Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fisheries Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fishres

The small-scale shark fisheries in the southern Gulf of Mexico:

Understanding their heterogeneity to improve their management
Juan Carlos Pérez-Jiménez ∗ , Iván Mendez-Loeza
El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR), Av. Rancho, Polígono 2-A, Ciudad Industrial, CP. 24500 Lerma, Campeche, Mexico

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Fisheries targeting sharks in the southern Gulf of Mexico are generally restricted to a few months or fish
Received 9 February 2015 in several months but participate in other fisheries. Sharks are also part of the by-catch in most fisheries
Received in revised form 1 July 2015 that use gill nets or longlines. The fisheries targeting sharks include the following: (1) a gill net fishery
Accepted 2 July 2015
for Rhizoprionodon terraenovae and Sphyrna tiburo in April–June and August–September, respectively, off
of northern Campeche; (2) a gill net fishery for Carcharhinus leucas in November–March off of central
Keywords:
and southern Campeche; (3) a longline fishery for C. leucas, Carcharhinus plumbeus and Sphyrna lewini
Shark fisheries
throughout the year off of the Tabasco state; (4) a longline fishery for C. leucas by medium-sized boats
Fleet dynamic
Fishery assessment
from the state of Yucatan; and (5) a fishery with gill nets for Carcharhinus limbatus off of the central coast
Management strategies of Tabasco in April–May. The decline in shark catches over the last two decades in Mexico prompted
a series of management measures, including the restricted issuance of fishing licenses, gear regulations
and closed seasons. Fishery management includes all shark species, but does not consider species-specific
differences in life history, the regional seasonality of the target fisheries, or differences in the gear types
that are used to target small or large sharks. We recommend the establishment of separate management
measures for small and large shark fisheries because, in addition to differences in the biological produc-
tivity of the target species, these two fisheries differ in the type of gear used and the seasonality and
region in which the fishing occurs. The fishery for R. terraenovae off of northern Campeche has charac-
teristics (same period and area over many years, catch composition dominated by adults and the target
species accounts for 80–90% of the catch) that enable population assessments and the evaluation of the
efficacy of management measures. Further restrictions on the use of gear types that target large sharks
are recommended due to the vulnerability of those species (e.g., C. leucas).
© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction seasonal abundance of sharks and teleost species. In some coastal

Small-scale fishing boats in Mexico account for approximately
97% of the countryı́s marine fleet (Fernández et al., 2011). The
coastal fisheries in Latin America are often highly dependent on
local resources, making them highly vulnerable to collapse (Salas
et al., 2011). Additionally, some characteristics of these fisheries,
such as those involving multiple species, multiple gear types, land-
ing sites widely dispersed along coasts, and an intricate relationship
between fishers and money-lending fish traders (Chuenpagdee
et al., 2011) make both the assessment and management of these
fisheries extremely challenging.
The small-scale shark fishery in Mexico has been recognized as
part of a multi-species fishery that operates on the basis of the
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jcperez@ecosur.mx (J.C. Pérez-Jiménez).
communities, sharks represent a subsistence fishery between more
profitable fishing seasons for teleosts (Castillo-Géniz et al., 1998),
mollusks and crustaceans (Pérez-Jiménez et al., 2012). This fishery
is very heterogeneous because the type of vessels and gears used
vary regionally (Bonfil, 1997) and seasonally. Bonfil (1997) pre-
dicted that the high levels of exploitation in 1980s combined with
the absence of management strategies would lead to a decrease in
shark populations. Additionally, Castillo-Géniz et al. (1998) found
that shark stocks harvested in Mexican waters were at risk during
the 1990s due to an increasing demand for shark fishing licenses as
well as a lack of regulatory actions. The Mexican Atlantic shark fish-
ery experienced a 35% decline in catches from 1999 to 2008 (Diario
Oficial de la Federación, 2012a). Unfortunately, there is still a lack
of knowledge regarding the status of the populations and the catch
trends for individual species.
The first management strategy established in Mexico for shark
fisheries was a moratorium on the issuance of fishing permits in

