poblaciones humanas. Por lo tanto, todos los esfuerzos para mantener los eco sistemas oceánico s lagunares en su balance normal están dirigidos a mantener o incrementar los niveles de vida en las comunidades de la Reserva a largo plazo y de forma sostenible. x El establecimiento de la Reserva Biológica Marina Cayos Miskitos y Franja Costera Inmediata, ha sido un primer paso muy importante en la consecución de estos objetivos. El equipo de expertos del Proyecto de Pesquerías EIA-USAID considera que el establecimiento de la Reserva fue realizado en el tiempo y la forma apropiados. Cada esfuerzo para mantener los objetivos de su establecimiento deben ser continuados. El manejo apropiado de la Reserva requiere dedicación de todos los sectores interesados así como de suficiente financiamiento. Los Gobiernos Nacionales y Regionales deben responsabilizarse por establecer los mecanismos para el manejo de la Reserva además de garantizar la participación de la comunidad en este proceso de cogestión. x RECOMENDACIONES SOBRE LANGOSTAS ( Ver recomendaciones de Childress y Herrkind en anexos). Establecer una talla mínima de 135 mm longitud de cola, 75 mm longitud de cefalotórax, 5 ozs. peso cola. La langosta espinosa del Caribe empieza su madurez cuando alcanza una longitud de 75 mm de cefalotórax, a pesar de que algunos individuos no se aparean exitosamente hasta que ellos son mucho más grandes. Un límite mínimo de talla protegerá a las langostas juveniles en la reserva hasta que ellas tengan la oportunidad de reproducirse. Esto también tendrá un beneficio económico al permitir que las langostas más pequeñas alcancen una talla más grande y por lo tanto un mejor valor de mercado. Estas tres mediciones de tallas son aproximadamente equivalentes permitiendo que sean realizadas en el agua, abordo de los barcos o en las plantas procesadores.

x Prohibir la captura de hembras grávidas. Las hembras de langostas espinosas cargan sus huevos en su abdomen. Una I hembra puede cargar hasta un millón de larvas en desarrollo. Estas larvas son la próxima generación de langostas. Sí estos embriones son removidos de la hembra éstos morirán. Para proteger las futuras generaciones de langostas, hembras grávidas (con huevos), deben ser liberadas sin ningún daño, por lo tanto la captura de langostas grávidas debe ser prohibida. Un programa de educación comunitaria con mecanismos de control en las plantas procesadoras se hace necesario. x Prohibir la pesca en los hábitat de reproducción y anidamiento en las áreas que rodean Gran Cayo Miskito, incluyendo los manglares, pastos marinos y corales de arrecifes hasta una profundidad de 10 mts.

Post-larvas de langostas espinosas se establecen en áreas densas de pastos marinos o algas rojas. A medida que las langostas juveniles crecen, ellas migran desde los pastos marinos y manglares a los arrecifes de corales. Arrecifes encontrados cerca de grandes extensiones de pastos marinos con frecuencia contienen muchas langostas juveniles. Si las langostas juveniles son capturadas en trampas o por buzos con frecuencia resultan maltratadas o muertas. Langostas dañadas crecen mas despacio, lo que significa que les toma más tiempo alcanzar la madurez. La mejor manera de proteger a los juveniles y asegurar un rápido crecimiento es prohibiendo su captura en estos hábitat de reproducción y anidamiento. Los hábitat que rodean Gran Cayo Miskito son ideales para las langostas juveniles por lo que solamente una captura mínima es realizada en esa área específica. Post-larvas de langostas se establecen en las raíces de mangles y áreas de pastos marinos. A medida que las langostas crecen ellas migran hacia los arrecifes de corales en aguas someras que rodean la isla. Una vez que los juveniles alcanzan la madurez (75 mm cefalotórax), ellas empezarán a dispersarse desde Gran Cayo Miskito a otras áreas de corales vecinas. En los arrecifes someros que rodean Gran Cayo Miskito no se debería pescar, para permitir que las langostas juveniles alcancen la madurez y migren hacia otros arrecifes en la Reserva. x Prohibir que los buzos usen ganchos y arpones. Los buzos que capturan langostas utilizan un instrumento que les permite forzar a las langostas a salir de sus escondites en los corales. Los ganchos y arpones que actualmente utilizan son efectivos en la captura de langostas pero usualmente las matan en el proceso. Este método es responsable por la pérdida de muchos juveniles y hembras grávidas que merecen protección. Los buzos pueden utilizar métodos alternativos para remover las langostas de entre los corales sin matarlas. Otras trampas capturan langostas por medio de sujetarlas por la cola. Las langostas capturadas de esta forma pueden ser removidas de entre los corales. Los buzos también pueden utilizar un palo largo para obligar a las langostas a abandonar sus cuevas, capturándolas posteriormente con una red de mano. Debido que estos métodos no matan a las langostas, los buzos pueden determinar la presencia de huevos así como medir la longitud del cefalotórax para estar seguros de que la langosta tiene una talla legal. Las langostas juveniles o grávidas pueden ser liberadas sin ningún daño cuando todavía están en el agua.

x Las trampas deben ser hechas de madera y tener una abertura de escape lino menor de 2.125 pulgadas. Ocasionalmente las trampas de langostas se pierden especialmente después de fuertes tormentas. Estas trampas perdidas o trampas fantasmas, pueden continuar capturando langostas manteniéndolas hasta que ellas mueran. Estas trampas perdidas pueden dañar físicamente a los corales frágiles. Si las trampas son hechas de madera éstas se descompondrán más rápido que aquellas hechas de alambre. Trampas de maderas perdidas son menos destructivas que las trampas metálicas. Debido a que las trampas no seleccionan el tamaño de las langostas que capturan muchos juveniles son atrapados con las langostas adultas de tamaño legal. Las aberturas de escape son espacios ubicados en las bases de las trampas y son lo suficientemente grandes como para permitir que I las langostas juveniles escapen a la vez que son lo suficientemente pequeños para retener a las langostas adultas. Uno de los costados de las trampas de madera debería tener un espacio entre cada rejilla de 2.125 pulgadas. Idealmente la abertura debería estar cerca de la base de la trampa. Las aberturas de escape también reducirán el trabajo de los pescadores quienes deben medir y sortear las langostas de cada trampa. x No se debe utilizar carne de tortuga o langostas por debajo de la talla legal como carnada en las rampas. Las langostas espinosas usualmente no entran en las trampas buscando comida, preferentemente ellas buscan refugio. Colocar carne de tortuga u otra carne en las trampas es una práctica de despilfarro que no siempre incrementará el número de langostas capturadas. Igualmente, la retención de langostas juveniles en las trampas sin abertura de escape causan hambre y muerte en los juveniles y no siempre incrementará el número de langostas capturadas. MARENA ha establecido regulaciones con el objetivo de restringir el uso de carne de tortuga en trampas de langostas, sin embargo se hace necesario establecer mecanismos que obliguen al cumplimiento de las mismas. x Las trampas deberían ser colocadas solamente en substratos arenosos. Las trampas que son colocadas en los pastos marinos o en los corales terminarán matándolos a través de bloquear la luz solar así como también por abuso físico. Las trampas ubicadas en substratos arenosos pueden causar menos daño a los hábitat y ofrecer a las langostas refugio en áreas donde los refugios naturales son escasos.

RECOMENDACIONES SOBRE CAMARONES (Ver recomendaciones por Klima en Anexos). x Prohibir arrastres para camarones dentro de la Reserva. Los arrastres de barcos industriales dentro de la laguna o aún por pescadores tradicionales utilizando redes de arrastre desarrolladas para barcos artesanales es prohibido, por lo que esta disposición debe hacerse cumplir fundamentalmente por las propias comunidades. Los arrastres tienen una captura accidental alta (FAC) y podrían dañar seriamente a las poblaciones de peces y crustáceos juveniles que utilizan las lagunas como una área de cría y tendrían grandes impactos en los adultos que utilizan las lagunas para desovar. Los métodos utilizados ahora por los pescadores tradicionales son apropiados para una explotación sostenible total de los recursos y puede ser dirigida mejor hacia las especies de interés mientras que se evita o libera peces que tienen poco valor. x Establecer 60 colas/libra como la talla mínima para camarones en las lagunas interior de la Reserva. Se recomienda establecer una talla mínima de 60 colas por libra para camarones capturados en las lagunas a fin de evitar la captura de despilfarro de camarones muy pequeños con poco valor. Si todas las capturas son retrasadas hasta que los camarones alcancen una talla de 60 colas por libra o más grandes, se podrán obtener ingresos significativamente mayores derivados de la pesquería de camarones en las lagunas. Es muy probable que el tiempo en que los camarones alcancen esta talla varíe de un año a otro, de modo que pretender establecer una fecha de inicio será muy difícil. Por lo tanto, nuevamente se enfatiza en la necesidad de establecer programas de educación comunitaria y medios para hacer cumplir estas regulaciones. Sin contar con un programa substancial de investigación que permita el establecimiento de una fecha en que la actividad pesquera se inicie, es mucho más práctico controlar el límite de talla en los centros de comercialización. Se recomienda que se concentren todos los esfuerzos para hacer cumplir estas regulaciones en los centros de acopio, procesadoras, mercados y restaurantes. Sería necesario estimar un monto considerablemente alto de multa para todos aquellos que compren o posean camarones por debajo de la talla mínima. x Preservar el medio ambiente de las lagunas. Ninguna práctica de manejo de los recursos pesqueros puede mejorar por sí misma la sostenibilidad de la pesquería de camarones y otros recursos más efectivamente, que la protección del medio ambiente de las lagunas. La pérdida potencial no es solamente para las pesquerías de las lagunas, sino para la mayoría de las pesquerías industriales de mayor valor en Nicaragua, camarones y langostas. El deterioro de la capacidad productiva de las lagunas y las áreas de los arrecifes de coral en las aguas nicaragüenses se puede observar a través de los grandes niveles de sedimentos y partículas de suelos provenientes en las aguas de escorrentías de las tierras altas, principalmente como consecuencia de las actividades de extracción de madera. Para los reguladores de esta actividad es muy difícil entender los altos costos económicos y ambientales de permitir prácticas de extracción de madera que no minimizan la lixiviación de los suelos y su posterior descarga en ríos y corrientes. Por el incremento de las actividades de extracción se puede afirmar que los madereros y administradores de estos recursos no están preocupados con las consecuencias de la aplicación de métodos inapropiados de extracción de

madera. MARENA y otras instancias responsables por el monitoreo de estas prácticas extractivas deberán implementar y hacer cumplir las regulaciones que protejan las aguas río abajo. Además de las actividades de extracción de madera, existen otras amenazas al medio ambiente de las lagunas que deben ser monitoreadas: descarga excesiva de aguas servidas sin previo tratamiento y escorrentía de químicos tóxicos en las aguas de las lagunas provenientes de las comunidades adyacentes y la industria minera. El cultivo de camarones es intensivo en la Costa del Pacífico, y es muy posible que se intente llevarlo a cabo asociados a 1os sistemas lagunares en la costa Caribe. MARENA debe limitar la destrucción de manglares como resultado de la implementación de estas actividades así como mantener un estricto control y monitoreo de las mismas, Estas amenazas deben ser monitoreadas a medida que las poblaciones de estas áreas aumentan y de ser necesario se deberían establecer regulaciones adicionales.

RECOMENDACIONES SOBRE PECES DE LAGUNAS (Ver recomendaciones por Marshall en Anexos) x Establecer 5 pulgadas como luz de malla mínima para redes agalleras. El propósito de estas recomendaciones son un intento de asegurar que la I mayoría, sino todas las especies importantes, de peces de lagunas alcancen su madurez reproductiva. Una luz de malla de 5 pulgadas es un punto inicial recomendable para una implementación inmediata, retirando en un período de tiempo razonable, las redes con luz de malla más pequeñas, sin menoscabo de esfuerzos que se realicen para implementar un programa de investigación y monitoreo que permita establecer la relación entre luz de malla y reproducción. Deberían dedicarse esfuerzos para determinar si la productividad es reducida o afectada por la pesca basada en la utilización de redes agalleras y si métodos de pesca igualmente efectivos como anzuelos y trampas, que permiten la liberación de peces por debajo de la talla mínima, pueden reemplazar la mayoría o todas las pesquerías con redes agalleras en las lagunas en un tiempo prudencial. x Prohibir métodos de pesca basados en la utilización de redes que bloqueen o interfieran los procesos migratorios en las lagunas. Durante algunas épocas impredecibles, ciertas áreas de las lagunas son utilizadas como "pasadizos" o "corredores" por poblaciones de varias especies de peces y crustáceos en su proceso natural de desove. La reproducción de estas especies podría ser afectada considerablemente por artes de pesca que bloquean estos pasadizos o corredores estrechos que comunican las lagunas con el océano. Durante épocas pico de desove en las que se producen migraciones de peces más grandes, no deben permitirse el uso de redes agalleras y otras artes de pesca no selectivas en las entradas de las lagunas y en estos pasadizos o corredores. En cualquier otro tiempo, el uso de redes agalleras debería restringirse considerablemente en la boca de las lagunas y canales estrechos, con un bloqueo máximo de un diez por ciento del área o menor. Esto protegerá las migraciones con propósitos reproductivos que se dan fuera de los tiempos máximos establecidos. El tiempo actual de desove para muchas especies de peces en las lagunas de la Reserva ha sido muy poco estudiada y debería recibir mayor atención en un programa de investigación. Un programa de educación a los miembros de las comunidades será necesario para explicar el valor de estas restricciones.

x Conducir estudios para .determinar la necesidad de establecer épocas de veda para algunas especies. A como se ha señalado en las recomendaciones presentes debería establecerse un programa de estudios de peces de lagunas, para estimar la posibilidad de que las épocas de veda puedan incrementar la productividad y sostenibilidad de las pesquerías de las lagunas. Vedas de corto tiempo durante los picos de migraciones para desove podrían incrementar la reproducción, al permitir que una mayor cantidad de peces estén disponibles durante la temporada de pesca. Al presente no parece que la presión de pesca por los métodos tradicionales esté teniendo un impacto excesivo en la reproducción, sin embargo no existen suficientes datos que sustenten esto. La situación se complica por la presencia de muchas especies que pueden tener diferentes tiempos de reproducción. Todo parece indicar sin embargo que el tiempo de desove para muchas especies se da en un período de tiempo relativamente similar, debido a los ciclos climáticos de las estaciones seca y lluviosa. x Desarrollo adicional o pesquerías alternas (cangrejos y camarones de ríos). Las pesquerías para langostas y camarones, son propensas a presentar mínimos y máximos en un período corto. Al darse el declive de estas pesquerías tradicionales, fuentes alternativas de ingresos deberán buscarse. Se necesita prestar atención de forma anticipada al proceso de identificación de pesquerías subexplotadas. Esto podría incluir estimaciones de los recursos moluscos, peces y crustáceos al interior de la Reserva. Las conchas y peces de arrecifes en los cayos y pastos marinos; los cangrejos y camarones de río (Macrobrachium) en las lagunas, se encuentran actualmente subexplotados. El desarrollo de pesquerías para éstas especies alternativas puede ofrecer algunos ingresos adicionales y oportunidades de alimento Un viraje hacía pesquerías alternas quitaría presión a la pesquería de langostas en los cayos, y róbalo y camarones juveniles en las lagunas, permitiendo una mayor sostenibilidad de estas pesquerías.

RECOMENDACIONES SOBRE PECES DE ARRECIFES (Ver recomendaciones de Marshall en Anexos).

x Incentivar métodos de pesca basados en anzuelos y líneas, al mismo tiempo que se desestimula el uso de métodos destructivos, especialmente químicos y explosivos. Incorporar todos los esfuerzos por mantener métodos tradicionales de pesca dentro de la Reserva. Los métodos de extracción a gran escala no son sostenibles especialmente con especies de lento crecimiento (pargos). Algunos métodos como el uso de dinamita y venenos, causan daños mayores a los hábitat. Otros métodos como las trampas Z y líneas largas pueden sobre- explotar rápidamente un área. Métodos tradicionales de anzuelos y líneas producen el mejor balance entre captura y sostenibilidad. x Prohibir la extracción comercial de peces de arrecifes ornamentales y corales al interior dentro de la Reserva. La captura comercial de peces juveniles para acuarios puede ser un negocio lucrativo y puede ser estimulado en otras partes de Nicaragua, siempre y cuando métodos apropiados de recolección sean utilizados. Sin embargo en Reserva, debería ser tratada como un área restringida para este tipo de actividades ya que provee las mejores condiciones para crecimiento de las especies de peces de arrecifes, permitiéndoles alcanzar una talla reproductiva. Debe prohibirse la extracción de todos los corales independientemente de la especie. Esto no deberá afectar grandemente a las actividades tradicionales de extracción y artesanía de corales, debido a que las especies valiosas (coral negro) se encuentran mayormente en aguas más profundas fuera de las reservas. La exportación de corales a algunos países (Estados Unidos), actualmente está prohibida, de modo que el cumplir con estas disposiciones internacionales debe hacerse lo más pronto posible. x Conducir estudios para determinar la necesidad de establecer épocas de veda para algunos especies. El ciclo de vida para muchas especies que habitan en los arrecifes es conocida, sin embargo para otras esto nos cierto. En cualquiera de los casos, en Nicaragua las condiciones para crecimiento de las especies necesitan ser investigadas y asociadas a las condiciones físicoquímicas como lluvias, escorrentías y circulación oceánica. El Centro de Investigaciones para los Recursos Hidrobiológicos (CIRH), debe jugar un rol principal en estas investigaciones. Épocas y áreas críticas para el desove deberían establecerse, con el objetivo de restringir las actividades de pesca durante los picos máximos de desove. Esto debería hacerse aún antes de que las especies de arrecifes sean sobre-explotadas. Como se practica en otros países, todos los peces significativos deberían ser removidos en un año por algunos métodos de pesca. Protección durante el tiempo de desove es una técnica importante utilizada para mantener la sostenibilidad.

x Considerar el establecimiento de una área protegida para peces de arrecifes. Nicaragua ha establecido apropiadamente la Reserva Biológica Marina Cayos Miskitos y Franja Costera Inmediata. Sin embargo, esta no es enteramente un área de preservación ya que la pesca y métodos de pesca tradicionales son incentivados. A medida que el desarrollo del ecoturismo es considerado y una mayor presión de pesca es esperada, independientemente de las regulaciones, se hace altamente apropiado establecer áreas específicas de arrecifes de corales plenamente protegidas, antes que éstos sean dañados o sus poblaciones de peces y otros organismos seriamente reducidas. En este respecto Nicaragua tiene una oportunidad única. Más estudios pueden ser necesarios, sin embargo, las consideraciones e investigaciones iniciales indican que el arrecife Whittie puede ser un sitio apropiado. Esto es debido a la relativa abundancia de vida, aguas transparentes, aislamiento relativo y una mayor proximidad a Puerto Cabezas. Será necesario discutir con los líderes comunitarios la selección de este sitio y alcanzar un acuerdo para restringir las actividades humanas. Por lo tanto, el arrecife específico necesitará ser delimitado, para posteriormente notificar y divulgar estas regulaciones entre todos los sectores con intereses en el área. Una restricción específica absoluta de toda actividad pesquera debe ser implementada. Se podría incentivar el buceo eco turístico en el sitio utilizando boyas que no necesitan ser ancladas a los corales (tipo MOORING), evitando la destrucción de los arrecifes.

RECOMENDACIONES GENERALES x Decisiones de manejo deben ser tomadas por un Consejo reducido, independientemente de lo deseable de obtener retro-alimentación de todos los sectores interesados. El equipo EIA ha concluido que para la Reserva debe establecerse un Consejo de decisión relativamente pequeño, el cual tendrá la autoridad final en las regulaciones de manejo de recursos y otras acciones que afecten los recursos pesqueros en el área protegida. Es de vital importancia que a todos los sectores con intereses en el área se les dé la oportunidad de participar en los procesos de decisión y que sus necesidades y puntos de vista sean considerados plenamente previo a cambios o creación de nuevas regulaciones. El informe de Jain (ver Anexos) sugiere la participación de todos los grupos de interés tanto en los procesos de manejo como en la toma final. de decisión. Otras opiniones. consideran que se debe tener un grupo mas reducido. Sin embargo el consenso del equipo EIA fue de que sería imposible establecer un Consejo conformado por muchos miembros que estuviera balanceado de forma tal que todas las consideraciones de manejo recibieran el peso apropiado. No existiría una forma práctica para que dicho grupo tenga un sistema de voto adecuado. El grupo EIA recomienda que el Consejo de decisión sea conformado por unos siete o nueve miembros y debe representar tanto las perspectivas de la comunidad como las regionales y nacionales. Tanto como sea posible, todos los miembros deberían tener capacitación extensiva o experiencia en manejo de pesquerías y recursos. Como ejemplo, en el consejo deberían estar representantes de MARENA, :MEDEPESCA, RAAN, los procesadores, ONGs ambientalistas y comunitarias, trabajando con información científica y estadísticas provistas por un grupo compuesto por científicos del CIRH, MARENA y MEDEPESCA.

x Establecer un método para limitar esfuerzo de pesca. En virtud del hecho de que la población de la región está creciendo rápidamente (duplicándose quizás cada 15 ó 20 años) y de que el desarrollo económico está aumentando, se deben implementar muy pronto los mecanismos que limitarán la cantidad de esfuerzo de pesca a un nivel que pueda ser sostenido por los recursos pesqueros de la reserva. Existe un axioma de manejo pesquero que dice que hay dos tiempos cuando es políticamente posible establecer límites razonables al esfuerzo de pesca: Primero, cuando hay relativamente baja participación y presión en el recurso; y segundo, cuando el recurso ha sido seriamente dañado hasta el punto en que todos reconocen la necesidad de reducir la capacidad combinada para cosechar el recurso. En la Reserva existe una oportunidad inusual para establecer límites en el esfuerzo de pesca total que podría estar considerablemente por encima de los actuales niveles de pesca. El establecimiento de límites razonables a la capacidad de captura de métodos tradicionales de pesca dentro del área protegida ayudará a garantizar que un ingreso razonable pueda ser sostenido por todos los participantes y beneficiaría a las futuras generaciones de los residentes de las comunidades. A pesar de que se necesitan programas de monitoreo e investigación para establecer el nivel máximo de captura que puede ser permitido en las lagunas y los Cayos Miskitos, un punto inicial razonable podría ser el establecer una cifra doble de los niveles actuales de esfuerzo de pesca para algunos peces. Se necesita, sin embargo, realizar investigaciones para determinar el nivel para cada especie o grupo. x Prohibir barcos pesqueros industriales. La pesca industrial es prohibida en la Reserva por lo que es necesario hacer cumplir esta regulación aunque quizás no exista consenso sobre ello. La Reserva es ambientalmente muy frágil como para permitir capturas intensivas y a gran escala por parte de la flota industrial. x Establecer fuentes de financiamiento. Es esencial que una fuente regular y dependiente de fondos sea obtenida para las actividades de monitoreo y manejo necesarias y requeridas para la Reserva. El equipo EIA recomienda que se tomen los pasos necesarios que permitan asignar un porcentaje fijo de dinero proveniente del Fondo de la Pesca, requerimiento contemplado en la ley específica vigente, para ser utilizado como fondos operativo s de manejo de la Reserva. Otras fuentes que deberían investigarse, incluyen un porcentaje de los fondos que son colectados por concepto de licencias para barcos de la flota industrial y extranjera e impuestos recaudados de los desembarques de las pesquerías de la reserva. Estos fondos deberían considerarse por separado de las operaciones de MARENA-Reserva Biológica Marina Cayos Miskitos y Franja Costera Inmediata y podrían ser administrados por el Gobierno Regional de la RAAN. Además, se deberían establecer fondos para mejorar las capacidades de pesca y seguridad de los pescadores tradicionales en la Reserva. Para actividades y programas específicos debe buscarse financiamiento de donantes extranjeros y ONGs, el cual no sustituirá los fondos internos.

