CORVINA DRUM HOOK AND LINE CAUGHT Cilus gilberti Sometimes known as Corvina, Peruvian Corvina, Chilean Croaker,

, Corvinilla, Courbine Blonde

SUMMARY Corvina Drum is a popular fish in South America, but little information exists on its biology, abundance or fishery. They are found from Peru to Chile and around the Galapagos Islands, and are caught by hook and line, longline and gillnets. The abundance of Corvina Drum is not known but their landings have decreased over the past decade. Management is poor overall for Corvina Drum, and essentially the fishery is unregulated. Hook and line fisheries generally cause little habitat damage.

Criterion Life History Abundance Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts Management Bycatch Final Score Color

Points 1.50 2.00 3.50 0.50 2.00 1.90

Final Score 2.40 - 4.00 1.60 - 2.39 0.00 - 1.59

Color

LIFE HISTORY Core Points (only one selection allowed) If a value for intrinsic rate of increase (r) is known, assign the score below based on this value. If no r-value is available, assign the score below for the correct age at 50% maturity for females if specified, or for the correct value of growth rate ('k'). If no estimates of r, age at 50% maturity, or k are available, assign the score below based on maximum age. 1.00 Intrinsic rate of increase <0.05; OR age at 50% maturity >10 years; OR growth rate <0.15; OR maximum age >30 years. Intrinsic rate of increase = 0.05-0.15; OR age at 50% maturity = 5-10 years; OR a growth rate = 0.160.30; OR maximum age = 11-30 years. Little information on the life history of Corvina Drum is available. They can reach a maximum size of 1 m (Mann, 1954; Meja et al., 1970), and population doubling time is 2-5 years (Chao and Robertson 2007). Species similar to Corvina Drum, such as corvina reina from Costa Rica, have growth rates of 0.12 to 0.17 (Mug-Villanueva et al. 2005). Orangemouth corvina (Mexico and USA), another similar species, reaches sexual maturity around 50 cm for males and 59 cm for females (Prentice and Colura 2009). The whitemouth croaker, a similar species also found in South America, reaches sexual maturity between 2 to 4 years of age and lives to around 10 years of age (Fishbase 2011). The life history information available for Corvina Drum and related species suggests a middle score is appropriate. 3.00 Intrinsic rate of increase >0.16; OR age at 50% maturity = 1-5 years; OR growth rate >0.30; OR maximum age <11 years.

2.00

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 Species has special behaviors that make it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., spawning aggregations; site fidelity; segregation by sex; migratory bottlenecks; unusual attraction to gear; etc.). Corvina Drum use nursery areas such as Playa Chipana in northern Chile (Vargas et al. 1999), which could make them susceptible to fishing pressure. Information on the habitat, depth or for how long these nursery areas are used is not available. Because little information is available, no points were subtracted. -0.25 Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity >20 years; sequential hermaphrodites; extremely low fecundity).

-0.25 Species has a small or restricted range (e.g., endemism; numerous evolutionarily significant units; restricted to one coastline; e.g., American lobster; striped bass; endemic reef fishes). Corvina Drum is found in the southeastern Pacific Ocean from Sechura Bay, Peru to Lota, Chile (Mann 1954). This is a small range, so points are subtracted. -0.25 Species exhibits high natural population variability driven by broad-scale environmental change (e.g. El Nino; decadal oscillations). It is likely that broad-scale environmental events effect Corvina Drum populations, with higher abundances during El Nino years when water temperatures are higher. In Chile, for example, abundances of Corvina Drum were 20.8% of the total catch in 1993 (El Nino year), but <1% in 1989, 1990 and 1991 and have been absent from the catches since 1994 (Sielfeld et al. 2002). +0.25 Species does not have special behaviors that increase ease or population consequences of capture OR has special behaviors that make it less vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., species is widely dispersed during spawning). +0.25 Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially resilient to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity <1 year; extremely high fecundity). Corvina Drum spawns in spring and summer, often in or near river mouths like the Loa River in Chile (SAG 2000). There is no information available on the number of eggs produced per spawning event, but drum species in general are considered broadcast spawners (Locascio et al. 2007). Whitemouth croaker, a similar species for example will produce between 2-13 million eggs per year (Manickchand-Heileman and Ehrhardt 1996). No points are added, because information specific to Corvina Drum is lacking. +0.25 Species is distributed over a very wide range (e.g., throughout an entire hemisphere or ocean basin; e.g., swordfish; tuna; Patagonian toothfish). +0.25 Species does not exhibit high natural population variability driven by broad-scale environmental change (e.g., El Nino; decadal oscillations).

1.50 Points for Life History

ABUNDANCE Core Points (only one selection allowed) Compared to natural or un-fished level, the species population is: 1.00 Low: Abundance or biomass is <75% of BMSY or similar proxy (e.g., spawning potential ratio). Medium: Abundance or biomass is 75-125% of BMSY or similar proxy; OR population is approaching or recovering from an overfished condition; OR adequate information on abundance or biomass is not available. Information on abundance or biomass is lacking for Corvina Drum. Analysis of landings data suggests declines of 30-40% over the past decade but this information does not include catch-effort data (Chao and Robertson 2007), so it is unknown whether abundance is decreasing or that less people are actively trying to catch Corvina Drum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened and Endangered Species consider Corvina Drum to be Data Deficient (Chao and Robertson 2007). Due to the lack of information, a middle score was awarded. 3.00 High: Abundance or biomass is >125% of BMSY or similar proxy.