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.07.004
0165-7836/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104
1993 as a precautionary measure to prevent the overfishing of
shark populations (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2012a). Addi-
tional measures were established by the Mexican Official Standard
for elasmobranchs in 2007. Management measures for shark fish-
eries in the Atlantic coast include gear restrictions, spatiotemporal
closures (in nursery areas) and prohibitions on the capture of select
elasmobranch species: sawfishes Pristis spp, the whale shark Rhin-
codon typus, the basking shark Cetorhinus maximus, the white shark
Carcharodon carcharias and devil rays of the genus Mobula and
Manta (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2007).
The most recent measure established by CONAPESCA (National
Commission of Aquaculture and Fisheries) was the closure of the
fishing season for all fisheries in which sharks are targeted or in
which sharks are caught as by-catch. In 2012 and 2013, the closed
season lasted May and June along the entire Mexican Atlantic coast,
as well as August for the state of Campeche and a portion of the state
of Tabasco (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2012b). In 2014, due
to a request from fishermen in the state of Campeche, the closed
season was modified to May and June in the states of Veracruz,
Tamaulipas (western Gulf of Mexico) and Quintana Roo (Caribbean
Sea) and from May 15 to June 15 and August in the states of Tabasco,
Campeche and Yucatan (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2014).
The lack of records regarding catch and fishing efforts by species,
as well as the heterogeneity of the shark fisheries makes man-
agement implementation and enforcement extremely difficult.
According to Hernández and Kempton (2003), traditional manage-
ment measures (license and gear restrictions, closed seasons, size
limits and catch quotas) have failed to prevent the overexploita-
tion of more than 80% of the fisheries in Mexico. Reeves et al. (2008)
stated that it is necessary to develop tools and approaches for using
information on fisher activity as well as data on exploited popula-
tions in formulating management strategies. Thus, it is necessary to
increase the knowledge on fleet dynamics and to identify the shark
fisheries that can be feasibly managed.
The primary objective of this study was to describe the shark
fisheries in the southern Gulf of Mexico and discusses strategies
Fig. 1. Fishing communities in the southern Gulf of Mexico. The numbers along the coastline (from 1 to 35) represent communities (the names of which are included in Table
2).
97
for their assessment and management. The small-scale fisheries
were described (i.e., effort, gears, areas, catch composition) using
fishery-dependent surveys; fleet and trade dynamics were assessed
via stakeholder interviews.
2. Methods
Following methods suggested by FAO (2001) and Morgan and
Burgess (2005), we characterized shark fisheries by establishing a
monitoring program for landings along a series of ports in the states
of Tabasco, Campeche and Yucatan, southern Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 1).
We also interviewed stakeholders (e.g., fishermen and permit hold-
ers) to complement the fishery-dependent surveys.
2.1. Fisheries and seasonality
We define a fishery as a group of boats using similar gear to
target the same assemblage of species or stocks during the same
time of year and in roughly the same region (Reeves et al., 2008). The
term “fishing resource” is used either for single species or groups
of species (e.g., octopus, mackerels, and sharks).
Most of the fishermen used small outboard motor boats 7.5–9 m
in length, made of fiberglass. Additionally, there are small inboard
motor boats 8–10 m in length, made of fiberglass or wood and
medium-sized inboard motor boats 15–18 m length, made of fiber-
glass or wood. The Mexican Official Standard for elasmobranchs
(Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2007) indicates that the small-
scale fleet is composed of boats 10.5 m long or smaller and that
the medium size fleet is composed of boats that are 10–27 m long.
During 2011 and 2013, we carried out weekly or monthly visits
to 35 communities in the states of Tabasco, Campeche and Yucatan
(Fig. 1) to characterize year-round fishery activity by monitoring
landings. Additional information was recorded using question-
naires for fishermen, permit holders and the managers of storage
plants in which the catch is usually stored prior to trade. Most
of the permit holders own a storage plant, boats and gear, and
98 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104
fishermen are generally only employees. The queries in the ques-
tionnaire included the target species by season (in order of
importance), number of boats involved in the fishery, fishing gears
by target species, fishing areas (distance from shore and depth) and
trade (prices and destination). We conducted 325 questionnaires
and made 3973 records of fishing landings.
The seasonality of the main fishing resources was described
using information from landings and questionnaires. The fishery
resources were arranged in order of importance according to the
results of the survey of landings and questionnaires, taking into
account the frequency of catches, the number of boats involved
in the fishery, seasonality and trade (e.g., price). The closed sea-
son was described according to the regulations described on the
CONAPESCA website (http://www.conapesca.sagarpa.gob.mx).
In the southern Gulf of Mexico, the Campeche Bank strongly
influences the seasonal abundance of marine resources and fishing
activities. The Campeche Bank is a large continental shelf around
the Yucatan Peninsula with a wideness varying from 30 to 216 km
and a depth of 10–200 m (Gío-Argaez et al., 2002) (Fig. 1). Hydrolog-
ical features in this area are highly seasonally dynamic due to river
inputs, especially from the Grijalva–Usumacinta River (Sanvicente-
Añorve et al., 2007). The Campeche Bank is characterized by a
warm tropical climate and is enriched with nutrients from land
that enable it to support a wide diversity of coastal-marine life and
habitats (Yáñez-Arancibia et al., 1999).
2.2. Sources of fishing mortality for sharks
The sources of fishing mortality for sharks were described
according to fisheries with similar gear, seasonality and fishing
area. Gear measurements (i.e., mesh size or hook length) were
obtained from the storage plants (unused gear types) or from the
boats at the landing sites. After landings, the fishermen were asked
Table 1
Fishing season by main resources in the region 1) without fishery for octopus, from Cuauhtemotzin, Tabasco (No. 1) to Isla Aguada, Campeche (No. 15),and in the region
2) with fishery for octopus, from Sabancuy, Campeche (No. 16) to El Cuyo, Yucatan (No. 35). The main fishing season indicated with color white (grey indicates low or null
catches) and close season indicated with black boxes.
about the gear characteristics (for verification), the operation of
the gear in the water column (i.e., drift or bottom set), the fishing
area (i.e., distance from shore, depth), the number of sets, and the
duration of the fishing trip (days). The sources of fishing mortality
for sharks were classified in order of importance according to the
questionnaires and landing surveys, taking into account the CPUE
of sharks, the objective of the fishery (targeting or not targeting
sharks), the size of the fleet involved in the fishery and seasonality
(months).
We also classified the fishing communities by the importance
of the shark catch (according to the CPUE of sharks in target and
non-target fisheries), the size of the fleet involved in the fisheries,
and seasonality (months) as follows: very low, low, medium, high
and very high. We also recorded the total number of active boats
by community to examine the relative importance of this figure for
overall fishing activity.
2.3. Catch composition of sharks
The landed sharks were identified to species, measured
(stretched total length in cm) and sexed. Data on the reproduc-
tive tracts were obtained when possible (measurements of oocytes,
uteri and embryos in females and the length of a clasper and its
calcification in males) to determine maturity stages. The calcifica-
tion of claspers was used to determine maturity in males according
to Clark and von Schmidt (1965). The first ovulation was used to
determine maturity in females according to Walker (2005) and
Pérez-Jiménez and Sosa-Nishizaki (2010). The catch per unit of
effort (CPUE) was estimated by fishery for the main species as the
number of sharks per days fished.
In this study, we used the term “small shark” to refer to small
shark species (maximum total length <150 cm) and the term “large
 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104 99