x Establecer un sistema de licencias para todos los barcos operando en la Reserva. Debería desarrollarse un método simple y práctico de registro y otorgamiento de licencias a todos los barcos, incluyendo los artesanales, con excepción de los cayuco s tradicionales que capturan recursos marinos en el área de la Reserva. A corto plazo, esto mejorará la capacidad de los técnicos y oficiales, encargados del monitoreo y cumplimiento de estas regulaciones, para distinguir entre los barcos legales e ilegales. A largo plazo, si se estableciera un límite de esfuerzo de pesca, este sistema necesitaría ser mantenido por un período de tiempo significativo, de modo que una evaluación completa puede ser realizada la partir del número y tipo de barcos que han estado pescando en los Cayos y en las lagunas de la Reserva. x Aplicar para el reconocimiento de Reserva Internacional de la Biosfera. El equipo EIA está de acuerdo con los esfuerzos para conseguir el reconocimiento internacional de Reserva de la Biosfera. Con tal propósito, el informe de Jameson (Ver Anexos) incluye todos los aspectos y aplicaciones pertinentes que permitan alcanzar esta meta. x Establecer, en cooperación con MEDE-Pesca, los límites y políticas que permitan reducir los esfuerzos de pesca dentro de la Zona de Amortiguamiento de la Reserva. Zonas de amortiguamiento son un medio de restringir las actividades humanas, especialmente agrícolas, que rodean a las áreas protegidas terrestres. Las especies marinas son recursos de propiedad común con hábitos migratorio s mucho más difícil es de proteger. La Reserva fue establecida como un área protegida, pero, sin zona de amortiguamiento.. La nueva legislación ambiental permite el establecimiento de dichas zonas alrededor de cualquier área protegida. Para la Reserva, existen tres zonas de amortiguamiento que es muy importante considerar: 1) la zona costera de las tres millas; 2) las áreas terrestres y riverinas en tierra firme, y 3) las áreas más allá del (perímetro) círculo de los Cayos de la Reserva. El consejo del equipo EIA sobre este tema es el siguiente: 1) La ley nacional específica vigente regula la zona de las tres millas, excluyendo específicamente la pesca industrial. Esto por 10 tanto, sirve esencialmente como una "zona de amortiguamiento" si se hacen cumplir las regulaciones pertinentes. Debido a que no es necesario declarar esta área como zona de amortiguamiento, se deben mejorar las capacidades de vigilancia y control. 2) La ley nacional específica vigente regula actividades en áreas próximas a los cuerpos de aguas (ríos y lagunas). El principal problema ecológico de las lagunas, es la escorrentía derivada de las actividades de extracción forestal que tiene lugar en las tierras altas más allá del área que sería designada como zona de amortiguamiento. Por lo tanto, la delimitación de una zona de amortiguamiento en tierra firme es considerada infuncional. 3) Al norte y este de la Reserva declarada alrededor de los cayos, se lleva a cabo una fuerte actividad de pesca industrial y extranjera. La declaración de una zona de amortiguamiento o área de pesca restringida sería apropiada, ya que serviría para proteger a las langostas de una sobre pesca masiva en sus migraciones diarias al interior y fuera de la Reserva. El único medio para hacer cumplir estas regulaciones es a través de la presencia permanente de una

patrullera de la Fuerza Naval en el área. Si no se cuenta con un sistema de vigilancia efectivo, el establecimiento de una zona de amortiguamiento no sería de ningún valor. También ha sido considerada el área total comprendida entre los 15º 13º 30 minutos longitud y desde la costa hasta los 82º latitud, un cuadrado rodeando totalmente a la Reserva. La pesca de camarón es la actividad principal que tiene lugar en el área fuera de las lagunas y los arrecifes. Las regulaciones nacionales vigentes deberían hacerse cumplir en esta área. La designación de una zona de amortiguamiento tampoco se considera funcional debido a la poca capacidad de .vigilancia y control. Considerando que la reserva funciona también como un santuario, esta merece protección adicional (exclusión de barcos industriales), ya que un santuario proveerá beneficio tanto a los pescadores tradicionales como industriales. No existe razón para excluir a los barcos industriales de las áreas próximas a la Reserva. La idea es asegurar 1) que ellos pesquen utilizando métodos legales vigentes (únicamente trampas, límite de talla, etc.) y 2) que exista una vía para prevenir que un número excesivo de barcos pesquen en el área adyacente a la Reserva cuando las poblaciones comiencen a declinar en otras áreas y la Reserva llegue a ser el único refugio que pueda mantener una pesquería viable. x Implementar programas en educación, capacitación técnica, alternativas económicas, investigación científica, control y vigilancia. El cumplimiento de las disposiciones y regulaciones por todos los sectores está basado en la participación de estos sectores en el proceso de la elaboración de las mismas. Pero, únicamente un público educado con un sentido de obligación hacia el medio ambiente y sus vecinos es el que se involucrará en este proceso. Este es el antecedente de lo práctico de estas recomendaciones. La investigación científica es el proceso que ayudará a definir las alternativas en la legislación requerida y los tipos de regulaciones necesarias. Educación sobre la importancia de conservar los recursos y capacitación técnica permitirá apreciar la investigación y las alternativas de implementación. Si los objetivos educacionales y sociales son alcanzados, los procesos de control y vigilancia vienen a ser factores menores para las comunidades locales, contribuyendo grandemente al establecimiento de los lineamientos para las interacciones con aquellos fuera de la comunidad.

x Continuar y expandir los programas de monitoreo, en cooperación con el CIRH, para colectar datos sobre captura y esfuerzo para langostas, camarones y peces de lagunas. Programas de monitoreo conjunto contribuyen al entendimiento y capacidad en ambas caras del proyecto. Los científicos en el CIRH, han contribuido de forma significativa al entendimiento científico y manejo de los recursos crustáceos y peces de Nicaragua. Los biólogos de MARENA en Puerto Cabezas han sido un factor crítico en la realización de los esfuerzos iniciales de monitoreo. Es esencial que ellos o sus funciones continúen a fin de desarrollar una base de datos en el tiempo para el manejo de las reservas y las áreas circunvecinas. A medida que el manejo se toma más complicado y el conocimiento científico más sofisticado, el desarrollar programas cooperativos con científicos de otros países viene a ser un factor muy importante. x Desarrollar programas de educación para educar a los pescadores en lo que respecta a las relaciones entre las medidas de manejo propuestas y la biología de las especies pesqueras. A pesar de que los pescadores tienen mucha experiencia en la localización y entendimiento básico de las especies pesqueras de su interés, las relaciones entre las especies, sus ciclos de vida y requerimientos de hábitat, no son entendidas a plenitud. Es por lo tanto importante desarrollar programas comunitarios de educación, por ejemplo, a través de programas como PROARCA, que expliquen estas relaciones. De no darse esto la cooperación comunitaria y el co-manejo tienen pocas probabilidades de éxito. x Considerar el desarrollo de actividades eco turísticas. El ecoturismo puede ser un medio importante para obtener ingresos en un área local. Ganancias económicas importantes se han logrado alcanzar en países vecinos como Belice y más recientemente Honduras. La transparencia del agua e infraestructura son mejores en estos países que en el Noreste de Nicaragua. Sin embargo el ecoturismo podría ser desarrollado en Puerto Cabezas a pequeña escala. Un arrecife totalmente protegido (el arrecife Whittie mencionado anteriormente) podría ser un sitio de interés, que no interferiría con las actividades de pesca. Algunas actividades turísticas en los cayos podrían ser alcanzadas también tanto con atención a las actividades humanas (casitas), como la vida marina. Se necesita desarrollar una infraestructura apropiada que soporte aún a una pequeña industria de turismo. Inicialmente la operación de un barco para buzos podría ser incentivada en la reserva y sus áreas vecinas. Potencial adicional puede ser ganado a través de contactos con grupos de pescadores de los Estados Unidos que podrían ser estimulados a pescar en éstas aguas. Los peces pelágicos mayores como el Marlin, se encuentran demasiado lejos de las costas debido a la extensa plataforma. Cumplir con las recomendaciones nacionales relacionadas con la captura de tortugas marinas. Nicaragua tiene regulaciones relacionadas a la captura de tortugas marinas y es signataria de acuerdos internacionales de especies amenazadas. Sin embargo en la reserva existe una pesquería indígena importante de tortugas marinas. Se necesitan desarrollar otras pesquerías (peces de arrecifes) o hacer disponibles fuentes alternas de proteína animal a un precio similar. Cumplimiento estricto de las regulaciones que impiden las actividades pesqueras de tortugas marinas podrían causar conflictos hasta tanto no sean presentadas otras alternativas.

Presiones internacionales para restringir la captura de tortugas marinas pueden darse muy pronto, por lo que se necesita que cuanto antes líderes nacionales y locales las regulaciones necesarias. x Reglamentar la Ley General del Medio Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales para cumplir con estas recomendaciones. Las regulaciones relacionadas con la captura de tortugas marinas por ejemplo, son internacionales, pero debe haber una legislación nacional que permita que el pueblo nicaragüense comprenda que el cumplimiento de estas leyes son para el bien de la nación. Esta legislación aplicaría a la captura de tortugas marinas u otras especies protegidas, así como captura ilegal de camarones y langostas. Las actividades ilegales ocurren en estas dos importantes pesquerías, cuyo rango va desde actividades "piratas" de barcos extranjeros hasta la transferencia de captura en el mar a otros barcos y pesca ilegal dentro de la reserva. x Cumplimiento de estas regulaciones con cooperación de la Fuerza Naval es importante para el bienestar de la Reserva. La Reserva no es una isla, sino que está conectada a las áreas circunvecinas. Las pesquerías en la Reserva, no están aisladas de las pesquerías fuera de ella debido al hecho de que las langostas en la Reserva no reconocen los límites que las separan de las otras áreas. Por lo tanto, si la abundancia de langostas fuera de las Reserva es demasiado baja, las capturas al interior de la misma disminuirán significativamente. La legislación de los recursos naturales tanto fuera como dentro de la Reserva, que vela por la conservación e intereses nacionales, tiene el objetivo de promover la captura sostenible en cualquier fea. La Fuerza Naval es la instancia correspondiente para hacer cumplir estas regulaciones en cooperación con las comunidades de la Reserva, MARENA, MEDEPESCA, etc.

SIGLAS ACRONYMS

ADFOREST

Administración Forestal Estatal State Forestry Administration

ANP

Área Natural Protegida Natural Protected Area

APAN

Asociación Nacional de Pescadores Artesanales Association of National Artisanal Fishermen

APCM

Área Protegida de los Cayos Misquitos Miskito Cays Protected Area

ASP

Área Silvestre Protegida Protected Wild Area

CCC

Corporación para la Conservación del Caribe Caribbean Conservation Corporation

CEPAD

Una ONG involucrada en varias actividades de desarrollo comunal en la RAAN -Nota del Traductor: Comité Evangélico pro Ayuda al Desarrollo. An NGO, involved in several community development activites in the RAAN

CIP

Centro de Investigaciones de la Pesca (ahora CIRH) Fisheries Research Center (now CIRH)

CIRH

Centro de Investigaciones sobre los Recursos Hidráulico Center for Research on Aquatic Resources

CZM

Manejo de la zona costanero Coastal zone management

DANlDA

Agencia para la Cooperación Internacional del Gobierno de Dinamarca. Danish Governmental Cooperation Organization

EEZ

Zona Económica Exclusiva Exclusive Economic Zone

EIA

Iniciativa Ambiental de las Américas Enviromental Initiative of the Americas

EIA

Evaluación del Impacto Ambiental Environmental Impact Assessment

ETP

Equipo Técnico de Planificación Technical Planning Team

FADCANIC

Una ONG involucrada en actividades de desarrollo en varias comunidades de la RAAN -Nota del Traductor: Federación Desarrollo de la Costa Atlántica de Nicaragua An NGO, involved in several community development activities in the RAAN

FISE

Fondo para la inversión Social de Emergencia Emergency Social 1nvestment Fund

GRAAN

Gobierno Regional Autónomo del Atlántico Norte Government of the Autonomous Region of the North Atlantic

GRAAS

Gobierno Regional Autónomo del Atlántico Sur Government of the Autonomous Region of the South Atlantic

ILRC

Centro de Recursos de Tierras Indígenas lndian Lands Resource Center

INATEC

Instituto Nacional Tecnológico National Technological lnstitute

INDERA

Instituto Nicaragüense para el Desarrollo de las Regiones Autónomas Nicaraguan lnstitute for the Devolpment of Autonomous Regions

INETER

Instituto Nicaragüense de Estudios Territoriales Nicaraguan Institute of Territorial Studies

INPESCA

Actualmente cambió a MEDE-PESCA now chanbged to MEDE-PESCA

INRA

Instituto Nicaragüense de Reforma Agraria (encargado de los asuntos relativos a la tenencia de la tierra) Nicaraguan Agrarian Reform Institute( charged with land tenure issues)

IRENA

Actualmente, MARENA Now changed to MARENA

MAG

Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería Ministry of Agriculture and F owl

MARENA

Ministerio del Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (anteriormente IRENA) Ministery of the Environment and Natural Resources (formerly IRENA)

MAS

Ministerio de Acción Social Social Action Ministry

MEDE

Ministerio de Economía y Desarrollo (preside sobre MEDEPESCA) Ministry of Economy and Development (presides over MEDEPESCA)

MEDEPESCA

Ministerio para el Desarrollo de la Pesca (anteriormente INPESCA) Ministry for the Development of Fisheries(formerly INPESCA)

MERA

Marco Estratégico para la Reforma Agraria Strategic Framework for Agrarian Reform

MIKUPIA

Man Iwankam Kupia (organización comunitaria de grupos indígenas de la RAAN Man Iwankam Kupia (community organization of indigenous groups in RAAN)

MINGOB

Ministerio de Gobernación Ministry of Government

NGO

Organización No-Gubernamental Non-governmental organization

NORAD

Organización para la Cooperación del Gobierno de Noruega Norweigan Government Cooperation Organziation

O.G.

Organizaciones Gubernamentales Government organizations

ONG

Organización No-Gubernamental (lo mismo que NGO) N on- governmental organization

PAFNIC

Plan de Acción Forestal para Nicaragua Forestry Action Plan for Nicaragua

PAMIC

Programa de Administración para Microempresas Administration Program for Microenterprise Una ONG involucrada en actividades de desarrollo en varias comunidades de la RAAN

PANA PANA

An NGO, involved in several community development activities in the RAAN PEA

Población Económicamente Activa Economically Active Population

PN

Parque Nacional National Park

PRADEPESCA

Programa Regional de Apoyo al Desarrollo de la Pesca en el Istmo Centro Americano (un programa financiado por los EE.UU.) Regional Program for Fisheries Development Support on the Central American Isthmus (an EU financed program)

PRIDES

Programas de Integración para el Desarrollo Integrated Development Programs

PROARCA

Programa Ambiental Regional de Centro América . Program Ambiental Regional do Centro America .

RA

Reserva Antropológica Anthropologic Reserve

RAAN

Región Autónoma del Atlántico Norte Autonomous Region of the North Atlantic

RAAS

Región Autónoma del Atlántico Sur Autonomous Region of the South Atlantic

RB

Reserva Biológica Biological Reserve

RBCICM

Reserva Bioesférica de las Comunidades Indígenas y de los Cayos Misquitos Biosphere Reserve of the 1ndigenous Communities and the Misklto Cays

REDES

Regiones de Desarrollo Sostenible Sustainable Development Regions

RRNN

Recursos Naturales Natural Resources

RUM

Reserva de Uso Multiple Multiple Use Reserve

THA

Tratado Harrison Altamirano Jarrison Altamirano Treaty

TR&D

Investigación Tropical y Desarollo, Inc. Tropical Research and Development, /nc.

UCA

Universidad Centro Americana Central American University

UPAZ

Universidad para la paz University for Peace

URACCAN

Universidad de las Regiones Autónomas de la Costa del Caribe de Nicaragua University of the Autonomous Regions of the Caribbean Coast of Nicaragua

USAID

Agencia Internacional para el Desarrollo (EE.UU.) Agency for International Development (US)

USDA

Sección de los Estados Unidos de Agricultura United States Department of Agriculture

WWF

Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza (anteriormente Fondo Mundial para la Vida Silvestre) World Wide Fund for Nature (World Wildlife Fund)

SELECTED REFERENCES The following is a listing of references pertinent to fisheries of Nicaragua, or management of fisheries, or of marine reserves. References are also given in most of the individual reports, and may repeat or enhance those listed here. Reports included in this volume are listed Both published and non-published references are included.

Sparre, P. lntroduction to tropical fish stock assessment: Part l. F AO Fisheries Techical Paper. 306/1. Rome. 1992. Sullivan, P.J., H.L. Lai and V.F. Gallucci. 1990. A catch-at-Iength analysis that incorporates a stochastic model of growth. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 47: 184-198. Townsley, P. 1993. A Manual on Rapid Appraisal Methods for Coastal Communities. Bay of Bengal Programme, India. USAID. 1996. Work Plan: Miskito Coast (EIA) Fisheries Project. Vegas, A. J. 1996. Report on the Status of Fisheries Enforcement in the North Atlantic Autonomous Region. Environmental Initiative for the Americas -Fisheries Project, USAID. Villa, J. D. 1992. Miskito Coast Protected Area: Zelaya, Nicaragua: Preliminary Report. Department of Biological Sciences. Florida Atlantic University. Boca Raton, Florida. Walters, B. 1995. People, Policies and Resources: Mangrove Restoration and Conservation in the Bais Bay Basin, Negros Oriental and Wider Philippine Contexto In Philippine Coastal Resources Under Stress. Juinio - Menez, M.A. and G.F. Newkirk (ed.). Selected papers from the Fourth Annual Common Property Conference held in Manila, Philippines, June 16-19, 1993. Walters, B. and M. Butler. 1995. Should We See Lobster Buoys Bobbing in a Marine Park? In Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable Fisheries. Shackell, N .L. and J .H.M. Willison (ed.). Second International Conference on Science and the Management of Protected Areas, held at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, 16-20 May 1994. Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada. Walters, B. and Y. Renard. 1992. Community Participation in Protected Areas Planning and Management in Sto Lucia. In Science and the management o/ protected areas. Willison, J.H.M., S. Bondrup-Nielsen, C. Drysdale, T.B. Herman, N.W.P. Munro, T.L. Pollock (ed.). Walters, C., N. Hall, R. Brown, and C. Chubb. 1993. A spatial model for the population dynamics and exploitation of the Westem Australian rack lobster, Panulirus argus. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci, 50: 1650-1662. Walters, C.J., and R. Hilbom. 1976. Adaptive control off is hing systems. J. Fish. Res. I Board Can., 33: 145-159.

APPENDIX I Stock Assessment and Management of Lobster and Shrimp Fisheries in Nicaragua

Marsh and Gallucci University of Washington

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

FIGURE 1: SIZE - FREQUENCY OF MALE LOBSTERS CAUGHT IN RESERVE FIGURE 2: SIZE – FREQUENCY OF FEMALE LOBSTERS CAUGHT IN RESERVE FIGURE 3: AVERAGE MONTHLY SIZES OF MALE LOBSTERS CAUGHT IN RESERVE FIGURE 4: AVERAGE MONTHLY SIZES OF FEMALE LOBSTERS CAUGTH IN RESERVE FIGURE 5: VON BERTALANFFY GROWTH CURVE FOR FEMALE SPINY LOBSTER TABLE 1: YIELD PER RECRUIT RESULTS FOR SPINY LOBSTER FIGURE 6: CHANGES IN YIELD PER RECRUIT WITH CHANGES IN F AND Tc. FIGURE 7: MXIMUM YIELD PER RECRUIT AT DIFFERENTE VALUES OF F AND Tc. FIGURE 8: SIZE COMPOSITION OF 1994 COMMERCIAL WHITE SHRIMP CATCH. TABLE 2: RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN COMMERCIAL CATEGORY, SIZE AND WEIGHT FOR WHITE SHRIMP FIGURE 9: VON BERTALANFFY GROWTH CURVE FOR WHITE SHRIMP FIGURE 10: TIME SERIES OF LOBSTER DATA FIGURE 11: FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF FOREINGN ILLEGAL FIGURE 12: MAP OF MISKITO CAYS WITH DISTRIBUTION OF LEGAL FOREINGN VESSELS

Environmental Initiative for the Americas Fisheries Project of USAID, Nicaragua

STOCK ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF LOBSTER AND SHRIMP FISHERIES IN NICARAGUA

Written by: Theresa Marsh Vincent Gallucci

USAID -University of Washington October 1996

CHAPTER l Introduction: A report on the management of the lobster and shrimp fisheries in Nicaragua must have at least two integrated parts. One part is the quantitative stock assessment and modeling of the data collected by the Nicaraguan agencies, CIRH and MARENA, about the fisheries, viz., ecological information and harvest or catch information. That is, it I deals with fue capture process and the resource from the point of view of government agencies (this report, Marsh and Gallucci 1996). The second part also deals with capture process, but from the point of view of the fishermen and the resources (Harrington and Gallucci 1996). In other words, how fishing regulations are made and obeyed by fishermen. In brief, the contents of this report deal with the triangle formed by the interests of the fishermen, the resource stocks and the management agencies. Recommendations made with respect to the management of the lobster and shrimp fisheries are based, in part, on the results from both parts of the report. The recommendations deal with, in particular, minimum sizes of capture, i1legal or pirate fishing, the establishment of zones for limited access fishing, and the capture of female lobsters in a reproductive mode. The focus of the analyses of both parts of the report is upon the Miskito Cays Protected Area and thus upon artisanal and not industrial fisheries. However, the Reserve areas are not an isolated island; they are surrounded by areas that are equally productive, but which support legal industrial fishing. Therefore, it is inevitable that comments will be made about the stock assessment of lobsters and shrimp in general. When this occurs, the comments are motivated by concern about the sustainability of the harvest within the Reserve. The method of analysis carried out in part one is based upon accepted methods of statistical analysis, stock assessment modelling and the formulation of the structure for a risk analysis of the fisheries. The concept of risk analysis has become increasingly used in fishery management over the past few years (see, for example, Walters ank Hilborn et al 1993). Risk analysis is a way of quantitatively evaluating risks to the sustainability of a fishery under different management strategies. One of the benefits of the kind of analysis is that it addresses the fact that there are unknown factors occurring in the fishery, and gives decision makers a better understanding of how these might impact fishery dynamics. For each situation, the first step is to identify factors associated with a certain degree of risk to the productivity of the stock. These can be called “risk factors”. The probability of a risk factor having an impact should decrease at a rate related to the decreased presence of the risk. The next step is to identify potential expected effects of these risks on a stock assessment. Expected effects are simulated to the extent possible by experimental computer manipulation of stock assessment or related models. Since risk is a probability concept, the problem formulation should include a simulation or some other way to represent the likelihood that each of the possible consequences will occur and, with each, a description of the corresponding benefit. This process provides decision makers with a range of management options, an estimated probability of risk associated with each option or combinations of options and the associated potential benefits. This process provides decision makers with a range of management options, an estimated probability of risk associated with each option or combinations of options, and the associated potential benefits. Management strategies are chosen as they suit managers' needs to balance, for example, the risk of stock collapse based on biological factors, with the importance of I other factors which

are social, political or economic. This leads to the types of considerations and analyses in the second part of the resource management report (Harrington & Gallucci 1996). These considerations are evaluated by the process of I interviewing and sorting the responses of fishermen, community leaders and other stakeholders to very selected questions, and careful analyses of the administrative structure of the government.

CHAPTER 2: The Lobster Fishery: The lobster fishery is the most economically important fishery to Nicaragua. It supports a great amount of commercial as well as artisanal fishing activities. Childress and Herrnkind (1996) note that, accounting for both industrial and artisanal catch in and just outside the Marine Reserve, the Reserve may contribute up to 50% of the total lobster production in Nicaragua. Because the different types of fishing co-occur within and around the Reserve, the dynamics of each must be considered together when assessing the potential of a long-term sustainable artisanal fishery. Management of lobster stocks varies greatly among nations; Childress and Herrnkind (1996) provide summaries of the most common management policies in the Caribbean region in their Tables 1 and 2. In the Nicaraguan fishery, management options will be addressed in terms of certain processes either presently occurring or potentially occurring which may be considered risk factors for the artisanal fishery. Management should contain the management recommendation(s) associated with their risks, as will be seen below. Five principal risk factors have been identified for the Nicaraguan spiny lobster fishery. Each will be considered independently. They are: 1. Mortality of berried females. 2. Mortality of juveniles. 3. Incidental catch of lobsters in shrimp trawls. 4. Illegal or pirate fishing. 5. Spatial concentration of commercial fishing effort. Risk Factor 1: Mortality of Berried Females: Fishing mortality of female lobsters carrying eggs (berried females) reduces the productivity of the lobster stock, and can contribute to recruitment overfishing. It has been noted that, in general reliable stock-recruitment relationships are hard to construct for crustacean fisheries. This is especially true in places such as the Caribbean, where there are strong currents which may act to carry larvae to other areas, leaving the origin of recruitment to any area unknown. In Nicaragua, almost nothing is known regarding larval dispersion, but considerable speculation has taken place on this subject (see, for example, Herrnkind 1977, Ehrhardt 1994). The most direct representation of the issue is the prospect of the existence of a relationship between the number of spawners and the number of recruits to the fishery. In a sense, if such a relationship exists, there is a case for the preservation of the reproductive potential of the stock. For spiny lobster, fecundity is related to size; total egg production in the fishery will increase with increased size and increased numbers of females. As important as this is the preservation of nursery areas for settlement to protect the individuals moving from pre-recruits to recruits. More specifically, the following issues can be identified: For Spawners:

x The abundance of females of reproductive age present in thee entire shelf area. x The total abundance of females (both below and above the age of first reproduction). x The abundance of females carrying eggs.

