Browse > Article

Effects of Hook and Bait Types on Bigeye Tuna Catch Rates in the Tuna Longline Fishery  

Kim, Soon-Song (National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI))
Moon, Dae-Yeon (National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI))
An, Doo-Hae (National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI))
Hwang, Seon-Jae (National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI))
Kim, Yeong-Seung (National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI))
Bigelow, Keith (Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center)
Curran, Daniel (Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Ichthyology / v.20, no.2, 2008 , pp. 105-111 More about this Journal
Abstract
A pelagic tuna longline research cruise in the eastern and central Pacific Ocean from September to October of 2006 was conducted to compare catch rates with the use of different hook type and bait combinations. Traditional tuna hooks (J 4) and three circle hook types (C15, C16, C18), along with five bait types (chub mackerel (CM), jack mackerel (JM), milkfish (MF), sardine (SD), and squid (SQ)) and hook number as a proxy for hook depth were evaluated for their effect on bigeye tuna catch rates (fish per 1,000 hooks) using Generalized Linear Models (GLMs). Results from 28 sets indicated significant differences in bigeye catch rates between individual longline sets and hook number. The GLM explained 33% of the deviance in bigeye catch rates with these two factors. An alternative model formulation included bait type which had a small effect (explaining 2.7% of the deviance) on catch rates. Hook type had a negligible and non-significant effect in the GLMs. These results indicate that all of the hooks and baits tested are equally effective at catching bigeye tuna and that hook number (depth) was the paramount operational factor in explaining bigeye tuna catch rates.
Keywords
Tuna hook; circle hook; bait type; catch rate; bigeye tuna; Thunnus obesus; Tuna longline;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Cooke, S.J. and C.D. Suski. 2004. Are circle hooks an effective tool for conserving marine and freshwater recreational catch and release fisheries? Aquat Consev; Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst., 14: 299-326   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Garrison, L.P. 2003. Summary of target species and protected resource catch rates by hook and bait type in the pelagic longline fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, 1992-2002. Contribution #PRD-02/03-08 of NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, FL, USA, pp. 1-10
3 SCTB. 2003. Report of the sixteenth meeting of the standing Committee on tuna and billfish, pp. 31-34
4 Trumble, R.J., S.M. Kaimmer and G.H. Williams. 2002. A review of methods used to estimate, reduce, and manage by catch mortality of Pacific halibut in the commercial longline groundfish fisheries of the Northeast Pacific. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp., 30: 88-96
5 Watson, J.W. and D.W. Kerstetter. 2006. Pelagic longline fishing gear: A brief history and review of reasearch efforts to improve selectivity. Mar. Tech. Soc. J., 40: 6-11
6 Gillman, E, E. Zollett, S. Beverly, H, Nakano, D. Shiode, K. Davis, P. Dalzell and I. Kinan. 2006. Reducing sea turtle bycatch in pelagic longline gear. Fish and Fisheries, 7: 2-23   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Kerstetter, D.W. and J.E. Graves. 2006. Effects of circle versus J-style hooks on target and non-target species in a pelagic longline fishery. Fish Res., 80: 239-250   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Kim, S.S., D.Y. Moon, C. Boggs, J.R. Koh and D.H. An. 2006. Comparison of circle hook and J hook catch rate for target and bycatch species taken in the Korean tuna longline fishery. J. Kor. Soc. Fish. Tech., 42: 210-216   과학기술학회마을   DOI
9 Lawson, T. (Editor) 2007. Western And Central Pacific Fisheries Commission Tuna Fishery Yearbook (Wes tern and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, 2007), available at ww.spc.int/oceanfish/Docs/Statistics/TYB.htm
10 Watson, J., D. Foster, S. Epperly and A. Shah. 2005. Fishing methods to reduce sea turtle mortality associated with pelagic longlines. Can. J. Fish. Aqua. Sci., 62: 965-981   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Read, A.J. 2007. Do circle hooks reduce the mortality of sea turtles in pelagic longlines? A review of recent experiments. Biol. Conserv., 135: 155-169   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Musyl, M.K., R.W. Brill, C.H. Boggs, D.S. Curran, T.K. Kazama and M.P. Seki. 2003. Vertical movements of bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus) associated with islands, buoys, and seamounts near the main Hawaiian Islands from archival tagging data. Fish. Oceanogr., 12: 152-169   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Falterman, B. and J. E. Graves. 2002. A preliminary comparison of the relative mortality and hooking efficiency of circle and straight shank ("J") hooks used in the pelagic longline industry. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp., 30: 80-87
14 Bigelow, K.A. and M.N. Maunder. 2007. Does habitat or depth influence catch rates of pelagic speices? Can. J. Fish. Aqu. Sci., 64: 1581-1594   DOI
15 Hoey, J.J. and N. Moore. 1999. Multi-species catch characteristics for the US Atlantic pelagic longline fishery. Captain's Report. National Marine Fisheries-NOAANMFS. Marfin Grant-NA77FF0543, (SK) Grant- NA86FD0113, pp. 1-78