Table 2 in less fishing of other resources. In this region (# 2), the most
Importance for shark catches in coastal communities. SS = small sharks, mainly R.
important small-scale efforts focus on octopus, groupers (species of
terraenovae and S. tiburo; LS = large sharks, mainly S. lewini, C. falciformis, S. mokarran,
C. limbatus, and C. leucas. Shark Catches: VL = very low, L = low, M = medium, H = high, family Serranidae), snappers (species of family Lutjanidae), mack-
VH = very high. Numbers of communities correspond to numbers in the map of Fig. 1. erels (Scomberomorus maculatus and S. cavalla), a complex of coastal
teleost fishes (e.g., Cynoscion nebulosus, Lachnolaimus maximus and
No. Communities # boats Shark Target By-catch
catches SS LS SS LS
Trachinotus carolinus), sharks and rays (primarily the spotted eagle
√ ray Aetobatus narinari and the southern stingray Dasyatis ameri-
1 Cuauhtemotzin 53 VL
√ √ cana) (Table 1).
2 Sánchez Magallanes 400 L
√ √ √ In the region without octopus fishing (region 1, Tabasco and
3 Torno Largo 55 M
√ √
4 Puerto Ceiba 20 VL southern Campeche), the most harvested resource is the Ameri-
√ √ √
5 El Bellote 20 L can oyster (Crassostrea virginica in Sanchez Magallanes, community
√ √ √
6 Chiltepec 87 L
√ √ √ 2), and the most important small-scale fisheries are for gafftopsail
7 Pico de Oro 20 L
√ √ sea catfish (Bagre marinus), snappers, snooks (Centropomus undec-
8 Frontera 82 L
√ √ √
9 San Pedro 100 H imalis and C. poeyi), mackerels, stingray (D. americana), seabob
√ √
10 Nuevo Campechito 27 L
√ √
shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri) and sharks (Table 1). With the excep-
11 Emiliano Zapata 173 L tion of the fishery for shrimp (which primarily occurs in southern
√
12 San Antonio Cárdenas 20 VL
√ Campeche), these fisheries are active throughout the entire region.
13 Atasta 100 VL
√ √ Aquaculture for oyster influences the small-scale fleet dynamics in
14 Ciudad del Carmen 200 M
√ √
15 Isla Aguada 189 M western Tabasco and reduces the fishing effort for coastal resources
√ √
16 Sabancuy 191 M including sharks.
√ √ √
17 Champotón 365 M
√ Other important fisheries, such as the fishery for swimming crab
18 Villamadero 100 L
√ √ (Callinectes sapidus), crevalle jack (Caranx hippos) and ribbonfish
19 Seybaplaya 250 M
√ √ (Trichiurus spp.) are present in region one. There is also an impor-
20 Lerma 150 M
√ √ √
21 Campeche 400 VH
√ √ √
tant fishery for lobsters (Panulirus spp.) in region 2. However, these
22 Isla Arena 302 H fisheries do not affect the dynamics of the fleet regarding increases
√ √ √
23 Celestun 513 H
√ or reductions in the fishing effort or by-catch of sharks. The sea
24 Sisal 153 L
√ cucumber fishery (Holothuria floridana and Isostichopus badionotus)
25 Chuburna 208 L
√
26 Chelem 18 VL is an example of a fishery that has influenced shark catches. This
√ √ √
27 Puerto Progreso 145 M fishery began in 2011 in Yucatan and northern Campeche and led to
√
28 Chicxulub 97 L
√ √ a reduction in the fishing effort for small sharks (R. terraenovae and
29 Telchac 226 L
√ S. tiburo) in April and May of 2011 and 2012. This occurred because
30 San Crisanto 124 VL
√ √ √ √ more effort was allocated for sea cucumber capture. However, in
31 Dzilam de Bravo 362 M
√ √ √
32 San Felipe 243 L
√ √
2014, the fishing season for sea cucumber was reduced to the last
33 Rio Lagartos 310 L week of April and thus had a reduced influence on fleet dynamics.
√ √ √
34 Las Coloradas 101 L
√ √ √ √ The number of communities with fisheries targeting sharks
35 El Cuyo 343 H
decreased due to fisheries targeting more economically valuable
or seasonally abundant species and due to the decline of some
shark” to refer to large shark species (maximum total length shark populations (Table 2). In addition, with the exception of
>150 cm). The term “shark” refers to all shark species. some fishermen from northern Campeche and western Yucatan
(who target small sharks from April to June and a small number
3. Results in August–September), most of the fishermen who target small or
large sharks combine the use of several gear types in the same
3.1. Fishing fleets fishing trip (e.g., handline and longline for snappers and longline
for sharks). Some fishermen occasionally target exclusively large
We recorded 6147 small outboard motor boats that harvest sharks (e.g., one or two fishing trips per month). Therefore, the
seasonally abundant fishery resources (i.e., teleost fishes, elasmo- number of boats that target sharks varies according to commu-
branchs or octopus). Additionally, we recorded five small inboard nity and month. However, shark by-catch occurs in nearly all of the
motor boats from the community of Campeche that target small communities.
sharks throughout the year, and ten medium-sized boats from the In general, there is high seasonal overlap among fisheries in the
communities of Puerto Progreso and Dzilam de Bravo, Yucatan, that southern Gulf of Mexico. Fishermen sometimes change gear types
target sharks seasonally. The small-scale boats that target small three times per month (e.g., handlines, longlines or gill nets) or use
or large sharks carried out fishing trips lasting 3–8 days and 1–3 two gear types in the same fishing trip (e.g., gill nets with differ-
days, respectively; the medium-sized boats that target large sharks ent mesh sizes or longlines with different hook sizes) depending
carried out fishing trips lasting 10–15 days. on the seasonal abundance of the resources. This makes it difficult
to estimate fishing efforts by fishing gear. However, we provide
3.2. Fisheries and seasonality an approximation of the number of boats involved in each fishery
(Table 3).
The southern Gulf of Mexico can be divided into two regions
according to the dynamics of the small-scale fleet: (1) a region with- 3.3. Coastal communities and fishing resources in Tabasco
out a fishery for Mexican four-eyed octopus (Octopus maya) from
Cuauhtemotzin (community 1) to Isla Aguada (community 15), and In the state of Tabasco, nine main fishing communities are situ-
(2) a region with a fishery for octopus from Sabancuy (commu- ated from Cuauhtemotzin to San Pedro (Fig. 1, Table 2, communities
nity 16) to El Cuyo (community 35) (Fig. 1, Table 1). The fishery for 1–9) with approximately 837 active small-scale boats and 64 stor-
octopus was the most economically valuable in Yucatan and north- age plants. The fishery for catfish and stingray is the most important
ern Campeche and involved approximately 80% of the small-scale for the small-scale fleet (Table 3, fishery 3). However, the Ameri-
fleet from August to mid-December. Activity in this fishery resulted can oyster (aquaculture) represents the highest production volume.
100 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104

Table 3
Sources of fishing mortality for sharks (in order of importance) in southern Gulf of Mexico. Position of the gear at bottom (B) or drift (D). For gill nets is indicated the mesh
size (cm) and for longlines the length of the hook (cm). Gill nets made of polyamide multifilament are coded as PM. The codes for states are: Tabasco (T), Campeche (C) and
Yucatan (Y). The number of boats is an approximation.