For Recruits: The abundance of pre-recruit, or juvenile, individuals. The abundance of these that recruit to the fishery.

Management Options: Management options which address these issues include: .Ban the capture of all females. x Ban the capture of females with eggs. x Set a minimum legal size for females. x Set a maximum legal size for females and males. x Enhance settlement and survival of settling lobsters within the Reserve. x Create refuge areas with a ban on all harvest, to protect the brood stock.

Discussion: The absence of a stock-recruitment relationship at this time does not mean that research cannot provide one in the future. An example of a crustacean fishery where a stockrecruitment relationship has been used is the King Crab fishery (Paralithodes), where a Ricker function was used to fit the data (Reeves 1989). H a function could be found to relate recruitment to the spawning stock it would argue for considerable I constraints on the female stock as a way of protecting the reproductive potential of the stock. Another example is the crustacean fishery on the northeast North American lobster, Homarus americanus, which was analyzed by Campbell (1986) using the Beverton and Holt Yield-per-Recruit model (1957), the same model currently used in Nicaragua. In Campbell's report it was noted that of the options related to the protection of reproductive potential, all could be simulated by the model. Results of these simulations that are relevant for the situation in Nicaragua follow: x Increasing the size of recruitment to the fishery, tc, had a greater impact upon increases in the yield per recruit than did lowering the rate of fishing mortality, F, when F was greater than 1, which is usually the case. For example, an increase of about ten percent in the size of first harvest raised the yield per recruit by about thirty percent. x The case of having a maximum size for recruitment was simulated and many different scenarios explored. One of these was that the yield per recruit curves without a

maximum size had the usual peaked appearances that we expect, but the introduction of a maximum size tended to flatten them to make an almost asymptotic curve. x Not protecting females with eggs had only a minor impact on yield per recruit if there was a corresponding increase in the size of first harvest, but the number of eggs per recruit decreased greatly. x Establishing a maximum size regulation could increase egg production by approximately 300 percent, and barely reduce yield per recruit. x A separate analysis where reproduction is evaluated in a partitioned model showed , that most females should be allowed to produce eggs at lease once prior to entering the fishery to minimize the chances of recruitment overfishing. x Finally, even small reductions in effort, via the length of the season, number of boats or traps fishing, produced benefits which included protected reproductive potential and economic gains. Currently there is a ban on the capture of berried females in Nicaragua. However, I it is not clear to what extent this is violated, or how effective enforcement activities are. I This would be relatively simple to enforce at processing plants, since individuals who have been scraped of eggs are easily identifiable (Childress, personal communication). Not all of these types of analyses have been done for the spiny lobster in Nicaragua at this time; however Beverton and Holt's Yield-per-Recruit model, which has been used in the past in CIRH analyses, has been utilized again, and including a greater range of parameters, for this report. This can also be used to further analyze the fishery, described above, in the future. Table 1 and Figures 6 and 7 illustrate the results of this analysis. Its methodology and these figures will be explained more fully in the next section. Risk Factor 2: Mortality of Juveniles: The previous focus on the need to devise policies that will limit recruitment overfishing by the harvest of females with eggs is naturally followed by concerns over the I harvest of either sex lobster prior to reaching legal size. If carried to too great an extent this type of harvest will have serious consequences for the fishery. The consequence of ignoring the roles about these types of harvests is that fewer lobsters live to be reproductive and fewer live to grow larger and to enter the legal harvest. The simulation exercise discussed in the previous section addresses this situation in two ways. First, it considers the simple exercise of the consequences for the yield by decreasing the number of recruits and then it repeats the analysis if there is a limit on the maximum size of harvest. When this additional condition is imposed there is little effect upon the yield because the reproductive potential of the population is largely protected and the females that would have had to make a contribution to it are not needed any longer for the same yield. The existence of a relationship between juvenile lobster abundance and recruitment to the fishery was established by Cruz et al. in the Cuban Spiny Lobster (P. argus) fishery (1995). In a four-year experiment, the authors used indices of abundance for puerulus, juveniles, prerecruits (sampled monthly), and the following year's catch, and determined the following: x There is a relationship between juvenile and pre-recruit indices, with a correlation of r = 0.8916, p = 0.005.

x There is a relationship between juvenile index and the catch index for the following year, with a correlation of r = 0.8316, p < 0.00 1. x For two consecutive years, the authors were able to use juvenile abundance to predict the next year's catch within three percent of the actual catch. . x This illustrates the importance of protecting the juvenile abundance for future recruitment to the fishery. x It is customary in most fisheries to set the size of entry into the fishery to be no less than the size of 50 percent first reproduction or the size of sexual maturity. Relatively few life history studies have been carried out in Nicaragua, but rather are borrowed from other places, for example Florida, where so many studies have been made. The environments in Florida that lobsters inhabit are diverse but it is possible to generalize the situation as follows: Legal entry or recruitment to the fishery is at 76 mm (3 inches) carapace length (CL) and the size of 50 percent reproduction is at 86-89 mm CL. In this case, entry to the fishery occurs at smaller sizes than does the age of first reproduction. The simulation modeling experiment referred to above suggests setting the size of entry into the fishery to be after the lobster has had its first egg extrusion so there is a 50 percent chance that a random female would be having her second reproductive experience. Minimum sizes of recruitment to the fishery in other Caribbean countries range from 65 to 100 mm CL (Villegas et al. 1982). For Nicaragua, two available studies indicate that female lobsters reach sexual maturity between approximately 128 -134 mm tail length (70 -74 mm CL) (Castaño and Cadima 1993). These data were obtained from a sample of 251 individuals taken over a period of three years. The present minimum legal capture size in Nicaragua is 135 mm tail length or 230 mm total length (MEDE - Pesca 1993). This corresponds to between approximately 73 -75 mm CL for females (Castaño and Cadima 1993), the size at which females are just becoming reproductive; cumulative reproduction at ibis size is less than five percent (Castaño and Cadima 1993). Data have shown that the average size of commercially caught lobsters decreased between 1984 -1990, from 155 mm tail length to 144 mm tail length (89 to 80 mm CL) (Castaño and Cadima 1993). There are a number of special circumstances that do make the Florida spiny lobster fishery an exceptional rather than a representative model. One is that in the Florida fishery, reaching the age of reproduction as noted above does not guarantee becoming reproductive. It must be coupled with lobsters being in the reproductive "area" to be effective. The important point is that fue Florida fishery is certainly an open one (see, for example, Ehrhardt 1994, Hateley and Sleeter 1993, Menzies 1981). That is, it is possible, to take an extreme position, that complete removal of the reproductive potential I would have no impact on recruitment to the fishery. That the Nicaraguan values are similar to those of Florida is a serious issue, since the open system for recruits almost certainly is not completely true in Nicaragua. Therefore, its is possible that the adoption of a standard similar to Florida mar lead to recruitment over fishing in the long term. On the positive side, the reproductive areas in Nicaragua are not located in a single direction as they in Florida, where very few lobsters survive the gauntlet of traps laid in wait for juveniles. In Nicaragua, the areas of reproduction

are dispersed in different directions and the juveniles are less susceptible to complete decimation. Nevertheless, for a fishery of such national importance to adopt the Florida standard, when is can clearly be shown to lead to lower yields per recruit, is not conservative management and adds spice to the risk analysis. However, size restrictions don't always ensure a certain size of first capture in reality, as they are only effective if they are obeyed. Fish processors in Nicaragua estimate that ten percent of the commercial catch they receive is sub-legal sized (Martinez, personal communication). In addition, catch data from the artisanal fishery, collected by MARENA between November 1995 and June 1996 from surveys of fishermen's catches at sea and at casitas, indicate that juveniles are commonly captured within the protected area. This emphasizes the fact that the Reserve probably provides important nursery habitat for juveniles (Childress and Herrnking 1996). These data are represented in Figures 1 through 4:

Figure 1:Size – Frequency of male lobsters caught in Reserve. Source. MARENA 1996.

Figure 1:Size – Frequency of male lobsters caught in Reserve. Source. MARENA 1996.

Figures 1 and 2 show size-frequency distributions by sex for all months combined, in mm tail length. Figure 2 also lists the size ranges for the onset 50 percent and 65 percent female reproduction. This figure illustrates that within this time period, 38 percent of all artisanally captured females in the protected area (n = 360) were under the legal minimum size, as were 36 percent of all males (n = 461). Figures 3 and 4 give the average monthly size of capture, and show that the smallest individuals were caught between December and March, by both divers and traps.

Figures 1 and 2 show size-frequency distributions by sex for all months combined, in mm tail length. Figure 2 also lists the size ranges for the onset 50 percent and 65 percent female reproduction. This figure illustrates that within this time period, 38 percent of all artisanally captured females in the protected area (n = 360) were under the legal minimum size, as were 36 percent of all males (o = 461). Figures 3 and 4 give the average monthly size of capture, and show that the smallest individuals were caught between December and March, by both divers and traps. The average size captured by traps is fairly consistent with the total average size by month, whereas the average size captured by divers is more consistentIy around the minimum legal size. This is reasonable, since divers can be selective in their captures and may take individuals which are larger than the average available size. It also suggests that escape vents are probably not being used in these traps. When considering management alternatives to protect the reproductions of the stock, all of the above issues should be considered.

Figure 3:Average monthly sizes and standard deviations of male lobsters, caught by traps and drivers. Source: MARENA 1996.

Figure 4: Average monthly sizes and standard deviations of female lobsters, caught by traps and drivers. Source: MARENA 1996.

Management Options: Management options which address these issues include: x Establish and enforce a minimum legal size of first capture. x Establish nursery areas closed to fishing. x Require and enforce that all traps have adequate sized escape gaps. x Outlaw and enforce fishing gear restrictions to those which do not cause severe injury or mortality (for example, hooks and spears) during the capture, making return of a captured animal impossible. x The Yield-per-Recruit model can be used to simulate these options separately or in conjunction with the options specified for Risk Factor 1, the harvest of berried females. x The following is a start on the simulation which is the basis for the risk analysis. This model is the same one which is currently used in Nicaragua as one stock assessment tool. The basis behind a yield-per-recruit analysis is the presumption that the fishery manager can influence two principal parameters: the age (or size) of first capture, Tc (or Lc), and the level of fishing mortality (F) (or effort, E). By calculating how the yield per recruit changes over different combinations of F and Tc, the model leads to an "optimal" age of first capture and an "optimal" level of fishing mortality. This is done using the equation:

Y/R = F*exp[-M*(Tc –Tr)] Woo *[1/z -(3Srz+K) + (3S2rz+2K) -(S3rz+3K)] Where: S = exp [-K(Tc -To)] F = fishing mortality K = growth parameter M = natural mortality To = growth parameter Z = total mortality;(F + M) Tc = age at first capture Tr = age at recruitment to the fishing ground Woo = maximum (asymptotic) weight Again, few studies have been undertaken in Nicaragua, in the case, to estimate growth parameters. The evaluation already carried out in Nicaragua used the computer program ELEFAN and the van Bertalanffy growth formula to estimate the parameters K, Loo and Tc A value for natural mortality, M, was obtained using Pauly's growth equation (1980): In (M) = -0.01512 -0.279 In (Loo) + 0.6543 In (K) + 0.04634 In (T)

Where: T represents the average annual sea surface temperature, equal to 27.5°C. K = 0.3/yr (both sexes combined) Loo = 45.2 cm total length (both sexes combined). (See Castaño and Cadima (1993) for parameters values K and Loo). The value of M = .60 was obtained using these values. They were also used in the present yield-per-recruit analysis. The van Bertalanffy growth formula was used to convert lengths to ages. This relation, for females, is illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Von Bertalanffy growth curve for female spiny lobsters. (Growth parameters form Castaño and Cadima 1993).

A summary of the results of the yield-per-recruit analysis are given in Table 1 and illustrated in Figures 6 and 7 in terms of how yield (in grams) per recruit is affected by different values of Tc and F.

Table 1. Yield per recruit (in grams) for different levels of fishing mortality and ages of first capture.

Figure 6 shows the yield per recruit for five different levels of F at different ages of T c' to demonstrate how a change in the age of first capture affects yield per recruit. While these curves appear to be independent of F, the dependence of yield per recruit upon T c is clear. Hence a change in the age of first capture from 2. up throught 3.5 years increases the value of yield per recruit for almost all levels of fishing mortality. The current legal age at first capture is approximately 2.25 years, but the artisanal catch data indicate that many lobsters of age 2 are being captured. The estimated value of F max is approximately 3.4 (Castaño and Cadima 1993). At this value and through values of F=4.0, the maximum yield per recruit occurs at Tc =3.25. This corresponds to approximately 105 mm carapace length, significantly larger than the current minimum size.

Figure 7 utilizes the same data to illustrate how changes in fishing mortality affect yield per recruit. A clear "optimal" level of fishing mortality F, defined in terms of a maximum yield per recruit. is hard to define except for Tc = 2.25 years, the lowest value for age of entry into the fishery. For the three middle values of T c there is little increase in yield per recruit for Fvalues greater than F = 2.0. Beyond this, the fishery provides diminishing returns relative to effort expended. For Tc = 4.5, a lower optimal yield value occurs, but it is at a lower F-value also, suggesting lower cost or effort.

A similar yield-per-recruit analysis was done by Cruz et al. (1995), again for the Cuban Spiny Lobster commercial fishery. In this case, the model was used to determine changes in yield per recruit and profits following combinations of changes in the minimum legal size of capture and in the length of the closed season. The analysis concluded the following: x With a closed season of 90 days and a ten percent increase in the legal minimum size, from 210 to 230 mm total length (69 to 77 mm CL), yield increased between 11 and 15 percent, and profits increased between 3 and 7 percent. x With this same increase in the legal minimum size but a reduction in the closed season to 75 days, changes in yield were between -0.5 percent and 2.0 percent, and profits decreased between 4 and 6 percent. x This was only found to hold for some regions. In regions where the average size of ( capture was higher than other regions, any measure which would further shift the size composition toward larger individuals would decrease profits. Discussion: Regardless of the exact forms of the curves above and the related table of values, the message is the same. Yield per recruit can be expressed equally well in economic terms, ( such as dollars, as can the value of effort, at least for the industrial fishery. Expression of f the effort parameter in economic terms for the artisanal fishery is more difficult. The definition of an appropriate measure would depend upon social as well as economic factors. In both the industrial and the artisanal fisheries the manager would use this analysis as part of the risk analysis by defining the parameter values that provided the maximum yield and evaluating the degree to which they reduced the standing stock size. Some standing stock size considered to be critical to the subsistence of the fishery in biomass or economic terms would be specified a priori. A stock production, age or length cohort analysis would be used to determine the standing stock sizes for different mortality and age of recruitment values. The risk analysis would involve introducing some variability to the parameters to see how often they reduced the standing crop below the critical level. It must be noted that the use of this version of the yield per recruit model has inherent problems since it is a steady state model with demanding assumptions about the constancy of many of the variables. Nevertheless, it does have value when employed as shown, as an indicator of the directions of impacts. The mortality of juveniles in the fishery at sizes prior to their becoming reproductive was observed by the large number of illegal small animal s in the catch. Quite another consequence of exploitation frequently observed is the fishery removing the largest animals in the population. The consequences of this depend on the particular fishery. In the crab fishery simulation, an upper size limit to keep the biggest animals (with the largest reproductive potential) in the fishery compensated for harvesting juveniles prior to their becoming reproductive. In the Nicaraguan fishery, the size distribution of catches has changed, as noted above by the decrease in the mean length of captured individuals, suggesting that the fishery has already removed the largest animals and is currently removing the smallest by illegal harvesting (this risk factor). No well studied fisheries probably exist where this has occurred. The consequences, however, are unlikely to be positive for the Nicaraguan fishery.

Risk Factor 3: By catch of Lobsters in Shrimp Trawls: Due to their highly migratory behavior between shallow and deeper waters, lobsters are at times found as both adults and juveniles in nearshore waters. Because of this, they sometimes occur as incidental catch for shrimp trawlers operating in these areas. While it is certain that this is happening along the coastline, it is not clear from the sparse data available where, when, and to what extent this happens. It presently is not considered by management to have a significant impact on the lobster stock (Castaño and Cadima 1993), but adequate data have not been collected nor have gear experiments been carried out to determine whether remedial trawling procedures or designs are either possible or necessary. The data available are monthly reports from processing plants, as shown below:

Management Options: Management options which address this issue include:

x Sampling to determine areas, amount, and composition of by catch. x Incorporate by catch into catch data for stock assessments.

Discussion: Because the issue of lobsters as by catch does not appear to present an inmediate threat to the lobster fishery, options for management focus less on ways to reduce this activity, and more on controlling it through the acquisition of knowledge of the type of by catch, and the use of this information to perfom more accurate stock assessments. The stock assessment can then be adjusted using the yield-per-recruit equation inversely, beginning with the amount of lobster catch in the trawls, the size distribution of the catch and the effort used, as a way to

relate the by catch to the targeted lobster catch. This would lead to corrected levels of mortality and revised harvest strategies. Risk Factor 4: Illegal Fishing: Illegal fishing, or pirate fishing, is occurring at high enough levels that the impact should be represented in two different ways, at least. Fist, it should be incorporated into the stock assessments carried out by CIRH for the industrial, national and foreign, lobster fleet on the entire Atlantic coast. The second way that it should be noted is relative to the Miskito Cays reserve area and its impact on the artisanal lobster fishery. The latter relates I to Risk Factor 5 below. The first quantitative information on the intensity of illegal fishing carne from the Nicaraguan navy in CIRH's Biennial Report for 1993-1995 in a chart which showed the number of pirate vessels, and nationality of each, that the Navy brought to port on both I coasts. An interview with the naval commander in March led to more specific information. In particular, it was noted that at this time he feels that the Navy captures I about 30 percent of the pirate vessels that are actually present, and he provided the details about the vessels that were captured on the Atlantic side. All of these were lobster boats, and all operated with divers as opposed to traps. An attempt was made to obtain more specific information for 1996. Two aerial transects were designed and flown, one in July and the other in August, over the area between the Reserve and the l00-meter contour +line. In these two months the level of fishing in the Cays is very low due to weather conditions. This also suggests that any fishing vessels would be using traps. Nevertheless, some data were obtained, although much of them have not yet been analyzed. A preliminary estimate is that in July, tour to six fishing vessels and in August, seven to eight vessels, were probably fishing illegally in the total area surveyed. The Navy and CIRH provided information about lobster capacities for the types of vessels observed, which will be used to make estimates of the actual total catch that goes to illegal fishing, primary from nonNicaraguan vessels. Further flights in weather with greater visibility would probably yield even more illegal fishing activity. The details of these flights and the analyses are discussed more fully in Chapter Four. Management options which address these include: x Increase enforcement of existing boundaries. Discussion: Because this risk factor has been identified in this straightforward manner, the only management option which can decrease the direct risk it presents is to decrease the illegal fishing itself, by increasing enforcement. lf this is undesirable or cannot be done, then as discussed above, catches from illegal vessels should at least be incorporated into future stock assessments. Risk Factor 5: Spatial Concentration of Effort: The information that the Navy provided on illegal vessels included the locations of the fishing activity. When these were plotted on depth contours it became clear that there was a concentration of effort in the areas just east of the circular Miskito Cays Reserve out to the edge of the continental shelf (i.e. the 100 m depth contour). This area is also rich in coral

areas at 20 meter depths, and is not very different from the areas in the Reserve. Over the three years' data provided by the navy, over 90 percent of the 49 vessels were concentrated in the area noted. This is important because of the lobsters' migratory behavior and probable reproductive migrations to and from the coastline, the tendency for larger lobsters to be located further off shore, and the noted abundance of juveniles in the Reserve. There is little doubt that the same activity that occurs in the Florida fishery directed at capturing the migrating juveniles will occur between the edge of the Cays and the deeper water. In Florida, it leads to a gauntlet of traps. In Nicaragua, I for now, it is capture by diving, but will likely evolve into primarily capture by traps. It stands to reason that eventually there will be sufficient effort concentrated in this clearly rich area by legal as well as illegal vessels, which will reduce the levels of catch in the future to levels lower than those currently obtained from the Reserve by the artisanal fishermen. This effect may also be at the heart of the fishermen's claim that fishing is not as good as it was years ago (Harrington and Gallucci 1996). Harrington , and Gallucci (1996) also note that fishermen from Sandy Bay claim that many industrial ( fishing boats are actually fishing inside the Reserve. Certainly they could be wrong, but it is just as likely that the vessel captains are wrong. Or, why would an illegal vessel be concerned about a circle drawn on a map if good lobster fishing is the target and he is the only vessel on the horizon? In other words, the claims of the fishermen are likely accurate. Management Options: Management options which address this include: x Increase enforcement of current roles. x Limit effort around the Reserve. Discussion: Stepped up enforcement of existing roles by the authorities is clearly needed, as is legislation to limit fishing in the area outside the reserve, as described. This could be accomplished via the definition of a limited entry zone for legal vessels, for example. In any event, estimates of the pirate catch should be represented in CIRH's annual stock assessment.

CHAPTER3 The Shrimp Fishery: The second most important fishery in the Protected Area is the shrimp fishery, which consists of artisanal and commercial fishermen harvesting tour species of penaeid shrimp: red (Penaeus duorarum, P. brasiliensis), white (P. schmitti), and brown (P. aztecus). There are certain management issues in penaeid shrimp fisheries which are common worldwide (see, for example, Klima 1989, Garcia 1989, and Gulland and Rothschild 1984). Of these, the principal issues Klima (1996) identified for the Nicaraguan fishery are: x Growth Overfishing: Growth overfishing occurs when individuals are captured at sizes smaller than a more optimal size that would provide the greatest yield per recruit. This often happens when competition between different resource users causes each to want to "catch his share while he can." This can especially be a problem when artisanal and commercial fishing target the same stock. x Economic Overfishing: Economic overfishing occurs when effort has increased without a subsequent increase in yield. In this case, there is diminishing returns on effort as the economic value of the fishery is dissipated among the users. x Uncertainty Because shrimp are a short-lived species, shrimp fisheries rely essentially on one cohort recruiting to the fishery each year. The absence of a reliable stock-recruitment t relationship, and the annual variability in recruitment due to environmental conditions provide uncertainty in predicting stock abundance and productivity. Excellent recruitment one year may cause increased effort the next, but does not guarantee continued high levels of recruitment. This makes the fishery more prone to overfishing. In Nicaragua, shrimp are harvested along the entire coastline, but the dynamics of the fisheries differ in ways dependent upon the type of harvesters (artisanal, industrial, or "semiindustrial") and the particular species. Artisanal fishermen are located in the coastal lagoons and in near-shore marine areas, including a three-mile wide strip closed to industrial vessels. They harvest almost exclusively white shrimp, which are found at depths between 3 and 35 meters; artisanal fishermen have access to the smaller individual s more common to the shallower of these areas. Industrial fishermen harvest all four species, but red shrimps are the most important, followed by white. In between industrial and artisanal are "semi-industrial" fishermen, who harvest at greater levels than the smaller artisanal vessels, and also fish legally within the three-mile zone. The life of the penaeid shrimp, described by Klima (1996), consists of two phases: the juvenile phase, during which smaller, less valuable shrimp are found in the lagoon nursery areas; and the adult phase, when the larger, more valuable individuals have moved out of the lagoons into the coastal oceanic areas. Management strategies which aim to optimize economic yield from the fishery (i.e. reduce growth and economic overfishing) attempt to balance harvesting practices with increasing growth potential.

With these issues in mind, the two primary risk factors which have been identified for Nicaragua' s shrimp fishery are: 1. The harvest of juveniles. 2. Industrial fishing in the coastal zone. Risk Factor 1: Harvest of Juveniles: There are very little data available on artisanal shrimp harvests. Industrial harvests of red and white shrimp for 1994 and 1995 are described and illustrated in graphs by Klima (1996). These show changes in catch and effort, as well as the population structure of catches. These indicate that the capture of juvenile white shrimp is common in industrial fishery and that the proportion of juveniles captured has been increasing (Sanchez and Cadima 1992). Since the artisanal fishermen are fishing in shallower water, it can be reasonably assumed that they also harvest juvenile shrimp. The harvest of juvenile shrimp leads to growth overfishing, one of the major management issues; and, if the average size of the catch continues to decrease, it could also lead to economic overfishing. Unlike the lobster fishery, there is not a great concern for protecting the reproductive potential of the stock because it generally is not as great a threat to shrimp fisheries. Rather, there is more importance placed on ensuring high levels of yield per recruit. Consequences are most easily analyzed through a yield -per- recruit model, as was described for the lobster fishery. This has not been done for the Nicaraguan shrimp fishery, but can be done in the future to predict the most optimal size at first capture. To maximize yield per recruit requires ensuring that a minimum size restriction is enforced. This involves making a trade off between immediate losses of shrimp harvest and future gains in value. Figure 8 shows that white shrimps of sizes 41 tails per pound and smaller made up approximately 28% of the commercial catch in 1994. A conversion chart, shown as Table 2, provided by Sanchez and Cadima (1992), estimates the average total length of these individuals as 114 mm and smaller, or 9.08 grams tail weight (for both sexes combined).