No. Fisheries Fishing gears # boats Fishing areas (km from shore) States where it occurs

<20 20–50 >50 T C Y

√ √ √
1 Small sharks Gill net, nylon&PM (B,D) = 11.5 100–130
√ √ √ √
2 Mackerels Gill net, nylon (B,D) = 11.5 >1000
√ √ √
3 Catfish and Stingray Longline (B) = 4.5 150–200
√ √ √
4 Large sharks Longline (B) = 6–8 20–30
√ √ √
5 Eagle rays and Bull shark Gill net,PM (D) = 32–38 30–35
√ √ √
6 Large sharksa Longline (B) = 6 10
√ √
7 Teleost fishes Gill net, nylon (B,D) = 7–13 >500
√ √ √
8 Snappers and Groupers Longline (B) = 3–3.5 40–60
√ √
9 Groupers Longline (B) = 3–3.5 800–900
√ √ √
10 Groupersa Longline (B) = 3–3.5 100
√ √
11 Rays Gill net,PM (B) = 30–36 5–8
√ √
12 Large sharks Gill net,PM (D) = 30 10–15
√ √ √
13 Snook Gill net, nylon (B,D) = 15–18 250–300
√ √
14 Shrimp Gill net, nylon (B) = 5 150–200
√ √
15 Atlantic tripletail Gill net, nylon (B,D) = 20 30–40
√ √
16 Ribbonfish Gill net, nylon (B) = 6–8 50–60
√ √
17 Snappers Handline = 2.5-3 30–40
√ √
18 Sardine Gill net, nylon (B) = 4 >100
a
Medium size boats.

The oyster is harvested in the community of Sanchez Magallanes,
where most of the regional fishermen are involved in this activity.
When the oyster season is closed, fishing activities occur inside the
lagoons for fishes or shrimps. This dynamic causes a reduction in
the fishing pressure on coastal resources, including that for sharks.
Thus, the main source of fishing mortality for sharks in Tabasco
is the longline fishery for catfish and stingray (Table 3, fishery 3).
The catch is dominated by sub-adult and adult R. terraenovae and S.
tiburo, as well as juvenile S. lewini and the silky shark Carcharhinus
falciformis. However, S. tiburo primarily appear in catches in the
community of San Pedro (in the border with the state of Campeche)
and are rare in the other communities of Tabasco.
The second most important source of mortality is the bottom
longline fishery for large sharks (Table 3, fishery 4). The catch in
this fishery is dominated by sub-adult and adult C. leucas, S. lewini
and C. plumbeus. This fishery is sporadic because it depends on the
availability of the gear and bait (fishes of the family Scombridae),
and the longline fishery for sharks is the secondary gear in some
trips to target catfish and stingray or snappers. However, some fish-
ermen from Torno Largo and Pico de Oro exclusively targeted large
sharks during some trips.
Another important source of mortality for sharks is the drift gill
net fishery in the community of Chiltepec (Table 3, fishery 12).
The catch is dominated by adult male C. limbatus. Another less
important source of mortality for neonates and young juveniles
of R. terraenovae is the ribbonfish fishery (Table 3, fishery 16). The
fishery for snappers with handline (Table 3, fishery 17) occasion-
ally catches the chain dogfish Scyliorhinus retifer, the cuban dogfish
Squalus cubensis and the dusky smoothhound Mustelus canis.
3.4. Coastal communities and fishing resources in Campeche
There are 13 fishing communities in the state of Campeche.
These communities range from Nuevo Campechito to Isla Arena
(Fig. 1, Table 2, communities 10–22), with approximately 2467
active small boats and 226 storage plants. The most important fish-
ery resources in the state of Campeche are octopus and the seabob
shrimp, followed by some teleost fishes, such as mackerels, snap-
pers and the common snook (Centropomus undecimalis). Sharks are
important in this state because small sharks (R. terraenovae and S.
tiburo) are seasonally abundant off the northern region and C. leucas
is common off the central and southern regions.
Thus, the primary source of shark mortality in the state of
Campeche is the fishery targeting small sharks (Table 3, fishery 1) in
the communities of Campeche and Isla Arena (Table 2). This fish-
ery primarily targets sub-adult and adult R. terraenovae, S. tiburo
and blacknose Carcharhinus acronotus, as well as juvenile S. lewini.
The second most important source of mortality is the fishery for
mackerels (Table 3, fishery 2), in which sub-adult and adult R. ter-
raenovae are common by-catch. Additionally, neonates and young
juveniles of R. terraenovae and S. tiburo are a very common by-catch
in the fishery for a complex of coastal teleost fishes that uses differ-
ent types of gill nets (Table 3, fishery 7). Another important source
of mortality is the target fishery for large sharks in Champotón and
Ciudad del Carmen (Table 3, fishery 5). Sub-adult and adult C. leucas
are common in that fishery. In the community of Ciudad del Car-
men, adult male C. limbatus are sometimes landed in great numbers
over a short period of time during their seasonal movements.
Small shark sub-adults and adults as well as large shark juve-
niles are commonly caught as by-catch in the fisheries for catfish,
stingray, snook and Atlantic tripletail. The snook fishery also cap-
tures adult male C. limbatus and S. lewini. Neonates of small sharks,
such as R. terraenovae and S. tiburo, are seasonally common in the
shrimp fishery. Nurse shark Ginglymostoma cirratum is occasionally
caught in the fishery for rays (Aetobatus narinari and D. americana,
Table 3, fishery 11).
3.5. Coastal communities and fishing resources in Yucatan
There are 13 fishing communities in the state of Yucatan. These
communities range from Celestun to El Cuyo (Fig. 1, Table 2, com-
munities 23–35) and encompass approximately 2843 active small
boats and 85 storage plants. Octopus and grouper represent the
most important fishery resources in Yucatan. Other important
resources include snappers, mackerels and lobsters. The primary
source of fishing mortality for sharks is the target fishery for small
sharks and mackerels with gill nets (Table 3, fisheries 1 and 2).
The fishery in Celestun and Dzilam de Bravo primarily targets sub-
adult and adult R. terraenovae and S. tiburo. Juvenile C. limbatus and
the spinner shark Carcharhinus brevipinna are also caught in the
community of El Cuyo.
The fishery targeting large sharks represents another source of
shark mortality. Harvesting in this fishery is carried out by at least
10 medium-sized boats (Table 3, fishery 6) from Puerto Progreso
 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104 101

Table 4 ted eagle ray and bull shark was dominated by females (81%), adults
Shark species (n = 21) recorded by monitoring surveys at landing sites in southern
representing 53% of those (Table 5).
Gulf of Mexico from 2011 to 2014.

Species # sharks
3.7. Organizational structure of the fleets
Rhizoprionodon terraenovae 19106
Sphyrna tiburo 6130
Sphyrna lewini 2024 The small-scale fishing fleets in the southern Gulf of Mexico
Carcharhinus acronotus 564 have several similar organizational characteristics. First, most of
Carcharhinus falciformis 201 the fishermen are employees with limited decision on the choice
Sphyrna mokarran 76 of the target species and trade. These fishermen also do not receive
Carcharhinus limbatus 75
Carcharhinus leucas 67
governmental benefits for their work (e.g., government subsidies).
Carcharhinus porosus 52 Second, the permit holders often own multiple boats (e.g., 2 or 20),
Carcharhinus plumbeus 46 make decisions about the choice of the target species (and provide
Carcharhinus perezii 45 specific fishing gear to fishermen), store and/or sell their products
Carcharhinus brevipinna 37
to local or regional dealers, and receive governmental subsidies
Isurus oxyrinchus 17
Ginglymostoma cirratum 16 (e.g., for gasoline). Dealers make decisions on the trade of the fish-
Galeocerdo cuvieri 7 ing products and frequently develop commercial relationships with
Mustelus norrisi 3 permit holders. Lastly, some fishermen are permit holders, how-
Scyliorhinus retifer 3 ever, these fishermen own only a single boat, choose the target
Squalus cubensis 2
Mustelus canis 1
species and make commercial relationships with dealers or permit
Carcharhinus signatus 1 holders (who have a storage plant) to sell their fishing products.
Negaprion brevirostris 1 The organizational structure can change among communities, and
Total 28,474 complex interactions between stakeholders are common.

and Dzilam de Bravo in November–March and June–July. Fishing 4. Discussion

operations for these boats are not restricted to the coast of Yucatan;
they can also fish along the coasts of Campeche, Tabasco, and poten-
tially northern Quintana Roo. Despite an intense longline fishery
for groupers in Yucatan, shark catches are low. The fleet of small-
scale boats strongly overlaps with the distribution of small sharks
or large shark juveniles. However, the hook size used in this fishery
is small. The medium-size boats operate farther from the shore,
thereby reducing the overlap with the distribution of abundant
small sharks (Table 3, fisheries 9 and 10). The catches of sharks
in the other two fisheries in Yucatan are also very low (Table 3,
fisheries 5 and 18).
3.6. Shark species and catch composition
We recorded 28,474 sharks belonging to 21 species (Table 4).
Four species accounted for 97.7% of the total number of sharks
recorded in the landing sites: R. terraenovae (67%), S. tiburo (21%), S.
lewini (6.9%) and C. acronotus (2%). In 2014, monitoring was focused
on the small shark fishery from the community of Campeche. Thus,
the number of sharks by species was biased for R. terraenovae and
S. tiburo. The highest catch per unit of effort was 13 R. terraenovae
/day in the fishery targeting small sharks (Table 5). The catch per
unit of effort for large sharks (S. lewini, C. leucas and C. plumbeus)
was less than one shark/day (Table 5).
The catches of sharks in the fishery targeting small sharks
included a low percentage of females (30%) of R. terraenovae, most
of which were adults (93%). This fishery is also composed of 48%
and 46% of female S. tiburo and C. acronotus, respectively, adults
representing a low percent of females for both species (23% and
24%) (Table 5). Only juveniles of both sexes were observed for S.
lewini in this fishery. The catches in the fishery for mackerels are
composed of 29% female R. terraenovae, adults accounting for 62%
of these (Table 5).
The shark by-catch in the catfish and stingray fishery consisted
of 41% females from R. terraenovae with a low percentage of adults
(18%). The by-catch included 57% females of S. lewini with no
records of adult females (Table 5). The catches of large sharks in
the fishery with longlines in Tabasco include a lower percentage
of females than males; the percentage of adult females was low
in S. lewini (6%) and C. plumbeus (14%) and high in C. leucas (83%)
(Table 5). The catch composition of C. leucas in the fishery for spot-
In the southern Gulf of Mexico, fisheries targeting sharks are
restricted to a few months of activity. When the season includes
several months (or the entire year), activities in these fisheries are
alternated with those in others. In addition, sharks are part of the
by-catch in most of the fisheries that use gill nets or longlines. In
general, the target and non-target shark fisheries include multiple
species and multiple gear types. It is common to change fishing gear
seasonally or between consecutive fishing trips; several gear types
can also be used during the same trip. Considering the heterogene-
ity of the small-scale fisheries in southern Gulf of Mexico, fisheries
that use specific gear sets targeting sharks (e.g., longline or gill nets
for large sharks) or the fisheries that target sharks during the same
period and that fish the same area over several years (e.g., the fish-
ery for small sharks off of northern Campeche) are more feasible
for assessment and management.
In Mexico, there is a moratorium on the issuance of new permits
for shark fishing. Other regulations, such as gear restrictions, the
prohibition of capturing some species and closed seasons are also in
effect (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2007, 2012b, 2014). Notably,
management does not consider the activity of the fishermen nor
the associated fleet dynamics. Additionally, the regulations blan-
ket all shark species (with the exception of prohibiting the capture
of some specific species). This likely lacks efficiency because differ-
ent species receive varying benefits depending on their life history
and their interactions with fisheries. The decrease in the catch
frequency of shark species in the southern Gulf of Mexico (Pérez-
Jiménez et al., 2012) and the decline of the official catch records of
sharks in Mexico (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2012a) indicates
the necessity for management strategies that correspond to spe-
cific regions and that take into account fleet dynamics and the life
history characteristics of the species in the catch.
However, assessments of shark fisheries in Mexico are based
on the time series of official catch records, which are divided into
only three categories: “cazón” (small sharks and juveniles of large
sharks, 1.5 m total length or smaller), “tiburón” (large sharks 1.5 m
or longer) or rays (separate from the “cazón” or “tiburón” group
since 1997). This classification creates challenges for the analy-
sis of catch trends by species and in determining which species
have declined (Pérez-Jiménez et al., 2012). Additionally, the lack of
records on fishing effort make it impossible to determine whether
102 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104

Table 5
Catch composition of the main shark species in the main fisheries.