If it is believed that the shrimps that the artisanal fishermen are catching in the lagoons are smaller, Figure 9, a von Bertalanffy growth curve, illustrates how allowing very young shrimp to grow even a matter of a couple months will increase their size and value substantially. An optimal minimum legal size would be set with this in mind, as well as the older shrimps' accessibility to artisanal fishermen. For example, a minimum legal size of 60 tails per pound would set the age of first capture at approximately six months of age. Because white shrimp tend to spend a large part of their life in estuarine waters, artisanal fishermen would probably have access to these sizes. This is a rather small size, but could be the most practical way to balance biological and economic concerns.

Management Options: Management options which address this include: x x x x

Mesh-size restrictions Closed seasons Closed areas Restrictions to offshore fishing

Discussion: Each of these management options has benefits in terms of protection of the juvenile stock. However, because of the relationship between the artisanal and industrial fisheries, as described above, the practicality of any these options must be addressed in terms of how they are affected by the second risk factor as well. Investigations of the white shrimp fishery yield and its dynamics within the lagoons should be undertaken. In this case, the van Bertalanffy growth curve would be I truncated at the age of presumed migration out of the lagoons. This age would also correspond to the or age of senescence in a yield per recruit model. In the same sense, the minimum mesh size would correspond to the age when the shrimp "enter" the fishery. Risk Factor 2: Industrial Fishing in the Coastal Zone: By law, the 3-mile nearshore zone is closed to industrial fishing. However, fishing by "semiindustrial" vessels does occur here. There is also concern that illegal industrial fishing is occurring here as well. Both industrial and semi-industrial vessels can harvest at greater and more efficient levels than the artisanal vessels. Therefore, harvesting outside of the lagoons is more competitive. This means that the tradeoff to artisanal fishermen is more than a question of waiting for the higher valued shrimp; it is also a question of allocation. That is, allowing the shrimp time to disperse and grow may mean giving them up altogether. The optimal management solution in this case means ensuring the least loss to the artisanal fishery, and not necessarily maximizing the economic potential. The second type of risk that is presented by the illegal industrial harvest is the inaccuracy of stock assessments which don't incorporate the illegal catch. As described in the discussion of the lobster fishery, the yield-per-recruit models rely on estimates of fishing mortality, which is an indirect measure of effort and yield. Even the use of a1l stock production model, which may be used for assessment in the absence of adequate detailed data to predict an MSY value, also relies upon accurate catch and effort data. Management Options: Management options which address these issues include: Exclusion of semi-industrial and industrial vessels from the 3-mile zone to maximize yieldper-recruit. Inclusion of illegal catch to make stock assessments more accurate. Discussion: Managing for more optimal harvests in the Nicaraguan shrimp fishery is complex. Some combination of the above options must be assessed and implemented, on the basis of their practicality. For example, a management strategy which allows juveniles to be captured without regulations may not be optional for the entire fishery, but mar be the best way to sustain the artisanal fishery, if it must compete with the semi-industrial and industrial harvesters. On the other hand, management might address options to decrease the competition between the different harvesters. This, too, can be a complex balance of options. For example, the restriction of mesh sizes may be too difficult to enforce to be I reliable; seasonal or area closures may be more applicable.

Klima (1996) describes the benefits of seasonal and area closures to the economic yield and cpue of the Gulf of Mexico fishery. Seasonal closures help to protect migrating juveniles, and area closures protect nursery areas. A study of the Australian penaeid prawn fishery (P. esculentus) revealed that area closures could be a reasonable substitute for size restrictions, although it mar be harder to enforce than a seasonal closure. A yield- I per-recruit analysis in this fishery showed that all seasonal closures increased egg-per- recruit and certain ones increased yield per recruit and value per recruit. The authors also acknowledge the importance of weighing benefits of any actions against the cost of enforcement (Die and Watson 1992). K1ima (1996) points out that the 1995 closed season appeared ineffective at limiting the harvest of juveniles, and discusses issues which must be considered in choosing the right combination of management options. Managers should consider monitoring the artisanal fishery in the lagoons and the effort within the three mile zone. Efforts to stimulate artisanal fishing outside of the lagoons by working cooperatively with MARENA. It is arguable whether optimizing yield has nay meaning when both fisheries are operating, unless the concept of a joint optimum is introduced. The joint optimum is likely to be less than the sum of two separately calculated options.

CHAPTER4 Selected Analyses of Catch and Effort in the Lobster Fisheries: Limited data on lobster catch are available The available data can be seen in the technical reports from CIRH. We have extracted from those data, a1l of which are on the industrial fishery, to make inferences relevant to the artisanal fishery in the Reserve. An example of the data available is seen in Figures 10 (a), (b), (C), (d), (e). These data have I value in their own right but at least as important is what they tell us about modifications of future data collection efforts so as to maximize the resultant stock assessment value. The data in Figure 10 are courtesy CIRH. The following discussion refers to the industrial fishery, carried out by cayucos and divers and not traps, over the years 1992 to 1995 and seven months of 1996. A1l tails were landed at Puerto Cabezas and do not include data from other ports. Time series of catch, the number of days fishing, the number of boats fishing, and the number of boat- I days fishing are in Figures 10 (a), (b), (c), and (d), respectively. It is interesting that all four curves shows the lowest values in 1993 and all rise to new highs in 1995, although the number of boats is remarkably flat, reasonably fitted by a regression line with zero slope. At least, as far as the dive fishery is concerned, there has been little or no expansion of thie fishery between 1992 and 1995. The graphs also show uniformly higher values arrived at by the equation: Avg [Y('96)] = Y(i) [y('96)] l/y(i)

where Y('96) is the unknown total value for 1996, based on year as takes the four values corresponding to the tour years of known values. Y (i) is the total for year i, y(i) is the total for the first seven months of year and y('96) is the total for the first seven months of 1996. Avg. [Y('96)] is the mean of the above, and thus a weighted estimate of I the value at the end 1996 and comparative to the other values from 1992 to 1995, viz. Y('92), Y('93), ...Y('95). When these estimates for catch, days and boats are included we conclude that 1996 has experienced increased catch, estimated as 648,000 lbs tails; I 2375 days fishing and 187 boats. To the extent that these values are accurate, the fishery will have expanded in 1996 by about 70%. These values are not shown in Figures 10 (a), (b) and (c). To estimate catch per unit effort for the period of 1992 to 1995, effort was considered to be the number of days fishing multiplied by the number of boats, to obtain boat-days. The catch pet unit of effort was thus graphed in Figure 10 (e). The catch numbers for the industrial fishery are interesting to compare to the values for the artisanal fishery shown in Figure 10 (f), also diver caught and processed at I Puerto Cabezas. The values are generally comparative, except that the highs for 1995 are much higher, as though the artisanal fishery in the more recent years is somewhat slower in response and smaller in scale.

Continuing the focus on the industrial lobster fishery, it is frequently useful to distinguish between the national and the foreign fleets. Consider the following classification of the fleet fishing on Nicaragua's Atlantic coast for lobster. Foreign, Industrial Fleet; diving: The fleet vessels are between 17 and 21 meters long, each carrying an average of 20 cayucos. Each cayuco has two persons, a diver and a helper, and about 60 tanks. There is an average catch of 10 lb. tails / diver/ day. Vessels are away for weeks at a time. National, Industrial Fleet; diving: The fleet vessels are between 19 and 21 meters long, each carrying an average of 20 cayucos. Each cayuco works 6-8 hours a day, about 10 days per month. There are about 20 divers and helpers per trip. They have a compressor and about 60 tanks on board. Artisanal Fleet; diving: Boat length is between 5 and 13 meters in length, having either outboard motors or sails. There are usually about 3 divers per boat. Divers usually work for 6-8 hours per I1 day and return to port at night. Diving is both free and with tanks. The normal average catch is 6 to 8 lbs. tails per diver per day. Foreign, Industrial Fleet; traps: Vessels are between 20 and 23 meters in length, carrying about 3,000 traps. Trips are 30 -45 days long. They lift about 1,000 traps per day, the remaining 2,000 being underwater during the time that the 1,000 are being raised. The catch is about 0.12 lbs. tails per day per trap. National, Industrial Fleet; traps: Vessels are between 19 and 21 meters long, carrying about 1,600 traps per vessel. They lift about 400 traps per day, the remaining 1,200 being underwater during the time that the 400 are being raised. The catch is about 0.19 lbs. tails per day per trap. Artisanal Fleet; traps: Vessels are between 5 and 13 meters long, carrying about 400 traps per vessel. They lift about 100 traps per day, the remaining 300 being underwater during the time that the 100 are being raised. Trips are 5 to 6 days long and they work about 20 days per month. The catch is about 0.5 lbs. tai1s per day per trap. This information is the part of the story that the reports from CIRH carry, here phrased concisely and in one location. It remains to utilize whatever other information is known, or that can be inferred, about the removal of additional lobster tails by illegal fishing, or pirates, and as by-catch in the shrimp fishery. Pirate Fleet; dive or traps: The presence of illegal fishing vessels adds an unknown component to the stock assessment. At a low level of intensity there is little concern, but at some level it is clear that consideration must be given to the impacts of the pirates. It is for this reason that the pirate catch is

considered a risk factor. In a effort to estimate the level of intensity, this project undertook to investigate the subject. The first information collected had its origins in a CIRH report (Informe Bienal, 1993-1994) containing data obtained from the., Nicaraguan Naval command. These data contained information on the numbers of pirate vessels that the navy had intersected and captured over the years 1991 to 1994, inclusive. The navy provided additional data on the detai1s of the vessels in question, their dimensions, the nature of the lobstering that they engaged in, viz., diving or traps, dates of capture and, most importantly, the location of capture. The capture record showed significant captures from Honduras. The vessels had a size distribution as shown in Fig.11(a), showing a size range from as sma11 as 10 meters in length to as large as 30 meters, with two large peaks in the 20-24 meter size classes. By way of contrast, a size distribution for legal, registered foreign vessels, shows the size range from 20 to 26 meters, with a peak between 22 and 24 meters [Fig. 11(b)]. The significance of these distributions is the demonstration that the pirate vessels include a I much wider range of vessels, with the majority being in the same size range, but some quite larger than the legal vessels. Therefore, when these vessels are fishing, their potential to remove large amounts of lobster tails is significant, although the fraction of the total taken lega1ly is not known.

The locations of the pirate vessels are shown in Fig. 12 with dots. The crosses are the locations of legal vessels on one day in late July, 1996, the significance of which will be exp1ained soon. This figure should be examined close1y, since it shows the Reserve and the 20m depth contour line that apparently attracts vessels fishing with divers. This depth is attractive because it indicates no that there is a sediment hill, but rather that

there is an expanse of coral reef that will likely harbor lobsters. The distribution of pirate vessels is largely clustered in the eastern areas between the Reserve boundary and the location of the 100m contour, where the continental shelf begins to drop off sharply. The legal vessels' locations in July were also clustered in an area bordering the eastern boundary near the drop off of the continental shelf, as well as in the more centrally located Franklin Reef. The major point is that both the legal fishing vessels and the illegal vessels are focusing their attention on the boundaries of the Reserve, meaning that their divers interdict the movement of migrating lobsters that temporarily take shelter in the rocks and coral. There is a high probability that the lobsters migrate to the more coastal areas for reproductive purposes. This is based upon extension of knowledge of the biological patterns of the species elsewhere and upon the fact that the lobsters are by catch in the coastal shrimp fishery. The presence of these fishing vessels at the observed times indicates that they would be in these areas at other times too. Eventually, when fishing pressure increases further, there will be larger and larger concentrations in the Reserve's boundary areas. Eventually, this will close off migration into and out of the Reserve, greatly affecting lobster dynamics and abundance in the Reserve and the artisanal fishery. Estimation of the Impact of Pirate Activity The potential impact of pirate fishing can be quantified by noting the average capacities of pirate vessels' holds and the average number of pirate vessels present. The naval data which provided the pirate vessel length [eslora ]distributions in Fig. 11 (a) included beam [manga], as well. Estimates of the volume of an average hold can thus be made with some accuracy. To estimate hold dimensions, 30% of eslora and 70 % of manga would provide an area measure. Effective vertical dimension is probably about 3 meters (all dimensions personal information and communication). A vessel's hold would also be expected to initially be full to 50% with ice. The question remaining is: to what percentage is the hold full to capacity when returning to port? This is a probability 10 statement and involves data collection using the legal vessels' holds' capacities and fullness as guides. However, it is relatively straightforward to do. Estimation of the number of pirate vessels operating is more difficult, and is comparable to an open ocean search and rescue operation. A statistical methodology called line transect theory (Gallucci, et al, 1995, see the sampling chapter, Conquest, et al.) has been used. The experimental sampling occurred twice, once in late July and the other in mid August. Different sighting models were tried. The most direct, the right triangle model, where visibility diminishes linearly with perpendicular distance from the transect was the most logical on Occum Razor's type thinking. In July's flight pattern, the estimated visibility ribbon, seeing a vessel of interest with probability of one on the transect to zero 5 miles perpendicular to the transect, is seen to be a small area compared to what could be seen due to the poor visibility. The number of sightings was very small, but that is not surprising given the limited visibility. The details of the statistical analysis are reported elsewhere, but the estimate of tour to six illegal vessels in July and seven to eight in August contains a 95% confidence consideration (see Risk Factor 4). It is noted as a statistical nicety that the information on the legal vessels in the area that the navy provided, is helpful data. The important point to make is that July and August would be times of relatively low diving activity, compared to September and into the new year. Thus, transects later in the year would likely show much higher levels of pirate activity.

A complete estimation of the impact of the pirate fishing upon the harvest and the need to incorporate this as harvest in doing the stock assessment must await additional information on the legal, vessels, as noted above.

CONCLUDING COMMENTS: This report describes and analyzes the stock assessment of the lobster and shrimp fisheries inside the Miskito Cayes Reserve. As in any management study, stock assessment, maximum sustainable yield, etc. are only part of the story. This report is closely coordinated with its companion report by Harrington and Gallucci (1996) that analyzes the fishermen and their communities and the formulation of fisheries policy by the government It is also closely coordinated with two reports that consider broader policy issues (lain, 1996) and the shrimp fishery (Klima, 1996). Its conclusions are also consistent with others that focus on various biological aspects of the lobster, shrimp and finfish species. The objective of this report, and its companion report, is to assist in the specification of stock assessment procedures that will increase the likelihood that the Miskito Cayes Reserve artisanal fisheries on lobster and shrimps will be sustainable over the long term. Comments relative to the stock assessment of the lobster and shrimp fisheries in areas beyond the Reserve boundaries m included when they are relevant to the fact that the Reserve is not isolated from these areas. Risk analysis is recommended as the underlying structure for decision making. This report identifies risk factors for both the lobster and the shrimp fisheries that should be examined in the context of a stock assessment mathematical model The stock assessment model most commonly used in this report is the Beverton-Holt, yield per recruit model The restrictions and limitations of the model are noted in the report, but its use is quite justified for the insights it provides. Other models of some value that should be applied eventually are agedependent cohort analysis (e.g., Gulland,1983), age independent cohort analysis (e.g., Lai and Gallucci 1988) and catch at size analysis, CASA .(Sullivan, et al. 1990). These later models avoid the translation to age, since length is the more natural dimension given that lobster tai1 and shrimp catch are both reported in terms of length. The lobster fishery must be viewed as a system with many different components, each of which removes biomass. Indeed, there is real urgency to consider the lobster and shrimp fisheries as an even bigger system. Ultimately, the lobster, shrimp and lagoon coral reef fisheries should be viewed one large mega-system. With respect to the lobster fisheries, an overall estimate of a maximum allowable exploitation rate should be made and then, subsequently, partitioned to the different sources. Seven different types of fishing fleets operate concurrently for lobster alone. Data collection, which is critical to management, is complicated but possible for the six legal ones, three dive and three trap: foreign, national and artisanal. Data collection for the remaining one, the illegal or pirate fishery, is partially impossible and what is possible will depend upon skillful sampling design and inference. Assessment should be based upon the perception that the fleets are coupled fisheries about which distinct data can be collected and analyzed. CIRH and MARENA could collaborate to collect baseline and a consistent time series data based on the Miskito lobster fishery. The data collection will allow more analyses of the type done herein and comparative studies with the Corn Island artisanal fishery, which could be beneficial to the management of the

Miskito fishery. The relative condition of the artisanal and industrial fisheries is an indicator of the future for lobster harvests, in general. Data collection on one is an important part of the management, not a separate undertaking. The location of the different concentrations of pirate and legal harvesters on the fringes of the Reserve support the idea that the Reserve is not an island and that reduced pressure on the borders of the reserve is essential to the artisanal fishery's future in the J Reserve. The concept of areas of reduced industrial fishing pressure, or limited access areas, on the boundaries of the lobster reserve is important to its future. The management agency should act on the collection of data that will simultaneously extend scientific and stock assessment information. One example is a careful study of the lobster bycatch of the shrimp fishery. This refers to a risk factor as well as contributes basic biological data on the life cycle of the lobsters in Nicaragua. This will also lead to an allowable F-value for lobster by-catch and the estimation of whether the shrimp fishery needs to be modified, closed, restricted, etc. The effects of pirate activities inthue lobster and the shrimp fisheries is likely to be a very significant part of the biomass removals. It would be useful to undertake a study to show the effects of the pirate fishery, e.g., the subsequent financial and biomass losses, on the legal fisheries. This would likely motivate the funding of efforts to terminate the illegal activities. This is an opportunity for the Navy and CIRH to collaborate on a joint, long term strategy. In the interim, estimation of an F-value or exploitation rate of the pirate fishery should be undertaken and subtracted from the estimate of the maximum allowable exploitation rate computed for the pooled industrial -artisanal fishery. In summary, the policy and stock assessment efforts must be carried out simultaneously. The fishery must be approached as a system and overall estimates of allowable exploitation rates computed and subsequently allocated. The underlying guide lines for making decisions about allowable rates should be based on an analysis of the risks r and benefits for the fisheries.

REFERENCES Beverton, R.J.H. and S.J. Holt. On the dynamics of exploited fish populations. Her , Majesty's Stationery Office. London. 1957. Campbell, Alan. 1986. Implications of size and sex regulations for the lobster fishery of the Bay of Fundy and Southwestern Nova Scotia. p. 126-132.10 G.S. Jameison and N. Boume (eds.) North Pacific Workshop on stock assessment and management of .1 invertebrates. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 92. Castaño-Calero, Orlando and Emydio Cadima. "Biologia y Evaluación de la Langosta Espinosa (Panulirus argus)." Proyecto NORAD NIC 011. Centro de Investigación de Recursos Hidrobiológicos. Simposium sobre Evaluación y Manejo de las Pesquerías de Crustáceos en Nicaragua 6-7 Diciembre 1993. Childress, Michael 1. Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida. Department of Biological Sciences, ldaho State University, Pocatello, ldaho. Personal communication. 28 August, 1996. Seattle, W A. Cruz, R., Sotomayor, M.E. de Leon, and R. Puga. 1992. Impacto en el manejo de la pesquería de langosta (Panulirus argus) en el Archipiélago Cubano. Rev. Invest. Mar., 12: 246-253. Cruz, R., M.E. De Leon, and R. Puga. 1995. Prediction of commercial catches of the Spiny Lobster Panulirus argus in the Gulf of Batabano, Cuba. Crustaceans, 68(2): 238- 244 Die, David and Reg A. Watson. A per-recruit simulation model for evaluating spatial closures in an Australian penaeid fishery. Aquat. Living Resour., 5:145-153. Ehrhardt, N.E. The lobster fisheries off the Caribbean Coast of Central America. p. 133143.10 B.F. Phi1lips, J.S. Cobb, and J. Kittaka (eds.) Spiny Lobster Management. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Cambridge MA. 1994. Francis, R.I.C.C. 1992. Use of risk analysis to assess fishery management strategies: a case study using orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) on the Chatham Rise, New Zealand. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49: 922-930. Gallucci, V.F., B. Amjoun, J.B. Hedgepeth, and H.L. Lai. Size-based methods of stock assessment of small-scale fisheries. lo Vincent F. Gallucci, Saul B. Saila. Daniel J. Gustafson, and Brian J. Rothschil (eds.). Stock asessment: quantitative methods for applications for small-scale fisheries. Lewis Publishers. New York. 1996. Garcia, S. 1989. Tbe management of coastal penaeid shrimp fisheries. In Marine invertebrate Fisheries: Their Assessment and Management. J.F. Caddy (ed.). John Wiley I and Sons. New York. Gulland, J.A. Fish stock assessment: a manual of basic methods. FAO/Wiley Series on \Food and Agriculture. John Wiley and Sons. New York. 1983. Gulland, J.A. and B.J. Rothschild, Eds. Penaeid Shrimps: Their Biology and Management. Fishing News Books, Farnham, Surrey, England, 1984, 308 pp. Harrington, G. and V.

Gallucci. Analysis of the artisanal fisheries and the potential for co- management in the Miskito Cays Protected Area, Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua. Environmental Initiative for the Americas Fisheries Project, USAID. Hately, Johnathan G. and Thomas D. Sleeter. 1993. A biochemical genetic investigation of spiny lobster (Panulirus argus) stock replenishment in Bermuda. Bulletin of Marine " Science, 52. (3):993-1006. Herrnkind, William. "Report on the Spiny Lobster Fishery in Nicaragua." Tallahassee, Florida. July 1977. Hilbom, R., E.K. Pikitch, and R.C. Francis. 1993. Current trends in including risk and ,1 uncertainty in stock assessment and harvest decisions. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50: 874880. K1ima, E.F. 1996. Shrimp management options in Nicaragua' s Protected Area. Report for USAID Environmental Initiative Project. Klima, E.F. 1989. Approaches to research and management of the U.S. fisheries for Penaeid shrimp in the Gulf of Mexico. In Marine Invertebrate Fisheries: Their Assessment and Management. J.F. Caddy (ed.). John Wiley and Sons. New York. Lai, H. and V.F. Gallucci. 1988. Effects of parameter variability on length-cohort analysis. J. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 45: 82-92. Martinez, Sergio. Centro de Investigación de Recursos Hidrobiológicos. Managua, Nicaragua. Personal communication 26 August, 1996. Seattle, W A. MEDE-Pesca. Normativas técnicas y administrativas de los recursos pesqueros y acuícolas. Managua, Nicaragua. 1993. Menzies, Robert A. 1981. Biochemical population genetics and the spiny lobster larval recruitment problem: an update. Proc. Gulf Caribb. Fish. Inst. 33: 23-243. Pauly, D. 1980. On the interrelationships between natural mortality, growth parameters and mean environmental temperatures in 175 fish stocks. J. Cons., Cons. Int. Explor. Mer.39: 175-192. Sparre, P. Introduction to tropical fish stock assessment: Part l. F AO Fisheries Technical Paper. 306/1. Rome. 1992. Sullivan, P.J., H.L. Lai and V.F. Gallucci. 1990. A catch-at-length analysis that incorporates a stochastic model of growth. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 47: 184-198. Villegas, L. et al. 1982. Memorias del grupo de trabajo sobre la langosta. Programa Internacional de Ordenación y Desarrollo pesqueros. WECAF REPORTE No. 36. Contribuciones No. 2 and 9. As cited in Castaño-Calero, Orlando and Emydio Cadima. "Biología y Evaluación de la Langosta Espinosa (Panulirus argus)." Proyecto NORAD NIC O 11. Centro de Investigación de Recursos Hidrobiológicos. Simposium sobre Evaluación y Manejo de las Pesquerías de Crustáceos en Nicaragua 6-7 Diciembre 1993. Walters, C.J., and R. Hilborn. 1976. Adaptive control of fishing systems. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 33: 145-159.

APPENDIX II The Miskito Coast Marine Reserve Lobster Population: Assessment and Recommendations

Childress and Herrnkind Florida State Unversity

The Miskito Coast Marine Reserve Spiny Lobster Population: Assessment and Recommendations Michael J. Childress and William F. Herrnkind

(1) Department of Biological Science. Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida, 32306-2043, USA

(2) Departrnent of Biological Sciences Idaho State University Pocatello, Idaho 83209-8007, USA

Final Recommendations

7 September 1996

1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION Caribbean spiny lobsters are one of the most important marine resources for nations oft e Caribbean (Villegas et al. 1982, Ehrhardt 1994, Cruz 1995). As fishing effort increases so does the potential for overexploitation and reduced economic benefits. Proper management requires .1 knowledge of local population structure and habitat requirements. In an effort to establish baseline data for future comparison, the USAID Miskito Coast Fisheries Project has been contracted to make recommendations for the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve in Nicaragua. This is an initial report on the status of Caribbean spiny lobster recruitment and population structure, within the marine reserve and recommendations for fisheries management, education, evaluation , and research. Our recommendations are based on knowledge of Caribbean spiny lobster life history and ecology, comparisons to the Florida Keys fishery, and preliminary data from the Miskito Cays. The Miskito Cays are a series of mangrove islands situated along the broad continental shelf off the northwest coast of Nicaragua. This shallow-water region boasts extensive seagrass beds, fringing coral reefs and mud banks dotted with mangroves, which in turn support an abundance of marine life including the Caribbean spiny lobster (Alevizon 1992, Marshall et al. 1992). Nicaraguan fishermen fish for lobsters in the Miskito Cays using both slat traps and divers armed with long hooked spears. For many years, fishermen from other countries such as Honduras have also come to fish illegally in this productive group of islands (Nietschmann 1990). The status of the spiny lobster population in the Miskito Cays is virtually unknown due to the lack of fishery data from both legal and illegal fishing and the lack of scientific data on juvenile recruitment and population structure. 1.1 Caribbean Spiny Lobster Life Cycle Spiny lobsters have a complex life-cycle composed of a free-swimming larval dispersal stage and a bottom-dwelling adult stage (Figure 1). Female spiny lobsters on reefs spawn during ebb tides which carry the larvae offshore into oceanic currents (Phillips and Sastry 1980, Phil1ips , et al. 1994). These phyllosoma larvae remain in the plankton for many months and potentially travel great distances prior to settlement (Booth and Phillips 1994). Larvae of the Caribbean spiny lobster, Panulirus argus, pass through 11 stages, the final molt producing the puerulus or postlarva (Lewis et al. 1952). Postlarvae do not feed (Wolf and Felgenhauer 1991) but are active swirnmers (Calinski and Lyons 1983), rising into the water column during flooding tides which transport them toward shore into shallow water (Witham et al. 1964). Postlarval duration is temperature dependent which has the potential to influence their transport distance (Field and ; Butler 1994). Settlement is continuous year-round with peak abundance at or shortly after each new moon (Little 1977, Little and Milano 1980). Settlement is highly variable, spatially unpredictable (Butler and Herrnkind 1992, Herrnkind and Butler 1994), and decreased by siltation . (Hermkind et al. 1988). Postlarvae settle into seagrass and macroalgae where they molt into first stage benthic juveniles (Marx and Hermkind 1985, Butler and Hermkind 1991, Hermkind et al. 1994). Early benthic juveniles have a dorsal stripe and banded legs which carmouflage them well in vegetation (Andree 1981). These algal phase juveniles are under severe predation risk especially when the venture from the protective algal cover (Hermkind and Butler 1986, Childress and Hermkind 1994) but algal cover does not appear to limit the abundance of older juveniles (Butler et al. manuscript). After about 3 months the juveniles reach approximately

15 mm carapace length (CL), are nocturnally active and begin to seek daytime crevice shelters (Marx and Hermkind 1985, Childress and Hermkind 1994) which reduce the risk of predation when lobsters are inactive (Eggleston et al. 1990, Smith and Hermkind 1992). over several months the juveniles become gregarious and begin to share crevices with other lobsters (BerrilI1975, Eggleston and Lipcius 1992, Childress and Herrnkind 1996).

Juvenile lobsters grow quickly during their first year after settlement, approximately 0.9 +/0.05 mmm CL per week. At age one year, they range from 25 to 75 mm carapace length (mean 55 mm CL) (Lellis and Russelll992, Forcucci et al. 1994). Juvenile lobsters feed at night on a wide variety of invertebrates but especially on clams, snails, urchins, crabs, shrimp and worms (Andree 1981, Herrnkind et al. 1988). One-year old subadult lobsters (>50 mm CL) become nomadic and migrate from the inshore nursery to the adult habitat on the coral reef (Herrnkind 1980, Kanciruk 1980). They continue to share crevices during the dar and move at night (Glaholt 1990, Mintz et al. 1994), Lobsters begin to mature at 70 mm CL but most do not mate until they are at least 80 mm CL (Warner et al. 1977, Lyons et al, 1981). Mating in Florida and the Bahamas occurs on the reef from April until August (Kanciruk and Herrnkind 1976, Lyons et al. 1981) but occurs year round in Nicaragua (Castano and Cadima 1993). Multiple reproductive females are sometimes found cohabiting with a single, large male (Kanciruk 1980). Males obtain a larger maximum size (approximately 200 mm CL) than females (approximately 150 mm CL) (Davis 1977). Fertilization is external; the male deposits a sticky spermatophore on the ventral plate of the female (Kittaka and MacDiarmid 1994). When the female is ready to spawn, the spermatophore is tom open and the sperm is then mixed with the eggs as they are being released. The female incubates the fertilized egg mass attached to her pleopods for 3-4 weeks. The number of eggs a female carries depends upon her size (approximately 830 eggs per gram body weight) thus egg number increases exponentially with body size from 250,000 eggs at 75 mm CL to 1,000,000 eggs at 100 mm CL (Chubb 1994). Some females have been observed to have multiple eroded spermatophores which suggests they can have several clutches (up to three) in a single breeding season (Lyons et al. 1981). After the reproductive season and the approach of autumnal or winter storms, subadult and adult lobsters in some regions aggregate and undergo mass migrations from shallow to deep 8 reefs (Herrnkind and Curnmings 1964, Kanciruk and Herrnkind 1978). Mass rnigrations have been observed in Florida, Mexico, Bahamas and Cuba and are characterized by coordinated

single-file queues (Herrnkind 1969, Herrnkind 1980). Lobsters use a number of stimuli to orient them including waves, currents, the earth' s magnetic field and the odor of other lobsters (Herrnkind et al. 1973, Zimmer-Faust and Spanier 1987). 1.2 Caribbean Spiny Lobster Fisheries Adult Caribbean spiny lobsters are fished throughout the nations of the Caribbean (Figure 2). The mean annual catch is 34,480 metric tonnes which represents 42.5% of the world's production of spiny lobsters (Lipcius and Cobb 1992). Spiny lobster fisheries have the highest commercial value of any fishery in the Bahamas, Belize, Brazil, Cuba, Florida, Honduras, Mexic and Nicaragua (Baisre and Cruz 1994, Briones and Lozano 1994, Ehrhardt 1994, Fonteles 1994 I Hunt 1994, Cruz 1995). To protect this valuable resource, most nations of the Caribbean have adopted so me management regulations such as minimum size limits, prohibiting the collection o gravid females, closed seasons, closed areas, and/or fishing gear restrictions (Table 1). However I regulations such as the minimum legal size vary widely from one country to the next (Table 2). This variation may have important management consequences if lobsters around the Caribbean are members of a single population (Lyons 1981). A stock -recruitment relationship attempts to relate the impact of local fishing effort on future larval recruitment. But for nations that fish for Caribbean spiny lobsters this relationship is unpredictable due to a long larval duration and wide dispersal by oceanic currents. Population genetic studies have found high levels of genetic variability within local populations (Menzies an Kerrigan 1979, Menzies 1981, McLean et al. 1983, Glaholt and Seeb 1992) but this variation I does not appear to have any geographic pattem suggestive of larvae returning to their natal population (Silberman et al. 1994). This means that the larvae produced in one country often settle in another which complicates the management efforts for all countries. The Florida (US) Fishery The Florida spiny lobster fishery has remained relatively stable for the last 25 years (Harper 1995). The annual catch in Florida has remained near 6 million pounds with an average variation of +/- 1 million pounds (Figure 3). However, the fishing effort has continued to rise

throughout the same period leading to a decrease in the economic benefit due to overcapitalization. The success of the Florida fishery in terms of a stable yield is believed to be related more to its geographic location along the Gulf Stream current than to current management practices (Lyons 1986).

The Nicaraguan Fishery The Nicaraguan spiny lobster fishery experienced a one time peak in reported landings of nearly 3 million pounds in 1978 (see appendix, Herrnkind 1977, Castano and Cadima 1993). Landings have recently been on the increase again with reported catch of over 3 million pounds in 1995. This recent increase in the Nicaraguan landings may be the result of cyclic fluctuations in larval abundance, but no such trend is apparent in the Florida data (Figure 3). This increase is most likely also the result of increased fishing effort which has doubled since 1990. The Nicaraguan fishery is made up of both commercial and artisanal fleets (Figure 4). The distinction is made based on the size of the fishing vessel rather the method of capture since both fleets utilize: divers and traps. The artisanal fleet is limited to fishing in the shallow waters surrounding the Miskito Cays and Corn Island. If we assume that the artisanal catch from the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve is landed at Puerto Cabezas then the marine reserve accounts for 8.2 % of the total Nicaraguan lobster production (Figure 4). However, much of the commercial effort occurs just outside the boundary of the reserve and we believe the marine reserve may account for as much as 50% of the Nicaraguan total.

Figure 3. Annual catch for US and Nicaraguan fisheries during the period 1964-1995. The Florida data is from Harper (1995) and the Nicaragua data is from Castano and Cadima (1993).

2. MEASURING SPINY LOBSTER POPULATION STRUCTURE 2.1 Miskito Cays Population Structure Population structure estimates of abundance, size and sex ratio were taken from fishermen surveys conducted at 12 locations within the Miskito Cays Marine Reserve (Figure 5). Marcos Williamson of the Caribbean Conservation Corporation conducted these surveys in the months of November and December 1995 and in February and March 1996. All lobster measurements were converted to carapace length (CL) measurements using the allometric equations of Castano and Cadima (1993). A total of377 individuals were measured, 154 remates and 223 males (Figure (5). This sex ratio is significantly mate biased (X2 = 6.195, df= 1, P = 0.016). Females had an average CL of 72.1 +/- 12.7 mm (mean +/- 1 standard deviation) and males had an average CL of 77. 7 +/- 15.0 mm (mean +/- 1 standard deviation). The size frequency distributions of males and females were significantly different (G = 14.93, df= 6, P = 0.021). The size frequency distribution also varied with census month (Figure 7). The size frequency of lobsters being caught within the marine reserve indicate that over 50% of the catch is composed of juvenile lobsters. This has the potential to reduce the future productivity of the marine reserve. If the size distribution continues to shift toward the smaller size classes from one year to the next then a minimum legal size should be enforced to protect

future productivity. The male-biased sex ratio may be related to tendency of remates to move toward deeper water to release larvae while the males remain in shallow water. Since deep water is outside the boundary of the marine reserve this behavioral difference in the sexes could account for both the biased sex ratio and the differences in the size-frequency distributions.

FIGURE 6. Miskito Cays lobster size frequencies by sex. The distribution reflects those individuals harvested within the marine reserve.

Figure 7. Miskito Cays lobster size frequencies by survey month. The size distribution of lobsters harvested varies seasonally.

Seasonal variation in the size frequency indicates a shift from larger lobsters in November and December to smaller lobsters in February and March. This might indicate intense overfishing if it were to continue over a period of more than 12 months. However, such seasonal changes in 8 size frequency distributions occur in other populations due the seasonal fluctuation in postlarval settlement (Forcucci et al. 1994). Altematively, this may be due to a season shift in effort from traps to divers.

2.2 Caribbean Population Structures We compared the size frequency distribution of lobsters landed in four countries with an unfished population from the Dry Tortugas National Park, USA (Figure 8). The US Virgin Islands have a minimum legal size of 89 mm CL and a distribution most similar to that of the Dry Tortugas. The United States have a minimum legal size of 76 mm CL and a distribution least like the Dry Tortugas. Nicaragua has a minimum legal size of 75 mm CL and a distribution intermediate between the US and the Dry Tortugas. Puerto Rico doesn't have an enforced minimum legal size but they have a distribution intermediate between the unfished

Dry Tortugas and the overfished United States. This suggests that having and enforcing a minimum legal size is not the only way to maintain a population with some large individuals. However, if fishing effort is not regulated the result could be a shift in size frequency and a decrease in annual production. No one knows just how many large individuals are necessary to maintain the larval production necessary to support the intense fishing pressure throughout the Caribbean. However, if all populations looked like those the United States we would expect to see a dramatic decrease in lobster production throughout the Caribbean.

FIGURE 8. Caribbean lobster size frequencies by nation. A comparison of the size frequency distribution of spiny lobsters from the Dry Tortugas National Park, an unfished lobster sanctuary with the harvested lobsters from the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Nicaragua and the United States.

3. MEASURING SPINY LOBSTER SETTLEMENT 3.1 Miskito Cays Settlement Survey We placed pairs of larval - settlement traps at five locations and examined the shallow - water habitat at six locations within the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve to monitor postlarval settlement and determine potential nursery habitats (Figure 9). We characterized each location by depth, habitat substrate, the presence of potential lobster shelters (Table 3) lobster abundance and size frequency (Table 4) and the den number and frequency of den sharing (Table 5). Larval Settlement Survey Our larval settlement traps were either lost or removed over the ten weeks they were in the field, thus we cannot assess the relative variation in larval settlement across the reserve. However, our juvenile surveys found lobsters less than 40 mm CL, providing strong evidence that the marine reserve must have appropriate settlement habitat and serve as a nursery area. Nasa and MDS Locations These two locations were similar in topography with a well developed coral reef The reef crest was approximately 5 wide at a depth of 1 m. The backreef consisted of coral rubble mixed with macroalgaes and sparse seagrass sloping downward to depths greater than 3 m. Neither reef had sufficient cover for algal phase juveniles and both had abundance lobster predators such as snappers, triggerfish, groups and rays. The few lobsters observed were greater than 50 mm CL and were found alone m coral crevice shelters. These locations are more likely to shelter lobsters that have immigrated from other regions of the reserve. Casa and PTB Locations These two locations were extensive seagrass beds from 1-2 m deep within a few hundred meters of Miskito Cay, Turtle grass, Thalassia testudinum, was the dominate vegetation with occasional large loggerhead sponges, Speciospongia vesparia, Along the shore of the island, .prop roots of the red mangrove, Rhizophora mangle, sheltered numerous potential lobster predators, especially snappers and portunid crabs. We didn't find any juvenile lobsters in either these locations despite the abundance of suitable settlement substrate. MKR and MCB Locations Miskito Key Reef is a well developed coral reef bounded by a extensive seagrass flat. Muerto Cay Bank is an extensive seagrass flat with occasional patch reefs of reef building corals. Both locations have abundant seagrass settlement habitat and large juvenile lobster shelters. Both locations had postalga lobsters les s than 40 mm CL. The lobsters were found aggregated in coral crevices on the edge of seagrass beds. The presence of postalgal lobsters in these locations suggest that the shallow seagrass beds just inside the fringing reef may be an important nursery habitat for juvenile lobsters within the marine reserve. Potential for Larval Settlement Despite the lack of postlarval settlement data, we are confidant that postlarval lobsters settle in the shallow grassbeds of the marine reserve. From our juvenile surveys the grassbeds just

inside the fringing reef appear to be more important than those inshore bordering the mangrove islands. Once juvenile lobsters reach 50 mm CL they may remain on the fringing reef or begin to disperse to other locations with well developed reefs such as the Nasa and MDS.

3.2 Caribbean Settlement Surveys Much recent research on spiny lobster ecology has focused on factors that influence larval settlement and early juvenile growth and survival (Herrnkind et al. 1994). Larval influx is often highly variable and at best unpredictable (Butler and Herrnkind 1992, Herrnkind and Butler 1994). Some spiny lobster fisheries have found that measurements of larval influx can be used to predict future catch (phillips et al. 1994). Predicting the future catch of Caribbean spiny lobsters has not been possible due to their complex pattern of larval dispersal and wide geographic range. One potentially promising predictor of future catch for a local area is the abundance of first year juveniles (14-50 mm CL) predicting the catch the following year which has been used in the management of the Cuban spiny lobster fishery (Phillips et al. 1994). Since local fisheries have no control over the number of larvae settling, the best management strategy is to increase the number of larvae that survive to enter the fishery, often referred to as maximizing the YPR or yield per recruit (Davis 1980). One way to maximize YPR is to reduce natural mortality. Juvenile spiny lobsters are under tremendous predation risk when they are small and any vegetation such as seagrass or algae can significantly reduce their rate of predation (Herrnkind and Butler 1986, Childress and Herrnkind 1994). As the juveniles grow larger their risk of predation decreases since they outgrow the capacity of many of their fish predators, but crevice shelters such as corals and sponges remain important in reducing their rate of predation (Smith and Herrnkind 1992). The use of artificial structures has been proposed as , one way to increase the YPR by decreasing the rate of predation on these older juveniles (Davis 1985, Eggleston et al. 1990, 1992, Eggleston and Lipcius 1992, Lozano et al. 1994, Mintz et al. 1994). One problem in the evaluation of the success of artificial structure studies is the gregarious nature of spiny lobsters (Zimmer-Faust and Spanier 1987, Childress and Herrnkind 1996). Do artificial structures really increase the numbers locally through increased survival or simply due to increased aggregation (Bohnsack 1989)? This natural tendency for lobsters to aggregate under artificial structures has led to their use by fishermen in Mexico, the Bahamas a d Cuba as a means to harvest lobsters more easily (Miller 1982, Briones et al 1994, Cruz and Phillips 1994). The success of artificial structures to increase landings on the scale of a local fishery has yet to be demonstrated. Juvenile spiny lobsters will seek shelter under almost any structure that provides adequated overhead cover. In the Florida Keys we found juvenile lobsters under a variety of structures but usually under large sponges (Forcucci et al. 1994, Butler and Herrnkind in press). In the Miskit Cays we found juvenile lobsters exclusively in coral crevices (Figure 10). We believe this difference in shelter choice to be due more to the availability of structure types than to any significant difference in the behavior of lobsters. Predominate use of coral crevices were also I observed in a similar habitat in Belize (Acosta and Butler manuscript).

4. FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND RECOMMEND 4.1 Management Practices and their Consequences Recruitment of individual spiny lobsters to a fishery population potentially can be increased by maximizing egg production, settlement, juvenile growth and minimizing juvenile mortality (Davis 1980). The following practices have the potential to increase the productivity. Protection of Critical Habitats Caribbean spiny lobsters settle in vegetative habitats such as seagrass, macroalgae or the fouling community on mangrove prop roots. The greater the area of such habitats and their exposure to onshore currents, the greater the potential to serve as a nursery for postlarval lobsters. Physical structures that are capable of providing a refuge from predators such as corals, octocorals, sponges and mangroves serve to reduce mortality of juveniles. Both seagrass beds and coral reef habitats provide the food resources needed for juvenile and adult lobsters alike. Coral or rock crevices near swift currents are important for females to incubate and release lobster larvae. Threats to any one of these critical habitats, especially from anthropogenic sources, may create a population bottleneck and decrease the productivity of a region (Butler et al. 1995). Protection of Juveniles Caribbean spiny lobster mature at approximately 76 mm CL, thus fishing on smaller individuals will eventually lead to the collapse of the fishery. Many nations have adopted slightly larger minimum sizes (Table 2) to increase an individual's opportunity to reproduce. The recommended minimum size adopted by many nations around the Caribbean is 86 mm CL. Protection of Gravid Females Female spiny lobsters incubate clutches of fertilized eggs on their pleopods for 3-4 weeks. During this time the eggs are cleaned and aerated by the female. If the female is disturbed the eggs may become dislodged and cannot be reattached. Dislodged or stripped eggs will not continue to develop nor hatch under natural conditions.

Closed Seasons In Florida reproduction begins in March and ends in August with the majority of egg production from April through July (Lyons et al. 1981). The closed season allows reproductive individuals the opportunity to mate, incubate eggs and release larvae without being disturbed by divers or traps. However, in other populations such as Nicaragua, reproduction occurs year round with different seasonal peaks (Castano and Cadima 1993). A closed season from April to , July protects approximately 90% of the egg production in Florida but only 35% in Nicaragua. Closed Regions Closed regions can serve to protect critical life history stages and have been used to protect both nursery and reproductive habitats (Davis and Dodrill1980). In Florida, Everglades National Park and Biscayne National Monument are regions of high lobster settlement and

serve primarily as nursery habitats. These regions have faster juvenile growth rates than nearby fished habitats in part due to the time juveniles spend starving in traps (Davis and Dodrill1989). The Dry Tortugas National Park is a region of high reproductive activity and produces as many as 20 times the volume of eggs per hectare than the rest of Florida Keys fishery. Trap Restriction Lobster traps are an effective method of capturing live lobsters if the interval between trap pulls is no more than 2 weeks. Capturing lobsters alive allows the fishermen to release individuals that are below legal size or carrying eggs. While in the trap lobsters are prevented from feeding and growth is greatly reduced (Lyons and Kennedy 1981). Some individuals may even lose as much as 20010 of their weight. This weight loss is especially hard on juvenile lobsters which have not reached harvestable size and may reduce growth by as much as 50% (Hunt et al. 1986, Hunt and Lyons 1986). One way to prevent this reduction in the growth rate of juveniles is to equip the lobster traps with escape gaps. Escape gaps are slots with an opening 2.125". The slot is small enough to retain legal sized lobsters yet large enough to reduce the catch of sublegal lobsters by 94% (Lyons and Hunt 1991).

Diver Restrictions Most Caribbean fisheries have some restrictions on the collection of lobster by divers to prevent the unwanted take of sublegal and/or gravid individuals (Table 1). Lobsters that are speared or hooked cannot be released if they are found to be too small or carrying eggs. Some countries prohibit the collection of lobsters while on SCUBA. Other countries restrict the collecting gear of the divers such that the animals are collected alive using a tail snare or hand net.

4.2 Alternative Management Plans for the Miskito Cays Designing appropiate management recommendations for any natural reserve must take into account biological, economic and social considerations (Cato and Prochaska 1981). We present five alternative management plans using combinations of management practices above. Plan A offers the greatest protection of the resource from a biological perspective but economic and social costs may be severe. Plans E offers the greatest economic and social benefits but cost to the future resource may be severe. Plans B, C and D offer a mixed alternatives that attempt to maximize biological benefits while minimizing economic and social costs. This provides a framework for others more familiar with the economic and social concerns of the region to understanding the potential biological benefit or cost to the spiny lobster population. Plan A: No Take Reserve In management alternative Plan A, the entire Miskito Coast Marine Reserve would become a sanctuary with no harvest of lobsters allowed at any time. Since the reserve includes both nursery and reproductive habitats, a protected area of this size could produce a large number of adult lobsters, and would produce the maximum population size, maximum average weight and maximum number of offspring of all management alternatives. Maximizing population size and average weight would benefit those fishing the border of the marine reserve and maximizing offspring number, given that lobster larvae disperse in ocean currents for 6-9 months, mayor may not directly benefit the remaining Nicaraguan fishery. Plan B: Restricted Take Reserve In management alternative Plan B, the regions surrounding Miskito, Muerto and .MorrisonDennis Cays including the mangrove edge, seagrass and adjacent fringing reef would become a sanctuary with no harvest of lobsters allowed at any time. The remaining area of the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve would be open to fishing except for the months of March, April and May when the entire reserve would be closed to fishing. During the open season only lobsters greater than 85 mm carapace length could be taken except for females carrying eggs. Fishing would be limited to harvest by wood traps containing escape gaps. Free diving and SCUBA diving would not be allowed within thee reserve. The shallow water closed area would , serve to protect juvenile lobsters from settlement until reaching harvestable size, and along with trap escape gaps, serve to minimize injury and maximize growth. A closed season, minimum size of 85 mm CL and protection for gravid females allows each individual the opportunity to reproduce at least once before entering the fishery and would protect at least 50% of the reproductive effort. The diving prohibition would reduce the injury to lobsters, the impact on corals and the health risks to the fishermen.