Species TL (cm) (%) females (%) adult females CPUE (Sharks/day of fishing)

Fishery for small sharks

R. terraenovae 47–113 30 93 13
S. tiburo 55–108 48 23 4.3
C. acronotus 54–126 46 24 0.9
Fishery for mackerels
R. terraenovae 58–101 29 62 3.5
Fishery for catfish and stingrays
R. terraenovae 32–112 41 18 0.65
S. lewini 44–146 57 0 0.73
Fishery for large sharks (Longline)
S. lewini 110–277 33 6 0.3
C. leucas 190–270 41 83 0.17
C. plumbeus 113–243 36 14 0.17
Fishery for eagle ray and bull shark (Gill net)
C. leucas 114–276 81 53 0.2

catch fluctuations are due to changes in shark abundance or to
changes in the fishing effort regime (Bonfil, 1997). The sustain-
able management and monitoring of small-scale shark fisheries
therefore requires alternative strategies.
4.1. Considerations for management
Ellis et al. (2008) raised several questions regarding the man-
agement of elasmobranchs, such as how to assess the status of
elasmobranch stocks given the frequent lack of appropriate data;
how best to manage low productivity species, particularly in a mul-
tispecies context; how best to manage species complexes where
there may be limited species-specific information and contrasting
life histories; and how to evaluate the efficacy of potential man-
agement measures.
Following the questions suggested by Ellis et al. (2008): firstly,
shark fisheries in Mexico are data-poor fisheries. These fisheries
fit the characteristics suggested by Pilling et al. (2008) in which
the best scientific information available is not sufficient to deter-
mine reference points and the current stock status with respect to
such reference points. Additionally, to reduce the risk of the over-
exploitation of low-productivity species (e.g., C. leucas), managers
should consider prohibiting the use of gear targeting vulnerable
species (e.g., longlines and gill nets for large sharks). To address
species complexes with contrasting life history, we propose differ-
ent management strategies for fisheries targeting small and large
sharks (as explained below). Finally, the efficacy of management
measures can be evaluated primarily in some specific fisheries such
as the target fishery for small sharks off of northern Campeche.
Management strategies for the southern Gulf of Mexico should
take various factors into account, such as (1) differences in the life
history parameters of the shark species, (2) the regional seasonality
of the fisheries targeting sharks, and (3) differences in the types of
gear used to target sharks.
4.1.1. Life history parameters
Current management of shark fisheries in Mexico does not con-
sider differences in life history parameters between species or
groups of species. With the exception of prohibitions on catching
C. carcharias, C. maximus and R. typus, the management measures
are applicable to all species (Diario Oficial de la Federación 2007,
2012b, 2014). Life history parameters are related to biological pro-
ductivity (Smith et al., 1998; Walker, 1998) and the risk of species
extinction (Dulvy and Forrest, 2010). It is thus important to con-
sider these parameters in shark fishery management. The fisheries
for the two main shark groups in official Mexican catch records,
(“cazón” or small sharks and “tiburón” or large sharks) can be used
in establishing management strategies. Small sharks are known to
have higher biological productivity than large sharks (Smith et al.,
1998; Walker et al., 1998).
Among the commercially fished sharks in the southern Gulf of
Mexico, the small shark species group includes R. terraenovae, S.
tiburo and C. acronotus, and the large shark species group includes
S. lewini, C. falciformis, S. mokarran, C. leucas and C. limbatus. There
is variability inside these groups regarding life history parameters
(e.g., C. acronotus versus R. terraenovae and S. tiburo). However, this
is a practical division that takes into account the fact that target
fisheries differ for each group (small or large sharks) in the southern
Gulf of Mexico (there are differences in fishing areas, seasonality
and the type of gear used). The management of sharks in the Atlantic
coast of U.S.A. considers three groups (large coastal, small coastal
and pelagic) based also on the fishery in which the sharks were
caught (and not on biological factors).
4.1.2. The regional seasonality of the target fisheries
The most common feature of shark fisheries is the seasonality of
the catches, which primarily depends on changes in species abun-
dance due to seasonal movements. In some regions of Mexico, high
shark catches occur in a short period of time during seasonal move-
ments, as demonstrated in the Gulf of Mexico (Castillo-Géniz et al.,
1998) and the Gulf of California (Pérez-Jiménez et al., 2005; Bizzarro
et al., 2009). Along the coast of Veracruz and Tamaulipas, (i.e., west-
ern Gulf of Mexico), seasonal movements of R. terraenovae and C.
limbatus increase their interaction with fisheries (Castillo-Géniz
et al., 1998). However, high catches of sharks are intermittent, and
the catch composition of these fisheries changes across consecutive
trips with the alternating dominance of teleost fishes or sharks.
The aggregation of R. terraenovae and S. tiburo between mid-
April to June and from August to September, respectively, enables
a catch period of at least two months for each species. Rhizopri-
onodon terraenovae account for more than 80% of the catch for
approximately 100–130 boats in April–June in areas between 20
and 50 km from shore, and S. tiburo account for 50–80% of the
catch of approximately 30 boats in August–September in coastal
areas (<20 km from shore). The characteristics of the fishery for
R. terraenovae enable the implementation of specific management
strategies and the evaluation of their efficacy. The reduction in the
number of boats starting in August is due to a change in the allo-
cation of the fishing effort toward the octopus fishery. The catch
of S. tiburo is accompanied by a high percentage of coastal fishes
in August–September, which makes management more difficult.
However, reductions in the fishing effort (due to the fishery for
octopus) led to a decrease in the fishing pressure on S. tiburo. Given
the dynamic nature of these regional fisheries, it is imperative
that managers consider these variations when new regulations are
established.
 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104
4.1.3. Fishing gear types used to target sharks
The gear used to target small sharks is the same as is used to
catch mackerels and other teleost fishes. However, the gear used
to target large sharks is exclusive. Although the Mexican Official
Standard for elasmobranchs (NOM-029-PESC-2006) has gear spec-
ifications for shark fisheries, there is a lack of studies on gear