Plan C: Limited Take Reserve In management alternative Plan C, the region surrounding Miskito and Muerto Cays including the mangrove edge, seagrass and adjacent fringing reef would become a sanctuary with no harvest of lobsters allowed at any time. The remaining area of the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve would be open to fishing any time. Only lobsters greater than 75 mm carapace length could be taken except for females carrying eggs. Fishing would be limited to harvest by wood traps containing escape gaps or diving using either tail snares or hand nets. The Miskito/Muerto Cays closed area would serve to protect juvenile lobsters from settlement until reaching harvestable size, and along with trap escape gaps, serve to minimize injury and

maximize growth. The live capture by traps or divers, minimum size of 75 mm CL and protection for gravid females allows some individuals the opportunity to reproduce at least once before entering the fishery and . would protect at least 10% of the reproductive effort.

Plan D: Monitored Take Reserve In management alternative Plan D, the region surrounding Miskito Cay including the mangrove edge, seagrass and adjacent fringing reef would become a sanctuary with no harvest of lobsters allowed at any time. The remaining area of the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve would be open to fishing any time. Any lobster could be taken except for females carrying eggs. Fishing would be limited to harvest by wood traps or diving using either tail snares or hand nets. The Miskito Cay sanctuary would serve to protect juvenile lobsters from settlement until reaching harvestable size and reduce the number of juveniles taken. The live capture by traps or divers, and protection for gravid females allows a few individual s the opportunity to reproduce at least once before entering the fishery and may protect some reproductive effort. Plan E: Unlimited Take Reserve In management alternative Plan E, the entire area of the Miskito Coast Marine Reserve would be open to fishing any time. Any lobsters could be taken. Fishing would be limited to harvest by any traps or diving using any gear. Some juvenile lobsters would be harvested in the nursery habitats and others would experience injury associated with the use of diving hooks or spears. Reproduction would not be protected.

4.3 Selection and Consequences of the Preferred Management Plan

Proper selection of the management alternative with the maximum benefit to the resource and the minimum impact on the fishermen requires more information about the Miskito Cays lobster population than is currently available. We recommend alternative management plan D based on the following biological considerations. The population structure (see Figures 5-8) suggest that a minimum size may not be necessary for some individuals to obtain a large size. The reason the Nicaraguan fishery catches 8 more large individual s than the Florida fishery has more to do with fishing effort. Should the Nicaraguan effort continue to increase then enforcement of the minimum size may become essential. With no enforced minimum size a protected nursery habitat is critical to prevent overfishing small individuals. Our surveys within the reserve suggest that lobster postlarvae likely settle in the shallow water surrounding Miskito and Muerto Cays (figures 9-10 and tables 3-5) which would benefit from restricted fishing. We recommend closing the region surrounding Miskito Cay initially to evaluate the efficacy of a protected juvenile habitat. The Miskito Cay region is ideal for it has adequate postlarval settlement substrate, fishermen do not frequently fish the surrounding fringing reefs and the abundance of casitas in the region enable the fishermen to patrol and police the region themselves. The year-round pattern of reproduction in Nicaragua (Casteno and Cadima 1993) suggests that a closed season would not be as effective as in Florida. Without a closed reproductive season, protecting gravid females year round becomes very important. Current fishing practice such as the use of hooks by divers have the potential to severely impact the future of the . population through the harvest of juvenile or gravid individual s which cannot be released if inadvertently speared. Traps should be made of wood and may not need escape gaps if checked regularly and placed outside of regions of high juvenile abundance. Habitat damage by divers o traps does not appear to be severe enough to warrant prohibiting either, but should be monitored closely. Environmental Consequences Lobster traps can negatively impact seagrass when they are left in the same location for -long periods of time. Seagrass mortality caused by shading is usually reversible once the trap is removed or once it disintegrates. Traps should be constructed of wood slats so they will decompose if lost. Traps can also negatively impact corals especially when they are moved by heavy storms. Physical damage to the corals caused by traps slamming into the reef have encouraged some Caribbean nations to adopt a policy banning traps from being placed within 10 m of the reef The benefit of such a policy and the rate of reef damage from trap loss deserves further consideration. Divers also impact lobster habitat especially corals. Since lobsters usually occupy deep crevices within the reef structure, divers must often hold on to, lay on top of, or break off coral in order to reach the lobsters. Handling coral can cause significant damage to fragile species such as staghorn (Acropora cervicomis) or elkhorn (Acropora palmata) corals. Diver education is the only way to reduce the impact. Traps can significantly reduce juvenile lobster growth by restraining them for weeks. Traps may also continue to capture and kill lobsters once they are lost. Fishermen can reduce these impacts by pulling their traps at least every two weeks and making their traps with wooded slats which wooded eventualy disintegrate if lost.

Divers also impact spiny lobsters through disturbance and injury. Often lobsters that are chased by divers may drop eggs or place themselves at greater risk of predation by tailflipping into the open. In addition lobsters may loose legs or antennae even if they successfully avoid capture. The use of non-lethal methods of capture such as tail-snares or hand nets can reduce the frequency of egg loss or injury during capture and most importantly allow the release of gravid females unharmed. Socioeconomic Impact The preferred management alternative will impact the fishermen of the Miskito Cays in 8 how they fish and to a lesser extent where they can fish. Divers should be able to switch from . using hooks to tail-snares with a minimum of effort and material s available locally and traps are . already the wooden-slat variety. Adherence to the closed area and gravid female prohibition should not significantly reduce the catch. The proposed regional closure in the area surrounding Miskito Cay will require some fishermen to travel further to fish, but no further than their normal fishing range. For these management recommendations to be successful the fishermen must understand how each regulation will benefit the lobster and in turn their catch next year and in future years.

5. RECOMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE The future of marine reserve depends upon an effort by local authorities to monitor and evaluate the success of management strategies. As conditions change so much the management strategies. Here we present some recommendations for future education, evaluation and research priorities. 5.1 Education The success of any management program depends upon the cooperation of the fishermen and the ability of the responsible management agency to enforce their regulations. Fishermen , must understand. how a particular regulation will benefit them both immediately and in the future. This would require some effort on the part of the management agency to instruct the fishermen in the basic life history of the spiny lobster and how each management effort will benefit them. Table 6 summarizes the management recommendations, immediate costs and future benefits for each lobster life history stage. Table 7 summarizes management alternatives and should help place the recommended restrictions in the context of a balance of the lobster' s needs with the social and economic needs of the fishermen. Table 8 is a list of concerns that should be discussed with the fishermen to help them understand the changes the agency wishes to establish. The more input fishermen have in choosing their own regulations the more likely they will be to follow those regulations. Enforcement of any policy will require a great deal of voluntary cooperation from the fishermen. We cannot overemphasize the importance education in the success of the preferred management plan.

5.2 Evaluation A fisheries management plan can only be successful if it changes as conditions warrant. Therefore, evaluation of the lobster population in the marine reserve is critical. The fishermen surveys aloe essential to evaluate the status of the fishery. Data should be examined just as we have done in section III. Changes in the size frequency distributions may indicate management changes are necessary. Table 8 summarizes what changes should be made depending on the change in the distribution. This oversimplified chart does not consider all possible conditions but should serve as a guide to evaluate changes in the population structure of the marine reserve. 5.3 Research Given a limited budget and personnel, research must take the lowest priority with education and evaluation corning first. The fishermen surveys already begun are critical to continue for they are the basis for the evaluation of the fishery status and success of the preferred, management alternative. These surveys should be conducted monthly and should be standardized by the number of fishermen interviewed or some other estimate of fishing effort. If additional resources are available we would recommend the following research projects.

Juvenile Censuses Juvenile spiny lobsters can be found and collected by divers with hand nets carefully searching crevices. Juvenile lobsters tend to aggregate under structures that offer good overhead cover such as loggerhead sponges or isolated coral heads. The addition of artificial structures such as concrete blocks serve to standardize the amount and type of Structure available. Artificial reefs made from concrete block s should be set up at a minimum of 6 sites within the marine reserve. These sites should be censused every month to every three months. Divers should I collect all lobsters found in the artificial shelters. In addition, divers should conduct timed surveys of all natural structures in the area. The juveniles should be collected, measured, evaluated for injury and sex to monitor for changes in population structure. Three of these sites should be within the Miskito Cay closed region and the other three in similar locations around Muerto Cay. Sites within and outside the closed region can then be compared to evaluate the benefit of this management strategy for abundance, mean size and injuries. Methods for setting up the artificial reef of concrete block s can be found in appendix 2. Postlarval Traps Many spiny lobster fisheries around the world use postlarval traps or collectors to monitor the influx of larval lobsters. Postlarval influx is usually seasonally variable and may produce seasonal cycles of lobster recruitment to the fishery. Fisheries managers have begun to develop predictive estimates of catch based on the influx of lobster postlarvae. Postlarval collectors may also be important in determining the location of settlement habitat. Three to five permanent postlarval collectors should be placed at a minimum of six locations throughout the marine reserve. Ideally the collectors should be checked every month. Local and seasonal variation in postlarval abundance will help guide management decisions about whether the proposed closed region should be continued or relocated. Methods for building collectors can be found in appendix 2.

6. SUMMARY The Miskito Cays Marine Reserve is a relatively pristine mangrove-coral reef ecosystem and an ideal habitat for Caribbean spiny lobsters. The size frequency of the lobsters taken from the reserve suggest that the population is not yet heavily overfished. Settlement surveys revealed potential nursery habitats that may be important to monitor and protect. We recommend the following regulations to protect the lobster population while minimizing the social and economic cost to the fishermen: (1) prohibit the collection of gravid females to protect reproductive effort, (2) prohibit the use of hooks and spears to protect gravid females before they are killed, and (3) set aside Miskito Cay as a closed nursery area including the mangrove, seagrass and fringing reef habitats to reduce juvenile disturbance through trap starvation and injury from divers. In addition to the management recommendations above, we encourage the management agency to (4) begin an education program to discuss regulations with the fishermen, (5) continue to monitor the catch through the fishermen survey program, (6) evaluate and adjust the management recommendations as warranted by the data, and (7) initiate research efforts that may reveal unique features of the Miskito Cays spiny lobster population important to their management. The Miskito Cays Marine Reserve has the potential to be a model of marine fisheries management balancing the demands of environmental protection, resource utilization and economic prosperity.

APPENDIX III

Shrimp Management Options in Nicaragua's Protected Area

Edward F. Klima

REPORT

SHRIMP MANAGEMENT OPTIONS IN NICARAGUA 'S PROTECTED AREA

BY EDWARD F. KLIMA

AUGUST 26, 1996

Introduction Penaeid shrimp stocks are similar world wide because of their unique life history, population dynamics and the characteristics of exploitation. Shrimp generally spawn offshore; their larvae move inshore into estuaries which serve as nursery areas. The time spent in the estuaries varies by species, but can be protracted for some species such as white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus ). The life cycle is completed after the shrimp move offshore and spawn usually many times in their short life of 12 to 18 months, but usually less that one year. Shrimp dependency on the estuaries raises concern for the quality and quantity of the estuarine habitat as well as management of shrimp fisheries operating within the nursery. Shrimp are fast growing and have high mortality rates and because of this, determinations of the best sizes at which to capture shrimp are critically sensitive to determinations of growth and mortality rates. Although shrimp are heavily exploited, it is not clear how recruitment is affected by stock size and or the environment. Scientist have some concern as to whether high levels of fishing effort generate population instabilities or whether high levels of fishing effort cause the stock to be in danger of collapse. Determination of the best biological and economics levels of fishing effort are difficult to determine. Most shrimp fisheries have similar problems in allocating the catch between inshore small scale fisheries and offshore large scale fisheries (Klima and et al, 1982; Nichols,1982; Poffenberger,1982). In addition, almost all shrimp fisheries are plagued with a host of unwanted catch often referred to as by catch or discards (Tillman,1992; Seidel,1992). Management issues are grouped into two areas, overfishing problems and non-overfishing problems. The overfishing problems are recruitment, growth and economic. The nonoverfishing problems are discards, and uncertainty. This report reviews current management practices in North America and provides options for the shrimp fishery in the protected area off the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua.

Background Overfishing Problems Recruitment overfishing occurs when recruitment of year- classes is consistently below the stock level of the adult standing stock. The level of exploitation results in a smaller stock size than the amount needed to produce the maximum sustainable biological yield. Generally Penaeid stocks have been shown not to be prone to recruitment overfishing because of their high rates of fecundity, short life span and rapid rates of growth. These biological characteristics result in yield curves that flatten out at the top of the curve instead of reaching an apex and then descending to zero. The .problem with this type of yield curve is that effort approaches infinity while the sustainable yield does not decrease. This obviously is not possible as at some point as effort increases yield must decrease. This implies that shrimp stocks are capable of maintaining sustainable yields for a wide range of fishing effort because of the flat type nature of the yield curve. This type of model indicates that as effort increases sustainable yield would not decrease. Never the less, the National Marine fisheries Service (NMFS) conducted a workshop in 1990 to define shrimp recruitment overfishing for the shrimp stocks of the Gulf of Mexico ( Klima and et al.,1990). This workshop provided definitions of overfishing based on the minimum parent stocks levels. Should the stocks in the Gulf of Mexico drop below these specified levels management actions would be taken. Growth overfishing is defined when a stock is harvested at less than the potential maximum yield per recruit. This type of overfishing results in a loss in total yield as compared to if the cohorts had been permitted to grow to a larger size before harvest. Most Penaeid fisheries are prone to growth overfishing. Not only does this result in a loss in yield but also a loss in economic return. Small shrimp are worth less than larger shrimp, hence if the stock is allowed to grow in size with a delay in harvesting more revenue and perhaps profit can be expected. The overall approach in most fisheries is to catch your share before anyone else. This strategy is not limited to shrimp fisheries. As a result heavy exploitation on small shrimp can and does cause excessive growth overfishing. Economic overfishing can be defined when any additional effort does not increase the yield. Most shrimp fisheries are open access in that their are not effort restrictions. The exceptions are most notably some of the Western Australian limited entry fisheries and some fisheries that limit the number of vessels such as Nicaragua. The state of Texas has recently imposed a limit on the number of vessel permitted to fish in its' inshore waters (Anon.,1995). The Maximum Economic Yield (MEY) represents the maximum difference between total costs and total revenue or in other words maximum profit. It is anticipated in an open access fishery equilibrium economic profits will be zero. The real problem with uncontrolled fisheries in which capital and labor inputs enter the fishery is that the marginal returns on these inputs begins to decrease. This results in the inefficient use I of capital and labor.

Non - overfishing problems Discards of fish, sea turtles and undersize shrimp are either illegal or unprofitable to sell and are common to shrimp trawl fisheries. An international conference sponsored by the Southeastern Fisheries Association was held in Lake Buena Vista, Florida in 1992. Members of the fishing industry, state and federal management agencies and scientist from ten countries met to address world wide by catch problems and seek solutions. All U.S. shrimp trawlers operating in offshore waters of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic I are required to use a Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) during a major part of the shrimp season. TEDs have been shown to effectively exclude sea turtles from the catch and do not reduce the shrimp catch significantly (Renaud and et al., 1993). Pellegrin, (1985) estimated the finfish by catch by the shrimp fishery in the Gulf of Mexico to be 10 billion fish. Federal finfish surveys (SEAMAP) since 1972 show a decline in size and number of many species caught inadvertently in shrimp trawls (Nichols et al., 1987). The problem of the incidental capture of unwanted finfish is currently being addressed as Bycatch Reduction Devices (BRDs) being developed by the NMFS Pascagoula Laboratory show promise in excluding juvenile red snapper(Lutjanus campechanus ) and other species from shrimp trawls (Watson, 1992). Undersize shrimp are discarded at varying rates depending on size restrictions, fishing practices and markets. The amount of discarded undersized shrimp relates to the amount of shrimp that would be available to reach marketable size and can be a key component in growth overfishing. Uncertainty in the magnitude of the stocks avai1abi1ity is a problem faced by all fisheries. The wide annual fluctuations in Penaeid stocks recruitment causes more concern than for longer- lived species. The estuarine dependency of most Penaeid stocks subject them to major environmental hazards which may set the strength of the year class. Management actions could be enacted to either enhance the inshore or offshore fishery or both depending on year class strength. This would depend on having a reliable predictive forecasting model. Other management actions could be to protect the estuarine nursery areas. Management Practices Regulations on U.S. Gulf of Mexico inshore fisheries were implemented in the late 1940s, when many of the states expressed concern over the economic welfare of their shrimp fisheries. At that ¡ time the majority of the catch was produced in the estuaries or the near shore waters out to about three miles. Large quantities of very small shrimp less than 100 individual s per pound were landed and processed as either dried or canned shrimp. The demand for small inexpensive shrimp created a fishery for the small shrimp, which continues to this day. The demand for small inexpensive shrimp is one of the main causes of growth overfishing. The fishing community equips itself for this product and resist change to harvest larger and more profitable shrimp. By the 1950s the fishery expanded to start to harvest the larger shrimp in offshore waters and introduced larger vessel and more efficient fishing gear. Allocation conflicts between inshore and offshore fishermen continues as fishing effort continues to increase. General objectives of the present state management systems have been to protect the resources and maximize catch among the various user groups. Primary nursery areas within the estuaries are permanently closed to all types of shrimp fishing. This insures protection of the habitat from damaging due to trawling and harvesting undersize shrimp. Regulations of the size of harvestable shrimp have been implemented by the various states. Most Gulf coast states regulate the harvestable size of shrimp by opening and closing seasons in state waters, size count laws and to some degree, by the restriction of various gears.

Implementation of the Magnuson Act in 1976 created the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC). The Council completed a plan for managing the shrimp fisheries in the Fishery Conservation Zone (FCZ); federal waters that extend from the Territorial Sea out to 200 miles. Management measures are based on the assumptions that no recruitment overfishing occurs, that the stock is a single year class, and that there is a need to protect small shrimp, because growth overfishing is a significant problem in most of the coastal sates. Rothschild and Brunenemeister, 1984 summarized the council`s scientific view of the shrimp stock s in the Gulf of Mexico as follows: 1) there is no demonstrable relationship between stock size and recruitment levels; 2) no recruitment overfishing occurs; 3) no restriction on the quantity of shrimp harvested; 4) the environment, especially temperature salinity and not stock size, controls the success of recruitment; and 5) surplus production models are inadequate for providing guidance on the relationship between stock production and the amount of fishing. These authors discuss the Council's views and in general provide information that negates these points. Present management regulations are more or less based on these assumptions. I would also like to point out that production , models do serve a useful purpose for the management of shrimp stocks, that recruitment overfishing is a distinct possibility and that unrestricted harvest may lead to recruitment overfishing. The GMFMC identified multiple management problems and adopted a goal and objectives to resolve these problems: Goal; To manage the shrimp fishery of the United States water of the Gulf of Mexico in order to attain the greatest overall benefit to the nation with particular reference to food production and recreational opportunities on the bases of the maximum sustainable yield as modified by relevant economic, social, or ecological factors. Objectives: 1) Optimize fue yield from shrimp recruited to the fishery. 2) Encourage habitat protection measures to prevent undue loss of shrimp habitat. 3) Coordinate the deve1opment of shrimp management measures by f the GMFMC with shrimp management programs of the several states I where feasible. 4) Promote consistency with the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. 5) Minimize the incidental capture of finfish by shrimpers when appropriate. 6) Minimize conflicts between shrimp and stone crab fishermen. 7) Minimize adverse effects of underwater obstructions to shrimp trawling. 8) Provide a statistical reporting system. The GMFMC adopted and the NMFS implemented, the following management measures to achieve the desired objectives: l. Establish the cooperative permanent closure with the state o Florida and the U.S. Department of Commerce off south Florida to protect small pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum) until they reach a size larger than 68 tails/lb. 2. Establish a cooperative closure of the territorial sea of Texas and the adjacent U.S. FCZ with the state of Texas and the U.S. Department of Commerce during the time when a

substantial portion of the brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus) in these waters are less than a count of 65 tails/lb. These offshore closures correspond to the time of year when juvenile undersize shrimp migrate from the bays and estuaries to offshore waters. In Texas the inshore bay waters are open to fishing during this time frame to permit the inshore fishery to harvest the juvenile shrimp. In recent years restrictions have been increased in an attempt to curtail the harvest in Texas inshore waters. The state of Florida closed permanently the near shore waters of Florida bay (referred to as the Tortugas Shrimp Sanctuary) to shrimp fishing. The GMFMC requires an annual evaluation of the Texas Closure and the Tortugas Sanctuary. The NMFS Galveston Laboratory has provided these annual evaluations since 1981 (Klima, et al. 1982; Nichols,198 ; Klima and Patella, 1986). In general these offshore closures have increased the quantity of the stock available for harvest and gross revenues because of harvesting larger, higher-priced shrimp (Nance et al. 1990). Nance et al. 1994 evaluated the feasibility of improving the economic return from the brown shrimp fishery by expanding the closed areas and seasons using a bioeconomic model. The results showed benefits for all of the gulfwide closures examined, with the ( maximum benefit for a combination of an inshore-offshore closure. These results clearly indicated that the brown shrimp fishery is growth overfished. Increased management protection for juvenile shrimp results in an increase in the dollar return to the fishery. The increased in profits go to the larger offshore vessels, at the expense of the smaller inshore vessels. Nance, 1993 examined the possibility of white shrimp closure in the Gulf of Mexico and concluded these also have the potential of positive benefits to the shrimp fishery. Management action of this type would require active planning to design the implementation. Without effective planning, it would be impossible to insure that any closure could be implemented without serious unrest in the fishing community. Social, economic impacts on I packing, processing, distribution and markets must be given consideration. Once the fishing industry understands the profit that will be gained from these types of management measures, there will be a rapid expansion of the fleet and a major increase in fishing effort. This of course will result in a rapid dissipation of profits after several years. Consideration would have to give to some form of limiting effort in order that increased profits will not be dissipated. Bowen and Hancock, 1984 indicated that all Australian prawn stocks are fully or excessively exploited, and face the problems of reducing fishing effort. Management is aimed at resource maintenance although controls are directed at reducing excessive fishing effort. Tiger prawns Penaeus esculentus in Exmouth Gulf and Shark Bay show recruitment overfishing (Penn et al., 1985) , Management has been attempting to reduce total effort and to delay application of fishing effort until later in the life cycle to reduce growth overfishing. Many of these fisheries are subject to some form of limited entry regulations ranging from restrictions on further entry. to the issue of special licenses. Australian shrimp fisheries have like most shrimp fisheries the problem of escalating fishing effort. Management in concert with the industry has taken steps to restrict and limit effective fishing effort. The state of Texas in 1995 has also taken steps to restrict the number vessels allowed to enter I the inshore shrimp fisheries and has established a limited entry plan for Texas Bays.