type selectivity that can be used to protect the most vulnerable
individuals (e.g., mesh size regulations to facilitate the escape of
the smallest or largest individuals). Gear specifications for small-
scale fisheries in the NOM-029-PESC-2006 included longlines with
straight hooks 64 mm or longer or circle hooks 45 mm or longer. Gill
nets that are 750 m long, have a 152.4 mm mesh size, and are made
of polyamide multifilament or monofilament have been authorized.
This measure is difficult for fishermen to accommodate because of
the multi-species nature of fisheries and changes in the abundance
of sharks and teleost fishes according to the week or month, as well
as due to the by-catch of sharks when other species are being tar-
geted. This type of measure is more appropriate for target fisheries
where the catch composition is dominated by one or two species
with similar life history characteristics (e.g., the fishery for small
sharks off of northern Campeche). There is a need for a manage-
ment plan that includes a study on gear selectivity in an attempt
to implement measures that reduce the catch of small sharks in
vulnerable stages (e.g., gravid females).
4.2. Recommendations for the management of the target fishery
for small and large sharks
The fishery targeting small sharks off of northern Campeche
needs to establish new requirements that integrate more appro-
priate management strategies such as rights-based fishing. For
example, (1) permits should be issued for targeting small sharks, (2)
permit holders need to fill out logbooks that include information
on fishing operations and catch by species (as established in NOM-
029-PESC-2006), and (3) continuous landing monitoring surveys
are needed. As explained above, the characteristics of this fishery
enable the implementation of a specific management strategy and
the evaluation of its efficacy. The fishery targets small sharks during
the same period and in the same fishing region each year.
The issuance of specific permits for targeting small sharks is
urgent for generating time series for catches and efforts to assess
catch trends. Most of the permit holders with boats targeting small
sharks have no fishing permits for targeting sharks. These fisher-
men own a fishing permit for targeting teleost fishes and are only
allowed to have 10% by-catch. However, their boats have a substan-
tially greater by-catch of sharks, primarily during April-June (80%
or more). Permit holders are willing to give true records of their
shark catches. However, CONAPESCA (the National Commission of
Aquaculture and Fisheries) only allows the recording of 10% of the
by-catch of non-teleost fishes. This contributes to an underestima-
tion of the catch records of small sharks in the official statistics. The
Mexican National Fisheries Institute (INAPESCA) and CONAPESCA
are aware of this situation because permit holders have described
it in several forums. The fishing authority in Mexico (CONAPESCA)
must decide whether to give fishing permits to legally target small
sharks off of northern Campeche or enforce the current restriction
of no more than 10% of non-teleost by-catch. The first option is
viable because the number of boats is relatively small (approxi-
mately 100–130 because the fishing area is farther from shore) and
because the fishery has been in existence for at least three decades.
The second option will likely be rejected by the permit holders and
fishermen, who will continue to fish illegally.
We recommend the issuance of fishing permits for targeting
small sharks and establishing a logbook system by species. This is
viable because catches are primarily composed of R. terraenovae in
April–June. The implementation of the logbook system and the con-
103
tinuous monitoring of shark catches will provide more thorough
information for the assessment of the populations and the evalu-
ation of management efficacy. Additionally, an observer program
for georeferencing catch composition by fishing areas and quantify-
ing the discarded by-catch is recommended (fishermen are willing
to cooperate). A strategy that controls the volume of catches, the
catch composition (e.g., by means of gear selectivity) and trade (e.g.,
prices) is sorely needed. From mid-April to June, there are high
catches of small sharks that results in the decrease of their price
from $35/kg to $14/kg (Mexican pesos). This phenomenon incen-
tivizes fishermen to catch as much as possible to maintain their
economic benefits.
Furthermore, assessments for the prohibition of gear used to
target C. leucas (e.g., longlines and gill nets) are recommended in
the near future. The economic impact of this measure will be min-
imal because the use of longline for large sharks is the secondary
gear in the small-scale fleet, and most of the fishermen who use
gill nets for large sharks in Campeche have no fishing permits. In
this scenario, it is not possible to provide fishing permits to these
fishermen because C. leucas is vulnerable to overfishing.
5. Conclusion
In conclusion, shark fisheries in southern Mexico are complex
and capture a variety of vulnerable species. This limits the sustain-
ability of these fisheries. We recommend separate management
strategies for small and large shark fisheries because (along with
differences in life history of the species) these fisheries differ in the
gear types that are used as well as in seasonality and region. The
fishery for R. terraenovae off of northern Campeche has character-
istics (same period and region consistently over many years, catch
composition dominated by adults, and the target species accounts
for 80–90% of the catch) that enable population assessments and
the evaluation of management efficacy. Increased restrictions on
the gear used to target large sharks are recommended due to the
vulnerability of those species (e.g., C. leucas).
Acknowledgements
We thank the fishermen of the artisanal fleet from Tabasco,
Campeche and Yucatan for allowing us to collect biological mate-
rial and for providing valuable information through interviews.
Special thanks to N.H. Cu-Salazar, F. Serrano-Flores, B. Aguirre y
G. Zamora for their help in the field. Special thanks to Matthew J.
Ajemian and Rod Fujita, whose valuable comments, edits and rec-
ommendations considerably improved this manuscript. Funding
was provided by the Environmental Defense Fund(Oceans Pro-
gram) and by CONACyT, project “CB-2008-101997-Z, Historias de
vida de los elasmobranquios que habitan en el Banco de Campeche”.
References
Bizzarro, J.J., Smith, W.D., Márquez-Farías, J.F., Tyminski, J., Hueter, R.E., 2009.
Temporal variation in the artisanal elasmobranch fishery of Sonora, Mexico.
Fish. Res. 97, 103–117.
Bonfil, R., 1997. Status of shark resources in the Southern Gulf of Mexico and