Nicaragua The goals for the Atlantic coast shrimp fishery are: 1) Maintain a viable fishery; 2) Insure viable profits; 3) Minimize impacts with inshore fishermen; . 4) Protect juvenile shrimp and allow growth to larger and more profitable sizes while allowing shrimp to disperse; 5) Require uniform mesh size coast wide. The government of Nicaragua has adopted specific management regulations to achieve these goals and objectives as follows: 1) Limit the number of shrimp vessels; 2) Close the fishing season and area from April through May; 3) Adopt a uniform mesh size of 2 1/4 inches. 4) Prohibit offshore vessels from fishing inside of 3 miles. The Atlantic coast shrimp fishery recently produced 4.9 million pounds of shrimp in 1995 but only 3.6 million pounds in 1994. Fishing effort was 3,500 days in 1994 and over 5,000 days in 1995. The increase in fishing effort may have also increased production without any change or increase in recruitment. Nicaragua has had a long practice of limiting the number of fishing vessels and presently limits the number of shrimp vessels operating off of the Atlantic coast. Fishing effort was low from January through May 1994 and increased to more than 250 days per month in Dec. 1994 (Figure 1). In 1995 effort was greater than in 1994 with the highest levels from July through Dec. 1995. The white shrimp catch appears to be low from Jan.-Feb through June with a large increase in production in August. The pink shrimp production appears to be about the same quantity through the year but with slightly more production from July to November (Figure 2). Over 82 % of the catch is comprised of pink shrimp and about 15 % white shrimp. In addition to limiting the number of shrimp vessels. Nicaragua implemented in 1983 a closed season and area in April and May for the entire Atlantic coast. The objectives of the closure are to restrict the capture of juvenile shrimp and allow them to grow to a larger more profitable size. The 1995 annual size distribution of pink shrimp is concentrated in size counts larger than 41 per pound. In fact. over 55 % of all the pink shrimp landed are greater than 41 count with more than 32 % greater than 61 count (Figure 3). Pink shrimp's monthly size distribution shows virtually no production in May and June except for juveniles 81 count or greater (Figure 4). The lower production is probable associated with the closed season. Recruitment of juvenile shrimp into the fishery appears to begin in April and continues at a high level to November. The larger size count of 31 or less are produced from Sept. to March. The white shrimp catch in 1994 was low in all months except August and November with production of over 155 thousand pounds per month or more than double any other months production. In 1995 the catch was greatest from August through December exceeding 85 thousand pounds per month (Figure 2). Total ), production was almost identical in both 1994

and 1995 about 755 thousand pounds annually. The distribution of the quantity landed was different between 1994 and 1995. Fishing effort was also much less in 1994 than 1995. The distribution of the white shrimp catch by size count differs greatly between 1994 and 1995 with larger size shrimp being landed in 1994 than 1995 ( Figure 5). More than 55% of the shrimp were 30 count or larger in 1994 whereas only 41% were that size in 1995. The monthly size distribution in 1994 shows large shrimp being landed in Feb. and March and from July-Oct. (Figure 6). The monthly size distribution in 1995 shows recruitment from April-June and good production of larger shrimp < 30 count in July-August and December (Figure 7) These data show over 15 thousands pounds a month landed during the closed seasons of 1994 and 1995. Management Options for the Protected Area Status Quo: No change in the management measures presently in place. This option would permit unlimited amount of fishing effort in the protected area since vessels would be allowed open access in the Protected Area. The present limit on the number of vessels permitted to fish along the Atlantic coast would not restrict fishing in I the Protected Area. The closed season/area measure would protect juvenile shrimp during the April-May time frame. Nursery areas restrictions: A variety of management measures are available, but the most effective are closed areas and seasons depending in the habitat. Generally primary nurseries which are critical habitat for post larval and juvenile shrimp should be permanently closed to all fishing. Transitional areas which provide habitat for rapidly growing juveniles should be restricted to fishing during times when the size counts are greater than 80 per pound or areas such as passes where juvenile shrimp tend to group prior to mi grating offshore. Management strategies should include planning of opening dates to optimize size at first capture from nursery studies and preseason trawl surveys. Restrictions on fishing gear the amount of shrimp landed and or daily fishing times are also critical in restricting the catch of juvenile shrimp. Klima (1989) summarizes shrimp regulations in the U. S. Gulf Coastal States. Details of Texas regulations include all of the above restrictions as well as an attempt to limit the number of fishing vessels (Anon. 1995). Protection of critical habitats such as intertidal marsh in the northern Gulf of Mexico is essential for reliable shrimp production(Rozas and Zimmerman, 1994; Zimmerman et. al., 1991). Restriction in near shore areas: Management regulations within 3 miles can be either closed areas/seasons and or effort limitations. The distance from the beach seaward or the area restricted can be determined based on the habitat and migrations of the shrimp species. Closed areas/seasons can be used to protect migrating juveniles to allow them. to disperse and grow to a larger size. This type of restriction is utilized off the Texas coast to protect migrating juvenile brown (P. aztecus) shrimp in June and July ( Leary, 1985). In addition, this type of restriction can protect concentrations of spawning adults; especially around the mouths of inlets where some species tend to congregate. Closed Areas and Seasons: These type of management measures have been used extensively in the Gulf of Mexico to protect migrating juveniles to offshore waters off Texas and Florida ( K1ima. 1989). Once the season opens larger size shrimp are produced at a more profitable size. The NMFS. annually evaluates the effectiveness of these closures by preparing a series of reports for the GMFMC. Since the implementation of the first Texas Closure. the closure has been a success in achieving the objectives of the shrimp management plan. Not only did the economic yield increase. but CPUE (catch per unit effort) off Texas is always greater during July-August than CPUE off Louisiana (an area not closed to fishing during June-July).

This is not to say that there are no problems associated with area/seasonal closures. Some of these problems are listed by Klima, 1989 as follows: 1) Loss of migrating shrimp to Mexico. 2) Too many vessels fishing off Texas at the opening causing problems with discarding, high fishing mortality and a decrease in stock available to local fishermen during fall and winter. 3) Increasing inshore fishing on juveniles and reducing the potential for the offshore fishery. 4) Closure not consistently applied throughout the northern Gulf. 5) Lower prices paid to the fishermen during July and August. 6) Tie up of vessels during the closure and movement of vessels to other areas to fish during the closure. In addition, to the above believe there are some other problems. The unrestricted increase in fishing effort since 1981 has dissipated all of the economic gains from the closure. Although enforcement is good it is not 100 % effective and as a result some poaching occurs and encourages more poaching because of the great financial potential realized. Mesh Size Restrictions: The concept is that the size of the opening will dictate the size of shrimp caught with smaller animals escaping through the holes in the webbing. Generally these type of restrictions are ineffective for a variety of reasons. .Namely they are very difficult to enforce and do not provide the desired size for capture. Nets clog, webbing stretches and further even under ideal situations, the size selection curves have a wide range in sizes. TEDs/BRDs: The U.S. Government requires that shrimp harvested with technology that may adversely affect certain sea turtles may not be imported into the U.S. unless there is an annual certification and compliance with fishing gear that restricts the capture of sea turtles (Federal Register, 1993). Teds are effective in excluding sea turtles under most fishing conditions and areas as long as attention is paid to materials, installation and the operation (Mitchell et. al., 1995). Teds should routinely be used in the protected area. Bycatch associated with shrimp trawling has caused serious decline in some fish stocks in U.S. waters and may be a problem in the protected area as well. Commercial evaluations show that the midsize fisheye in the top position and the extended funnel BRD are capable of significantly reducing juvenile red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) as well as other fishes fishing mortality in shrimp trawls (Anon. A, 1996). Several BRDs have and are being tested that reduce significantly the bycatch of fishes especially red snapper, with minimal shrimp loss. Consideration should be given to using BRDs in the protected area. Limiting Fishing Effort: Various means of limiting effort are available and presently Nicaragua limits the total number of vessels in the Atlantic coast fishery. Some form of limited number of permits should be considered for the Protected area. Conclusions Management of the Protected area could be based on a combination of the above management strategies to achieve the goals and objectives for Nicaragua. Restrictions within the estuaries and nearshore areas will in conjunction with offshore closures produce larger and more valuable shrimp. The closed fishing season in 1995 did not appear to be effective as over 300 thousand pounds I of pink shrimp and 60 thousand pounds of white shrimp were landed.

Enforcement of the management regulations will be critical to insure not only compliance but the ability to achieve the goals and objectives. Interaction and input by the fishing community will facilitate the management plan. Once the fishermen understand and : have input enforcement of regulations will be easier. Literature Cited Anon. 1995. Texas Commercial Fishing guide. Tx. Parks & Wildlife Dept. Austin Tx. Anon. A, 1996. Summary report on the status of bycatch reduction device development. Report by NMFS Pascagoula Lab. Pascagoula Ms. Bowen B. K. and D. A. Hamcock. 1984. The limited entry prawn fisheries of Western Australia: research and management. J. A. Gulland and B. J. Rothschild, Eds., Penasid Shrimps: Their Biology and Management, Fishing News Books, Farnham, Surrey, England. :272 - 290. Federal Register. 1993. Foreign Ted Regulations, Guidelines for determining comparability of foreign programs Jan. 10,1991, Revised Guidelines Feb. 18,1993/Vol. 58, No.31:9015-9017. Klima E. F. 1989. Approaches to research and management of the U.S. fisheries for Penaeid shrimp in the Gulf of Mexico. In Marine Invertebrates Fisheries Ed. J. F. Caddy. John Wiley & Sons :87-113. Klima E. F., K.N. Baxter, and F. J. Patella. 1982. A review of the offshore shrimp fishery and the 1981 Texas Closure. Mar. Fish Rev. 44. No. 9-10.16-30. Klima E.F., J. M. Nance, E. X. Martinez, and T. Leary. 1990. Workshop on definition of shrimp recruitment overfishing. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-264 : 9. Klima E. F. and F. J. Patella. 1986. A synopsis of the Tortugas pink shrimp, Peneaus duorarum, fishery, 1981-84, and the impact on the Tortugas Sanctuary. Mar. Fish. Rev. 47(4):11-18. Leary T. R. 1985. Review of the Gulf of Mexico management plan for shrimp. In P. C. Rothlisberg, B. J. Hill and D. J. Staples, Eds. Second. Aust. Nat. Prawn Sem.,NPS2 Cleveland, Australia:267-274. Mitchell J. H., J.W. Watson, D.G. Foster, and R. E. Caylor, 1995. El 1. excluidor de tortugas (TED): una guía para mejorar su funcionamiento NOAA Tech. Meno. NMFS-SEFC-366:35. Nance J. M. 1993. Analysis of white shrimp closures in the Gulf of I Mexico. NOAA Tech. Memo.NMFS-SEFC-321: 12. Nance. J. M., E. X. Martinez, and E. F. Klima. 1994. Feasibility of improving the economic return from the Gulf of Mexico brown shrimp fishery. North Am. Jour. Fish. Mang. 14:522536. Nichols S. 1982. Impacts on shrimp yields of the 1981 Fishery . Conservation Zone Closure off Texas. Mar. Fish. Rev. 44 No. 9-10:31- 37.

Fishing Effort 1994

1994 White Shrimp Catch

1995 Pink Shrimp Catch

1995 Pink Shrimp Catch

1995 Pink Shrimp Catch

1995 Pink Shrimp Catch

1995 Pink Shrimp Catch

1994 White Shrimp Catch

1994 White Shrimp Catch

1994 White Shrimp Catch

1994 White Shrimp Catch

1994 White Shrimp Catch

1995 White Shrimp Catch

1995 White Shrimp Catch

1995 White Shrimp Catch

1995 White Shrimp Catch

APPENDIX IV

Lagoon Fish Surveys in the Miskito Coast Protected Area, Nicaragua

Michael J. Marshall Lewis Environmental Consultants

United States Agency for International Development Environmental Initiative of the Americas.

LAGOONAL FISH SURVEYS IN THE MISKITO COAST PROTECTED AREA, NICARAGUA

Submitted to United States Agency for International Development, Nicaragua

October 1996

Authored by: Michael J Marshall,. Ph.D. Senior Ecologist

Lewis Environmental Services, Inc. 5503 40th Avenue East Bradenton, Florida 34208 USA

Assisted by: Mr. Balbo Mueller Mr. Norton Chavarria Mr. Jose Ríos MARENA Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua

with special thanks to the crew of the R/V Palpa

LAGOONAL FISH SURVEYS IN THE MISKITO COAST PROTECTED AREA 5 INTRODUCCION 6 METHODS 6 Areas Surveyed. 6 Salinity Characterization 7 Field Sampling Techniques 7 Data Analysis 8 RESULTS 8 Bottom types 8 Lagoonal differences in species abundance 8 Distribution of fish and shrimp versus season 9 Distribution of fish and shrimp versus salinity 9 Distributions of fish and shrimp versus depth 10 Salinity survey of the Wawa River

10 DISCUSSION 11 FU1URE RPSEARCH NEEDS 12 FUTURE CITED

LAGOONAL FISH SURVEYS WITHIN THE MISKITO COAST PROTECTED AREA

INTRODUCTION Many tropical fish and invertebrate species spend part of their lives in mangrove lined bays and seagrass beds and then migrate offshore to mature and spawn (Lewis et al, 1985). Offshore current eddies carry the eggs and weakly swimming larvae of these species to estuarine areas where the species undergo maturation to juvenile or subadult stages (Fig. 1) In order to successfully manage commercial fisheries in the Miskito Coast Protected Area lagoons (Fig. 2 and Fig. 3) it is necessary to understand migration patterns between estuarine and offshore areas, to know when and where spawning occurs economically and ecologically important species, and to know which habitat types to afford the greatest level of protection. Habitat types of probable importance in the Miskito Coast Lagoons include mangrove prop root zones and seagrass beds. Mud bottoms are also important for many species but fish abundance and species richness is usually highest, at vegetated sites and is often correlated with vegetation biomass (Lubbers et al., 1990). Our study focused on fish communities within the major lagoons (Figs. 2 and 3)~f the Miskito Coast Protected Area (MCP A). The purposes of the lagoonal survey effort were to 1) continue the characterization of fish communities within the lagoons, begun ,in1994 (Marshall el al., 1.994) and 2) to determine the importance of seasonal changes in salinity on fish Populations in the lagoons. A fisheries management plan is needed for snook fisheries within the Miskito Coast lagoons. As yet there are no regulations on this fishery and many fishermen fish exclusively for snook with large meshed gill nets. The I population densities, distribution and seasonal dynamics of lagoonal snook (principally Centropomus undecimalis) need to re accurately assessed. The current study can only I as a starting point to achieve the goal of characterizing the distributions of lagoonal and invertebrate species. Our field work began on August 8 and was completed on August 16. Bismuna, Karata and Wounta Lagoons (Fig. 2) were included in our fish community surveys. We trawled in the shallow coastal areas immediately adjacent to the lagoons, in the entrance passes, and in the broad shallow areas within each lagoon. Our work was completed with the help and guidance of many people from communities on the Miskito Coast. Three biologists from MARENA collaborated with me in every aspect of the project.

METHODS Areas Surveyed. Four of the large lagoons of the MCPA were selected as study sites in 1994. These included Bihmuna (Wani) Lagoon (156 km2), Pahara Lagoon (96 km2), Karata Lagoon ( 34 km2), and Wounta Lagoon (87km2), Pahara Lagoon was excluded from the August 1996 surveys due to local politics. Salinity Characterization During the 1994 dry season we measured salinities in the Rio Wawa, a tributary of the Karata Lagoon,. well beyond the upstream limit of mangrove growth and beyond the boundaries of the MCPA. Surface and bottom salinities, Seechi disk disappearance depths, and temperatures were measured at 0.5 -1.0 intervals along the river. Locations and distances between stations were determined by GPS. This survey was repeated . August, 1996 but it was only necessary to sample at the river mouth to find completely fresh water at the surface and at the bottom. We continued upstream for approximately two mile; to validate our observation that the river water was completely fresh from top to bottom. Salinities, Seechi disk disappearance depths, water temperature, and depth were also measured at the starting point of each trawl. Field Sampling Techniques. A trawl was used to sample fish communities in the open lagoonal waters, in the rivers, and in mangrove-lined channels. The trawl was equipped with a 1/4 inch mesh cod end liner and a tickler chain. The trawl wings were 1-inch mesh with a head rope 15 feet in length. Trawls lasted 6 minutes unless we were stopped by shallow water or by bottom snags. GPS determined latitudes and longitudes were recorded at the beginning and end of each trawl. Distances trawled averaged 0.25 nautical miles. Depths were recorded, at one minute intervals, along the path of each trawl to produce bottom profiles for each trawl site. We measured salinities, Seechi disk disappearance depths, and water temperatures at the majority of the trawling stations. Several salinity measurements were missed because of equipment failure. Fish were identified, counted, weighed, and returned to the water as soon as possible alter each trawl. Specimens of several species were kept as voucher specimens. Data Analysis Since the changes in the distribution and composition of the fish assemblage between wet and dry seasons were the major focus of this study our data were tabulated and graphed to show how species composition and catch per six minute trawl differed between the dry season of 1994 and the wet season of 1996.

RESULTS Bottom types Seagrass beds were limited to small patches in the lagoons. Seagrasses were found in Karata and Bihmuna Lagoons but not in Wounta Lagoon. Halodule was the only seagrass species found during the wet season. Lagoon bottoms, in the areas that we trawled, were usually very muddy. Trawls picked up lots of leaves and twigs from mangrove trees throughout each lagoon. Passes typically had sand bottoms but. pockets of a thick gray mud was encountered in a few locations. Oyster bars were located by sonar and by our trawls in the entrance into Wounta Lagoon. Dense accumulations of sticks, sunken logs, an leaves were common in the passes.

Lagoonal differences in species abundance Table 1 lists the species caught by trawling in each of the three lagoons in August 1996 and during the dry season in 1994. Fish collected in the passes and near shore areas are also included in this list. Figures 4 through 6 show the distribution of the most abundant genera of fish, shrimp, and crabs in the three lagoons. Two genera, Arius and Stellifer, were the most abundant fish in each of the three lagoons. Commercially important genera caught in the wet season included Centropomus (snook or robalos), Diapterus and Gerres (mojaras) and Bairdiella. Penaeid shrimp were caught but they were not abundant in the lagoons. No artisanal shrimpers were seen in the lagoons.

Distribution of fish and shrimp versus season. During the dry season Gerres cinereus (Table 2) was the most abundant fish caught over mud bottoms (Marshall et al, 1994). Gerres and fue other gerreids (Bairdiella ensifera, B. rhonchus, Díapteros rhombeus, Eugerres plumeieri, and Eucinostomus gula) were less abundant over sand and seagrass beds than over mud Penaeus spp. were more abundant on a per trawI basis in seagrass beds than over mud or sandy bottoms. Shrimp caught in seagrass beds were juveniles. Larger shrimp were caught near mangrove prop root shorelines on in the near shore Miskito Channel. Crabs (Callinectes danae and Calliectes spp.) were most abundant in seagrass. Snappers (Lutjanus analis) were only caught in seagrass beds. The wet season results were much different. Fewer species were caught throughout the lagoons (TabIe 1) and fish diversity and abundances were not greater over the sparse Halodule beds than over bale mud bottoms. Few snook (Centropomus spp.) were caught in trawls in the dry season (Table 3). More snook (C. undedmalís and C. ensiferus) were caught during the wet season but aIl of these fish were juveniles. C. ensiferus was the most abundant snook caught during the August 1996 lagoonal survey.

Distribution of fish and shrimp versus salinity During the dry season species were variably distributed across salinity zones (Marshall et al., 1994). Many species that were caught in the lagoons in April 1994 were not captured during the wet season (August 1996) when salinities averaged near zero and never exceeded two parts per thousand. Salinities measured in the passes during the wet season were slightly higher than the lagoonal salinities but were always less than 5 ppt.. Distributions of fish and shrimp versus depth We trawled at depths ranging from less than 25 to greater than 30 feet. Species were distributed across the entire depth range or within more restricted depth zones. Arius felis (Fig. 7) was most abundant in depths from 12-24 feet, Bairdiella spp. (Fi .I 8) were abundant in depths from 15-18 feet, and Stellifer lanceolatus (Fig. 9) was most abundant in water from 12-24 feet deep. Centropomus undedmalis and ensiferus (Fig. 10) were most abundant is shallow water (4-6 feet). Salinity survey of the Wawa River I The Wawa River was surveyed well beyond the boundaries of the MCPA in April 1994. The last stop at 14°13.01' 83°33.83' W, had a surface salinity of 0.3 ppt and a bottom salinity of 9.5 ppt. Surface and bottom salinities at the mouth of the Wawa River (13°58.19'Nj83°28.38'W) were 25 ppt and 26 ppt, respectively. During the wet season (August 1996) surface and bottom salinities were 0 ppt. at the mouth and at all other points upstream from the first station on the Wawa River.

Discussion The data generated by this study will be useful in mapping and defining nursery grounds and protective habitats for many ecologically and economically important fishes from the Miskito Coast lagoons. This work needs to be continued for several years in order to obtain an accurate picture of the dynamics of the communities and habitats within these large lagoons. The same data sets, if studies are continued, can also be utilized as a means of assessing the impact commercial and artisanal fisheries on recruitment of juveniles to the lagoons. The collections will also be valuable since they are the first from this area and since the will be available for future work on coastal fisheries. It was obvious from earlier dry season surveys (Marshall et al, 1994) mangrove forest prop roots and seagrass beds are important fishery habitats and that their protection should be a high priority in the MCPA management plan. The mangrove fringe influenced catches over mud bottoms. Few fish were caught over bare mud bottoms in the central areas of the lagoons. A large majority of the fish caught over mud bottoms were taken adjacent to the mangrove shoreline or in mangrove lined creeks. Trawl samples taken in the deep channels at river mouths typically contained mojaras (Gerres and Diapterus) and catfish (Bagre marinus and Arius felis).

FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS The effort described in this preliminary report represents a starting point for work that should be continued over a several year period and extended to the remaining lagoons of the Miskito Coast Protected Area. All of the collecting should be handled by MCPA personnel and fishermen from the villages in each lagoon. The identification work and data analyses could be undertaken at the MCPA/MARENA office in Puerto Cabezas. The initial program should be extended to monitor populations of fishery species (snook, mojara, snappers, etc.) within and offshore from each of the lagoons. The extended program could be designed as a fisheries independent monitoring program to determine the environmental impacts of coastal trawling and other types of near shore fisheries. By catch surveys on shrimp trawlers operating in the MCPA should also become a regular part of any effort to manage coastal fisheries. It is extremely important to develop regulations concerning shoreline clearing. Land has been cleared for numerous small farms on the banks of the Wawa River. Deforestation within watersheds is a major contributor to increased rates of sedimentation in many other tropical areas. Sediment loads in river water may have a strong impact, by decreasing light penetration depths, on the growth of submerged aquatic vegetation (SA V) in the MCP A lagoons. Local fishermen also believe that t the sediments from upland areas have caused a general shallowing of large portions of the Miskito Coast Lagoons. It would be useful for management purposes to monitor changes in SAV distributions, turbidity levels, sedimentation rates, and water depths in the coastal lagoons over a multi-year period. These studies do not require expensive equipment and can be very useful in understanding the impacts of upland deforestation on lagoonal fisheries. Literature Cited Lewis, R.R., m, R.G. Gilmore, Jr., D.W. Crewz, and W.E. Odum. 1985. Mangrov habitat and fishery resources of Florida. Pp. 281-336 in W. Seaman, Jr. (ed.), Florida Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources. Florida Chapter, American Fisheries Society, Kissimmee, Fl. 543pp. Lubbers, L., W.R. Boynton, and W.M. Kemp. 1990. Variations in structure I estuarine fish communities in relation to abundance of submersed vascular plants. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 65, 1-14. Marshall Michael J., Leopoldo Peralta W., and Jerris J. Foote (1994). Lagoonal reconnaissance and near coastal fish surveys in the Miskito Coast Protected Area Report lo! the Caribbean Conservation Corporation, Gainesville, Florida, USA.

TABLE 1. List of the fish species present during the wet season. (August 1996) and the dry season April 1994 in the Miskito Coast Lagoons.

TABLE 1. (continued) List of the fish species present during the wet season. (August 1996) and the dry season April 1994 in the Miskito Coast Lagoons.

TABLE 2. Mojara (Gereidae) catch per sis minute trawl during the dry season of 1994 and the wet season of 1996.

TABLE 3. Snook (Centropomidae) catch per six minute trawl during the dry season of 1994 and the wet season of 1996.

FIGURE 1. Life cycles of gray snappers and pink shrimp showing their dependence on lagoonal nursery grounds and offshore spawing areas.

FIGURE 2. Location of the coastal lagoons of the Miskito Coast Protected Area.

FIGURE 3. Map of the Coastal area of the Miskito Coast Protected Area showing the locations of the major lagoons.

FIGURE 3. (continued) Map of the Coastal area of the Miskito Coast Protected Area showing the locations of the major lagoons.

LAGUNA WOUNTA FIGURE 4. Fish caught in Laguna Wounta during the 1996 wet season.

LAGUNA KARATA FIGURE 5. Fish caught in Laguna Karata during the 1996 wet season.

LAGUNA BIHMUNA FIGURE 6. Fish caught in Laguna Bihmuna during the 1996 wet season.

ARIUS FELIS FIGURE 7. The distribution of Arius felis by depth in three lagoons of the Miskito Coast Protected Area during the wet season (August 1996).

BAIRDIELLA SPP. FIGURE 8. The distribution of Bairdiella spp by depth in three lagoons of the Miskito Coast Protected Area during the wet season (August 1996).

STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS FIGURE 9. The distribution of Stellifer Lanceolatus by depth in three lagoons of the Miskito Coast Protected Area during the wet season (August 1996).

CENTROPOMUS SPP. FIGURE 10. The distribution of Centropomus Spp by depth in three lagoons of the Miskito Coast Protected Area during the wet season (August 1996).

APPENDIX V

Reef Fish Surveys of the Miskito Cays, within the Miskito Coast Protected Area, Nicaragua

Michael J. Masrshall Lewis Environmental Consultants

United States Agency for International Development Environmental Initiative of the Americas.

REEF FISH SURVEYS OF THE MISKITO CAYS, WITHIN THE MISKITO COAST PROTECTED AREA, NICARAGUA

Submitted to United States Agency for International Development, Nicaragua

October 1996

Authored by: Michael J Marshall,. Ph.D. Senior Ecologist

Lewis Environmental Services, Inc. 5503 40th Avenue East Bradenton, Florida 34208 USA

Assisted by: Mr. Balbo Mueller Mr. Norton Chavarria Mr. Jose Ríos MARENA Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua

with special thanks to the crew of the R/V Palpa

CONTENTS

Introduction The Miskito Coast Protected Area includes many acres of shallow, offshore banks that are covered by seagrass and by coral patch reefs. The Miskito Cays, islands on the offshore bank, are covered completely by mangroves and have little or no high ground. Some of the islands surround small lagoons that are also carpeted by seagrass. All of these habitats are undoubtably important to the overall functioning of the highly productive fisheries of the Miskito Coast area. The surveys of reef fish communities reported herein are the first comprehensive studies of the fishes of the Miskito Cays Protected Area. These reports were not meant to be final products but rather were produced as initial descriptions of fish assemblages within the Protected Area s waters. If this type survey were repeated at monthly or quarterly intervals it would be possible, within a few years, to produce an accurate assessment of the distribution and population dynamics of the Miskito Coast Protected Area' s offshore fish communities.