Caribbean: implications for management. Fish. Res. 29, 101–117.
Castillo-Géniz, J.L., Márquez-Farías, J.F., Rodríguez de la Cruz, M.C., Cortés, E., Cid
del Prado, A., 1998. The Mexican artisanal shark fishery in the Gulf of Mexico:
towards a regulated fishery. Mar. Freshwater Res. 49, 611–620.
Chuenpagdee, R., Salas, S., Charles, A., Seijo, J.C., 2011. Assessing and managing
coastal fisheries of Latin America and the Caribbean: underlying patterns and
trends. In: Salas, S., Chuenpagdee, R., Charles, A., Seijo, J.C. (Eds.), Coastal
Fisheries of Latin America and the Caribbean. FAO Fish. Aquac. Tech. Pap. No.
544, Rome, pp. 385–401, 430p.
Clark, E., von Schmidt, K., 1965. Sharks of the central gulf coast of Florida. Bull. Mar.
Sci. 15, 13–83.
Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2007. NOM-029-PESC-2006, Pesca responsable de
tiburones y rayas, especificaciones para su aprovechamiento. Publicada el 14
de Febrero del 2007. Ciudad de México.
104 J.C. Pérez-Jiménez, I. Mendez-Loeza / Fisheries Research 172 (2015) 96–104
Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2012. Carta Nacional Pesquera. Publicada el Viernes
24 de Agosto de 2012. Ciudad de México.
Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2012. Acuerdo por el que se modifica el Aviso por el
que se da a conocer el establecimiento de épocas y zonas de veda para la pesca
de diferentes especies de la fauna acuática en aguas de jurisdicción federal de
los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, publicado el 16 de marzo de 1994 para
establecer los periodos de veda de pulpo en el Sistema Arrecifal Veracruzano,
jaiba en Sonora y Sinaloa, tiburones y rayas en el Océano Pacífico y tiburones
en el Golfo de México. Publicado el 11 de Junio de 2012. Ciudad de México.
Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2014. Acuerdo por el que se modifica el Aviso por el
que se da a conocer el establecimiento de épocas y zonas de veda para la pesca
de diferentes especies de la fauna acuática en aguas de jurisdicción federal de
los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, publicado el 16 de marzo de 1994 para
modificar el periodo y zonas de veda de tiburones en el Golfo de México y Mar
Caribe. Publicado el 14 de Mayo de 2014, Ciudad de México.
Dulvy, N.K., Forrest, R.F., 2010. Life histories, population dynamics, and extinction
risks in Chondrichthyans. In: Carrier, J.C., Musick, J.A., Heithaus, M.R. (Eds.),
Sharks and Their Relatives II, Biodiversity, Adaptive Physiology, and
Conservation. CRC Press, pp. 639–679.
Ellis, J.R., Clarke, M.W., Cortés, E., Heessen, H.J.L., Apostolaki, P., Carlson, J.K., Kulka,
D.W., 2008. Management of elasmobranch fisheries in the North Atlantic. In:
Payne, A., Cotter, J., Potter, T. (Eds.), Advances in Fisheries Science 50 Years on
from Beverton and Holt. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 184–228.
FAO, 2001. La ordenación pesquera 1. Conservación y ordenación del tiburón. FAO
Orient. Tec. Pesc. Resp. No.4, Supl. 1, Roma, FAO, 2001. 66p.
Fernández, J.I., Álvarez-Torres, P., Arreguín-Sánchez, F., López-Lemus, L.G., Ponce,
G., Díaz de León, A., Arcos-Huitrón, E., del Monte-Luna, P., 2011. Coastal
fisheries of Mexico. In: Salas, S., Chuenpagdee, R., Charles, A., Seijo, J.C. (Eds.),
Coastal Fisheries of Latin America and the Caribbean. FAO Fish. Aquac. Tech.
Pap. No. 544, Rome, pp. 231–284, 430p.
Gío-Argaez, F.R., Machain-Castillo, M.L., Gaytán-Caballero, A., 2002. Los ostrácodos
de la Zona Económica Exclusiva de México Parte I. La Bahía de Campeche. Jaina.
13, 1–11.
Hernández, A., Kempton, W., 2003. Changes in fisheries management in Mexico:
effects of increasing scientific input and public participation. Ocean Coast.
Manage. 46, 507–526.
Morgan, A.C., Burgess, G.H., 2005. Fishery-dependent sampling: total catch, effort
and catch composition. In: Musick, J.A., Bonfil, R. (Eds.), Management
Techniques for Elasmobranch Fisheries. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap. No. 474, Rome, pp.
182–200, 251p.
Pérez-Jiménez, J.C., Sosa-Nishizaki, O., Furlong-Estrada, E., Corro-Espinosa, D.,
Venegas-Herrera, A., Barragán-Cuencas, O.V., 2005. Artisanal shark fishery at
Tres Marias Islands and Isabel Island in the Central Mexican Pacific. J.
Northwest Atl. Fish. Sci. 35, 333–343.
Pérez-Jiménez, J.C., Sosa-Nishizaki, O., 2010. Determining reproductive parameters
for population assessments of two smoothhounds (Mustelus californicus and
Mustelus lunulatus) from the northern Gulf of California, Mexico. Bull. Mar. Sci.
86, 3–13.
Pérez-Jiménez, J.C., Méndez-Loeza, I., Mendoza-Carranza, M., Cuevas-Zimbrón, E.,
2012. Análisis histórico de las pesquerías de elasmobranquios del sureste del
Golfo de México. In: Sánchez, A., Chiappa-Carrara, X., Pérez, B. (Eds.) Recursos
Acuáticos Costeros del Sureste: Tendencias actuales en investigación y estado
del arte. RECORECOS, CONCYTEY, UNACAR, UJAT, ECOSUR, UNAM, México, D.F.
463–481.
Pilling, G.M., Apostolaki, P., Failler, P., Floros Ch, Large, P.A., Morales-Nin, B.,
Reglero, P., Stergiou, K.I., Tsikliras, A.C., 2008. Assessment and management of
data-poor fisheries. In: Payne, A., Cotter, J., Potter, T. (Eds.), Advances in
Fisheries Science 50 Years on from Beverton and Holt. Blackwell Publishing,
pp. 280–305.
Reeves, S.A., Marchal, P., Mardle, S., Pascoe, S., Prellezo, R., Thébaud, O., Travers, M.,
2008. From fish to fisheries: the changing focus of management advice. In:
Payne, A., Cotter, J., Potter, T. (Eds.), Advances in Fisheries Science 50 Years on
from Beverton and Holt. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 135–154.
Salas, S., Chuenpagdee, R., Charles, A., Seijo, J.C., 2011. Coastal fisheries of Latin
America and the Caribbean: issues and trends. In: Salas, S., Chuenpagdee, R.,
Charles, A., Seijo, J.C. (Eds.), Coastal fisheries of Latin America and the
Caribbean. FAO Fish. Aquac. Tech. Pap. No. 544, Rome, pp. 1–12,
430p.
Sanvicente-Añorve, L., Alba, C., Alatorre, M.A., Flores-Coto, C., 2007. Cross-shelf and
vertical distribution of siphonophore assemblages under the influence of
freshwater outflows in the southern Gulf of Mexico. Hydrobiology 586, 69–78.
Smith, E.A., Au, D.A., Show, C., 1998. Intrinsic rebound potentials of 26 species of
Pacific sharks. Mar. Freshwater Res. 49, 663–678.
Walker, T.I., 2005. Reproduction in fisheries science. In: Hamlett, W.C. (Ed.),
Reproductive Biology and Phylogeny of Chondrichthyes: Sharks, Batoids and
Chimaeras. Science Publishers, Inc., USA, pp. 81–127.
Yáñez-Arancibia, A., Lara-Domínguez, A.L., Rojas-Galaviz, J.L., Zárate-Lomeli, D.J.,
Villalobos-Zapata, G.J., Sánchez-Gil, P., 1999. Integrating science and
management on coastal marine protected areas in the Southern Gulf of
Mexico. Ocean Coast. Manage. 42, 319–344.