Training and future studies Biologists from MARENA and from the Caribbean Conservation Corporation' s office in Puerto Cabezas (Fig. 1) assisted the principal investigator with every aspect of these studies. It is anticipated that the reef fish studies will be continued by these biologists. Reef fish surveys can also serve as fisheries independent assessments of the impact of local fisheries on commercially important fish stocks. At present there is little fin fish fishing activity within the area. Most fishermen pursue lobsters and turtles. Reef fish are usually caught as food for the fishermen or returned to the coastal villages. Lobster fishermen use lobster hooks to capture both lobsters and reef fish (Jones, 1995). Long line boats fish further offshore at locations well beyond the current boundaries and proposed buffer zones of the MCPA.

Future Research Needs As previously mentioned this study was designed to provide a simple, first description of the nature of reef fish communities within the MCPA. Much more information will be needed over the years to preserve the sustainability of the reef fish resource as human demands for marine resources grow along the northeast coast of Nicaragua. The Gulf Coast Fisheries Management Council (1989) and Bohnsack and Sutherland (1985) presented lists of information needs relative to the reef fish habitat within the Gulf of Mexico. These same needs exist for effective reef fish management on the Miskito Coast and elsewhere in the Caribbean. An abbreviated and slightly modified listing of the recommendations include: 1) identify optimum reef fish habitat; 2) identify environmental and habitat conditions that promote reef fish production; 3) determine the connections between estuarine habitats and reef fish recruitment; 4) identify areas of critical importance to

reef fish; and 5) determine the impact of shrimp trawling in the Miskito Channel on reef fish populations. Exploratory drilling for petroleum will commence in the near future within the MCPA. The potential for direct damage to reefs and seagrass beds (and therefore fisheries) will depend on the drilling methods and practices utilized by the drillers (Hudson et al, 1982). It is recommended that comprehensive resource inventories be completed before explorations begins. Guidelines for environmental impact studies are available from the U.S. Minerals Management Service. The many deleterious effects of oil spills in a tropical area (Caribbean Panama) with coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrass beds are described in detail in Keller and Jackson (1993) and Marshall (1990).

Methods Reef Fish Surveys Nine shallow coral reefs in the Miskito Cays area (Fig. 2) were surveyed during June 1996. A video camera, in an underwater housing, was used to photograph fish around each of the nine reef sites. At each site we swam reef-edge transects that measured approximately 100 feet in length. All fish that we could see on both sides of the transects were photographed. It took approximately 5 minutes to complete a 100 foot transect and in the later sets of transects we timed the transects instead of measuring their lengths. At each site the cameraman swam slowly along a section of the reef until either he reached the 100 foot mark or until an alarm signaled the end of a five-minute interval. At this time an assistant would swim to the cameraman and hold up a sign marking the end of a transect. Stopping alarms, from a underwater watch, were audible on the videotapes. Each new transect was begun with a shot of a sign which gave the name of the reef and the transect number. The timer started after the sign had been photographed. After information about the reefs was recorded by the assistant. Depth, location on the reef, bottom type, etc. were recorded on an underwater slate. After completing the field work all of the videotapes were reviewed in order to identify fish species and to count individuals. The videotape originals were kept in Nicaragua while copies of the originals were taken to Florida. Fish counts per transect were averaged for each reef. Most fish were identified to species. Large schools of I small bait fish were not included in the counts.

FIGURE 2. Map of the offshore section of the Miskito Coast Protected area. All nine reefs censused for fish are within the shaded area.

Site Descriptions All nine reef sites were in shallow water (1 -S meters) and were usually surrounded by shallow flats. Seagrasses (Thalassia testudinum or Syringodium filiforme) were the dominant plant species on each reef flat. The base of each reef and the seaward slopes were covered with large areas of unconsolidated coral rubble. Much of the rubble was covered with a thick coating of algae (Fig. 3A). Figure 3. Habitat types of the Miskito Cays reefs. A, Algae and hydroid colonies on unconsolidated coral rubble in back reef area; B, the coral (Millepora sp.) on a Miskito Cay's reef; C, sea plumes (Pseudopterogorgia sp.) in the back reef area; D, a stony coral (Siderastrea siderea) on a shallow fore reef.

A few scleractinian corals (Fig. 3D) were seen on the leeward side of most reefs. Fire coral (Millepora spp.) (Fig. 3B) and soft corals (Fig. 3C) were present in abundance in some back reef areas. Most live scleractinian corals were found on the seaward edges of the reefs. Acropora palmata (Fig. 4) and several species of non-branching corals (Diploria sp., Siderastrea sp., and Montastrea sp.) varied in abundance from reef to reef. general the seaward-most reefs (Ned Thomas and Witties Reefs) seemed to have the best developed coral assemblages. Water clarity was best at these two reefs during o June visit.

Fish assemblages Thirty-five species of fish were counted in our videotaped transects (Appendix 1). Twelve species were herbivorous fishes. The abundance of herbivores exceeded.

the density of carnivores. Scaridae (Scams spp. and Sparisoma spp., Fig. 6) and a kyphosid (Kyphosus sp.) were the most abundant fishes on mast reefs (Figs. 7-15). Parrot fish and chubs are strictly herbivorous species which can feed on a wide variety of marine algae and plants. Pomacentrids (Fig. 16) were also abundant on most reefs.

Three species of snappers (Fig 17) were present on several reefs but were not abundant on any reef. Groupers were seen on occasion beyond camera range and were not counted on our transects. A jewfish (Fig. 18) (Epinephelus itajara) was captured from beneath a large coral head on Witties Reef. Hogfish (Lachnolainus maximus) were commonly seen on most reefs. Four species of grunts (Haemulon album, H. macrostomum, H. flavolineatum ,and H. sciurus) were also counted (Fig. 19). Their abundances varied greatly from reef to reef. Large schools of small Menidia and other schooling fishes were videotaped but were not counted. Two species of sharks (Carcharinus perezí and Ginglymostoma cirratum) were seen on Witties Reef. The reef shark was attracted by fish blood and entrails that were washed overboard by the crew while we were diving. Most fish of possible commercial importance were juveniles to small adults. Hogfish (Lachnolainus maximus), some of the haemulonidae (grunts), and the balistidae (trigger fish) were exceptions to this observation. Yellow tail snappers on the reefs surveyed during this trip were all quite small « 12 inches). Other snappers were also . well below the sizes required to be commercial importance.

Discussion The shallow reefs of the Miskito Cays area are typical of other shallow reefs along the coast of Central America. Water clarity is generally lower on continental reefs, as these would be classified, and coral development is not as great as that seen on insular reefs. The fish assemblages of the Miskito reefs reflect the habitat in which they are found. Coral reef fish communities are usually consistent within loose zones of coral zonation throughout the Canobean (Alevizon et al.,1985). Many herbivorous species are seen on the shallow Miskito Cays reefs within the patch reef and reef crest zones, used in this study, and this is presumably due to the lush carpet of algae that is characteristic of these shallow reef zones. This type of habitat would also support a wide variety of invertebrates and small fish on which small carnivorous fishes would forage. It also serves as an important juvenile habitat for lobsters. . Few fish of commercial importance and of adequate size for reef fish fisheries were seen on the shallow reefs. Yellow-tail snapper were the most abundant species of commercial importance but most of the specimens on these reefs were quite small. Perhaps this represents a seasonal phenomenon but large yellow-tail usually move off the shallow reefs into deep water as they matute. In south Florida large yellow tail snappers are typically caught over reefs and rocky bottoms on the continental slope. This is also true of groupers and other snappers on the Florida reefs (Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council 1989) and is presumably true of the fish of the shallow reefs of t}\e Miskito Cays. Most existing and future reef fish fisheries would thus focos on the reefs and hard bottoms in deepwater(>15 m} that surround the Miskito Cays.

Recommendations Shallow water reefs within the Miskito Coast Protected Area should be set aside because of their importance an juvenile and sub-adult habitat for several commercially important species, as artisanal fishing grounds and protected from any commercial exploitation. Fishing can drastically alter the species composition of reef fish assemblages on shallow, water reefs (1994). Intense fishing on the MCP A shallow reefs could drastically affect recruitment from these reefs into the more commercially viable deep water fisheries. No commercial fin fishing operations should be allowed within the waters of the MCP A Spear fishing should also be prohibited within the Protected Area. Other forms of fishing that are environmental harmful (e.g., explosives and poisons) should also be prohibited. If fish traps are allowed they should be constructed so that small fish can escape. Size and bag limits reef fish are not needed at the present time but might be necessary in the future as fishing pressure increases. It mar be possible to develop a small trade in aquarium fish collected from the shallow reefs but it was our impression that the fishes typically sought after by tropic fish collectors are not abundant on the MCP A' s reefs. A survey of the reefs conducted during the dry season months mar prove that this statement is false. We recommend that certain reefs within the Protected Area be set aside as protected zones for ecotourism. All fishing activities, including artisanal fishing, would be prohibited within these areas. Ned Thomas Reef and the Witties Reefs would be good choices for this type of protection. They are relatively well developed reefs and are located within a reasonable distance of Puerto Cabezas. If an ecotourism business develops on the Miskito Coast dive boats could easily reach these two reef I areas within 3-5 hours from the piel at Puerto Cabezas.

APPENDIX VI

Field Program for Fisheries Management in the Cayos Miskitos, Nicaragua

Chris R. Jones

LOBS2-1 – LANGOSTAS – ENTREVISTAS CON NASEROS APCM (MARENA – EIA – NOAA) (archivo: lob2 – 1b.doc)

Fecha

Tipo embarc.

Nombre embarc.

Área de Pesca Cuadrante/ Cuadricila

Localización (GPS) Longitud Latitud

Duración de nasas Capturando (días) Con el Se Se Se Se anota Si es Con los obtiene la obtiene entrevistado anota el tipo de posible se datos de se obtiene la la embarcaci obtiene el ubicación posición posición N de día del con el fecha ón en que nombre que su pescador del GPS se en que se hace la de la mediante pescad capturando. se entrevista embarcaci registra lectura de mediant ón en el hace la lectura GPS mapa entrevi sta cuadricula Garmin en de un GPS caso se do de Garmin puede Reserva utilizar el en caso en que se cuadrante de moto puede nave se utilizar encuentra el de el motopescador nave

Levante de Nasas C/C S/C

Se encue ntran las nasas que tienen captura

Se encue ntran las nasas que no tienen captura

Appendix 2, Page 3

Captura Profund. Langostas Brazadas

Tipo de Fondo

Observaciones

Se anota el tota de las langostas que sacó durante la faena

Si es posible se anota el relieve marino, auxiliad o por medio de ecosond a de la M/Palpa

las Se anotan más observaciones relevantes. Ejemplo: a veces se puede hacer mediciones biológica de los pescadores entrevistados cuando llegan a sus casitas luego de desembarco y los datos irán acorde con este formato.

Se registra la profundid ad del lugar de pesca promedio del ecoson-de la M/Palpa

FIELD PROGRAM FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT CAYOS MISKITOS, NICARAGUA

BACKGROUND USAID's Environmental Initiative for the Americas (EIA) funded a project to prepare fishery management plans directed toward conservation and sustainable harvest of fisheries resources in the Miskito Cays Protected Area (APCM) in northeastern Nicaragua. This project assists scientists and technicians at MARENA and the Central lnstitute for Hydrobiological Research (CIRH) to acquire, analyze and present biological and fisheries data related to management strategy development for shrimp, lobster, reef and lagoon fisheries in the Miskito I Coast Marine Reserve. Assistance focused on preparing recommendations for design and implementation of specific fisheries resource management strategies for the Reserve area, and for updating and improving the overall plan for management of the Reserve. A number of fisheries and coastal zone management specialists, primarily from the United States, made numerous visits to Nicaragua between September 1995 to October 1996 to obtain and analyze biological and fisheries information to prepare recommendations for fishery management - t plans. Four fisheries were the target of the investigation and management planning: spiny lobster, penaeid, shrimp, lagoon fish, and reef fish. This document reviews a program of field sampling that was developed over the course of the project. A longer-term objective of the EIA project is to transfer skills to MARENA and CIRH biologists and resource managers to enable them to continue the monitoring and management of the reserve area after the project is completed. Personnel from the Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC), a USAID contractor involved in preparation of the initial overall management plan for the APCM area, made up the field staff for the APCM program. Most of the CCC staff have been integrated Into MARENA's program for the region in late 1996. While much general biological and fisheries information was available from CIRH for the Atlantic coast as a whole, the US specialists found that little data had been collected in a systematic way that could provide a foundation for ongoing fishery management decisions by managers of the APCM. The science (and art) of fishery management requires a solid base o statistical information that describes not only the biology and life history of the animals involved but a demonstrable understanding of the dynamic relationship between the everchanging population of these animals and the effects fishing activities-over a time frame of several years or more-that can have a major impact on the size and structure of the fish populations in question. The NOAA/EIA project initiated for the first time a comprehensive I program to perform field assessment of both the animal populations and the specific fishing activity that is occurring in the APCM. Specifically, the following data or measurements are some of those required for science-based fishery assessment and management: x x x x x

Size and sex distribution of the fish population Relationship of fish size to reproduction Periods requiring protection of reproductive activities Total fishing effort Catch per unit effort

FIELD PROGRAM FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT CAYOS MISKITOS, NICARAGUA x Total harvest x Relative "fishing power" of different types of fishing gear x Selectivity of different types of fishing gear For the APCM fisheries, so me of these data could be obtained by using CIRH data or from sources, but because the protected area is unique biologically and harvest is by small-scale traditional fisheries, institution of a field program was necessary. The EIA specialists worked with the CCC biologists and, eventually, with CIRH biologists to design and implement a number field studies focused on lagoon fisheries and the lobster fishery. The CIRH data was considered sufficient for most of the shrimp fishery since most of the harvest is by Industrial vessels outside the boundaries of the protected area. Juvenile white shrimp are captured in j[ the lagoon fishery and were included In the lagoon field program. There is currently only a minimal fishery for reef fish and, no specific program was initiated. under the EIA project to systematically study this area. Concentration of effort was primarily on assessment of shallow water reef fish health and abundance. As the reef fish fishery develops, a program similar to the others should be begun.

FIELD PROGRAM FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT CAYOS MISKITOS, NICARAGUA

PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE FOR THE FIELD PROGRAM Personnel: MARENA provides a position for an aquatic biologist who is head of the APCM office in Puerto Cabezas, who also has substantial administrative responsibilities. The CCC staff, most of whom will be employed by MARENA after the project ends, consists of the following professional and semi-professional positions: 2 biologists; 1 fisheries technician/community liaison; vessel captain; vessel engineer. Formerly there was a position for master diver, but this position has gone unfilled since January of 1996. There are approximately six other persons employed at the APCM office who have administrative or security functions. Equipment: The following is a partial list of equipment that was available for the field work in the APCM: R/V Palpa -Diesel powered fiberglass vessel, 28-feet, speed 18-Knots, radar, GPS, color fishfinder/depth sounder, fuel 200 gallons in tanks, 200 additional as deck load; range 400 miles or about 4 days in the field; inflatable skiff with 25 HP outboard, swim platform. Capable vessel for short term field trips at sea in light to moderate weather. Overnight trips with as many as 8 persons have been successful, if not comfortable. Much maintenance has been deferred; electroni equipment not reliable, recurring steering problems with no backup. R/V Lam -Traditional dugout vessel with 40-HP outboard, 30 feet. Suitable for working in lagoons and for brief sea passages in light weather. Carries 6 persons relatively safely. Dive equipment -4 SCUBA outfits with regulator, Bouyancy Compensators, tanks, mask/fins/snorkel. AII in poor to fair condition. A Portable Poseidon air compressor not safe by U.S. standards). No other safe supply of dive air in .., Puerto Cabezas. Presently, there is no functioning decompression chamber in the area. Four new SCUBA tanks were purchased, as well as additional collecting and dive gear, such as bags, buoys, lines, masks, fins, snorkels, etc.. Hydrological sampling equipment -Secci disks, sub-surface sampling bottles, refraction salinometer, thermometers. Computers -Two pentium 75 computers and one laser printer were purchased for the project, through the TR&D capacity building project with MARENA. Trawl- small otter, for lagoon work provided by Mote Marine Laboratory. Other: The project purchased two handheld GPS units (Garmin 45); a binocular dissecting microscope, fish measuring devices, calipers, scales, etc.

TRAINING FOR FIELD PERSONNEL: Significant technical assistance was provided to train the MARENA and CCC biologists in techniques of obtaining and analyzing data needed for fisheries management. Training was primarily informal and "on-the-job" and included: development of sampling methods and plan~; for fisheries data; preparing forms for

FIELD PROGRAM FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT CAYOS MISKITOS, NICARAGUA collection of data, basic fishery management and stock assessment concepts; data entry and auditing in spreadsheet programs, using spreadsheet programs for analysis of data, and graphical presentation of data.

FIELD METHODS LOBSTER STUDIES -An attempt was made to collect lobster data in the Miskito Cays on a monthly basis, utilizing the Palpa. Specifically, interviews of fishermen, measurements of lobsters, and basic hydrologic information were planned. Due to vessel, budget, and weather constraints, these trips did not occur every month. However, data were utilized from these field samples the reports by Childress, and Marsh and Gallucci. TRANSECTS -Aerial transects were flown over the Cays on two occasions, in July and March, 1996. The purpose was to record fishing effort, primarily for lobsters, in and near the reserve. Weather was an issue for both flights, and it was determined that insufficient budget existed for these studies to be sufficient. Transects using the Palpa were also tried, but not considered effective, due to the distance which needed to be covered and time and fuel needed to cover the area. LAGOON STUDIES -Five sites in three lagoons were to be sampled each month, with data gathered on fishing activities and basic hydrology. In addition, five villages were convinced to gather daily data on harvest. Unfortunately, this occurred only at the end of the EIA project. Although some of this data is utilized in the lagoon report by Marshall, at least one full year of accurate and consistent data is needed for it to be of value. Data sheets are given in the appendix to this document, which clarify the measurements taken. These two sampling programs are continuing, so that a valuable timeline of information will be available for future analysis. Table 1 lists the field data collection formats that were developed under the EIA program along with the purposes for each sub-element. Appendix 1 contains several of the formats developed for use by APCM biologists. Appendix 2 shows a sampling protocol developed for the lobster field data by CCC biologist Marcos Williamson.

FIELD PROGRAM FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT CAYOS MISKITOS, NICARAGUA

TABLE 1. Field data collection forms (ACPM/EIA/NOAA)

LUTJANIDAE

Reef names

HAEMULIDAE

Reef names

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 7. Reef fish census at Farrell Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 8. Reef fish census at London Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 9. Reef fish census at Miskito Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 10. Reef fish census at Nasa Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute trawl

Figure 11. Reef fish census at Ned Thomas Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 12. Reef fish census at Porgee Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 13. Reef fish census at Uiplin Reef.

POMACENTRIDAE

Reef name

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 14. Reef fish census at White Reef.

Mean Individuals per five minute transect

Figure 15. Reef fish census at Witties Reef.

DATOS HIDROLÓGICOS DEL AREA MARINA Y LAGUNAS DEL APCM (MARENA EIA – NOAA) Mes. Anotar el mes que se hizo las mediciones

Fecha

Hora

Se anota la fecha de la recolec de los datos

Se anota la hora de la toma de datos

Posición Cuadrante /Cuadríc. Con los datos de ubicación con el GPS se registra en el mapa cuadricula do de la reserva en que cuadrante y cuadrícula se encuentra el pescador.

Localización (GPS) Longitud Latitud

Se obtiene la posición del pescad. Mediante lectura de un GPS Garmin en caso se puede utilizar el de la moto - nave

Se obtiene la posición del pescador mediante lectura de un GPS Garmin en caso se puede utilizar el de la moto – nave.

Profund. (pies) Se registra en la profund. del lugar de buceo (pesca) por medio de la ecosonda de la motonave Palpa

Temperatura Sup medio Fondo

Se obtiene el agua con una cubeta o con el muestreado r luego se efectúa su medición con un termómetro graduado

Appendix 2, Page 5

Hidro-1 7-dec-95

Sup

Se obtien e el agua con una cubet ao con el muest reador luego se efectu a su medici ón con un refract rómetr o

Salinidad Medio Fondo

Turbidez

Corriente M/S Direcc. Las Las medicione medicione se hacen se hacen con un con una disco boya Secchi suelta a la deriva, se registran la dirección y la distancia con el GPS desde que se introduce la boya al agua hasta que se recoge.

Turbidez

En el caso de las mediciones se seleccionar on estaciones para efectuar dichas medidas. Normalm. en las líneas de los transectos utilizados para recolectar los datos de la actividad pesuera en el área.

Appendix 1. Reef fish and counts from video transects. Farrell Reef Haemulon album Lutjanus ápodos Pomacanthus arcuatus Sparisoma arcuatus Thalassoma bifasciatum Acanthurus chirurgus Ocyurus chrysurus Gerres cinereus Scarus coelestinus Acanthurus coerulus Stegastes fuscus Haemulon macrostomum Lachnolainus maximus Caranx rubber Sparisoma rubripinne Abudefduf saxatilis Haemulon sciurus Caranx spp Menidia spp. Scarus spp. Scarus taeniopterus Balistes vetula Anisostremus virginicus Sparisoma viride

5 13 1 1 1 1 6 2 42 2 36 5 3 2 3 37 1 1 1000 11 64 1 1 39

London Reef Haemulon a/bum Lutjanus ápodos Pomacan/hus arcuatus Tha/assoma bifasciatwn Ha/ichoeres bivittatus Acan/hurus chirurgus Ocyurus chrysurus Gerres cinereus Scarus coelestinus Stegastes fuscus Lutjanus griseus Haemulon macrostomum Lachnolainus maximus Sparisoma rubripinne

10 6 3 2 1 1 7 3 1 28 1 7 2 82

FIELD PROGRAM FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT IN THE CAYOS MISKITOS, NICARAGUA

Environmental Initiative for the Americas National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Agency for International Development October 1995 through September 1996

October 1995 through September 1996

Program Summary Prepared by Chris R. Jones Fisheries Consulting Services 4328 Burke Avenue North Seattle, Washington 98103

Appendix 2: Methodology and Protocols for Lobster Sampling – Prepared by Marcos Williamson CCC Biologist

INFORME A: Lic Balbo Muller Foster Dir Proyecto Cayos Miskitos/MARENA De: Lic Marcos Williamson C Ecólogo del Proyecto Cayos Miskitos ASTO: Informe de metodología de recopilación de datos de langostas Fecha: 2 de agosto 1996

El presente informe comprende la metodología utilizada para la recolección de datos provenientes de la actividad langostera dentro de la reserva. Luego de la primera gira experimental efectuado junto al Dr Trott en noviembre de 1995 se procedió a rediseñar los formatos iniciales para su mayor efectividad Actividad que realizaron los biólogos del proyecto junto al Sr Cris Jones en la semana comprendida entre el 6-10 de Dic 95 obteniéndose como producto un total de 5 formatos, cada uno para diferentes actividades asignándoles diferentes códigos. Estos son: ACTIVIDADES

1) El formato para entrevistas de pesca por buceo 2) El formato para entrevistas de pesca por nasas 3) El formato en muestreo biológico 4) El formato para datos hidrológicos 5) El formato para actividades pesqueras en el área

FORMATOS (códigos)

Lob1-2 Lob2-1 Lob2-2 Hidr01.doc Lob3 Lob4

Ejemplo de estos formatos se muestran a continuación con la explicación de la metodología utilizado para el llenado de sus respectivas casillas, cabe mencionar que en el rediseño de los formatos iniciales fueron tomándose en cuenta los formatos tradicionales utilizados por el CIRH con el fin de que en un futuro los datos pueden ser compatibles con la información base que poseen ellos para futuros análisis. Área de trabajo El área en la cual se esta recopilando datos de langostas es el Área marina de la reserva de los Cayos Miskitos que comprende un área desde el centro de la isla de los Cayos Miskitos un circulo de 40 kilómetros a la redonda (decreto 43-91).

Para efectos de estudio el área fue dividido en cuadrantes y cuadriculas basados en los formatos tradicionales del CIRH (ver mapa adjunto). A continuación los formatos utilizados para la recopilación de información y sus explicaciones.