2.00

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 The population is declining over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE). The abundance of Corvina Drum may be declining over generational time, as landings have decreased during the last 10 years. But no hard evidence exists, so no points were subtracted. -0.25 Age, size or sex distribution is skewed relative to the natural condition (e.g., truncated size/age structure or anomalous sex distribution). Corvina Drum reach a maximum size of 1 m (Mann, 1954; Meja et al., 1970), but no information is available about whether size patterns have changed so no points were subtracted. -0.25 Species is listed as "overfished" OR species is listed as "depleted", "endangered", or "threatened" by recognized national or international bodies. The IUCN Red List of Threatened and Endangered Species consider Corvina Drum to be Data Deficient (Chao and Robertson 2007). No organization lists Covina Drum as overfished, so no points were subtracted.

-0.25 Current levels of abundance are likely to jeopardize the availability of food for other species or cause substantial change in the structure of the associated food web. +0.25 The population is increasing over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE). +0.25 Age, size or sex distribution is functionally normal. +0.25 Species is close to virgin biomass. +0.25 Current levels of abundance provide adequate food for other predators or are not known to affect the structure of the associated food web. Corvina Drum are opportunistic predators that eat shrimp, crabs and bony fish such as sardines (Vargas et al. 1999; Fernandez and Oyarzun 2001; Oyarzun et al. 2001 Fishbase 2011). There is no information available on whether current levels of abundance provide adequate food for other predators, so we have not added any points.

2.00 Points for Abundance

HABITAT QUALITY AND FISHING GEAR IMPACTS Core Points (only one selection allowed) Select the option that most accurately describes the effect of the fishing method upon the habitat that it affects 1.00 The fishing method causes great damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., cyanide; blasting; bottom trawling; dredging). The fishing method does moderate damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., bottom gillnets; traps and pots; bottom longlines). The fishing method does little damage to physical or biogenic habitats (e.g., hand picking; hand raking; hook and line; pelagic long lines; mid-water trawl or gillnet; purse seines). Corvina Drum is caught using several methods including surface longlines, gillnets, and hook and line. The longline fishery is common in central Chile (around Valparaiso). The gillnet fishery for Corvina Drum (also around Valparaiso) fishes within one or two miles of shore using nets with a mesh size of 20 cm (Simeone et al. 1999). There is little

2.00

3.00

information available on the Corvina Drum hook and line fishery, but this fishing method generally causes little damage to the seafloor (Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003), so we have awarded a score of 3.

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 Habitat for this species is so compromised from non-fishery impacts that the ability of the habitat to support this species is substantially reduced (e.g., dams; pollution; coastal development). Corvina Drum is found over soft bottom habitats (Fishbase 2011) and is typically found in inshore waters (Oyarzun et al. 2001). Mining activities in Chile have lead to the dispersal of pollutants, including arsenic, into the surrounding waters, specifically in the northern areas of the country (Richtera et al. 2004). However, research from central Chile has suggested the effect of arsenic from mines seen in rivers has not yet reached the adjacent marine system (Richtera et al. 2004). Due to the lack of information, we have not subtracted any points. -0.25 Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are not protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc. -0.25 No efforts are being made to minimize damage from existing gear types OR new or modified gear is increasing habitat damage (e.g., fitting trawls with roller rigs or rockhopping gear; more robust gear for deep-sea fisheries). -0.25 If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is very slow (e.g., deep water corals; rocky bottoms). +0.25 Habitat for this species remains robust and viable and is capable of supporting this species. +0.25 Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc. Although there are no areas closed specifically for Corvina Drum, there are a number of Marine Protected Areas in their region (WDPA 2006) that likely protect Corvina Drum, so we have added points. +0.25 Gear innovations are being implemented over a majority of the fishing area to minimize damage from gear types OR no innovations necessary because gear effects are minimal. Gear effects from hook and line fisheries are generally low (Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003).

+0.25 If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is fast (e.g., mud or sandy bottoms) OR gear effects are minimal.

3.50 Points for Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts

MANAGEMENT Core Points (only one selection allowed) Select the option that most accurately describes the current management of the fisheries of this species. 1.00 Regulations are ineffective (e.g., illegal fishing or overfishing is occurring) OR the fishery is unregulated (i.e., no control rules are in effect). In Chile, the Under-secretary of Fisheries manages Chilean fisheries by providing policy settings and regulatory framework (FAO 2000; OECD 2009). The Servicio Nacional de Pesca (SERNAPESCA) is responsible for management and enforcement of fisheries regulations (OECD 2009) and the Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (IFOP) is contracted to carry out research (FAO 2000). Some management measures are that vessels used for industrial fishing must be registered in the National Industrial Fisheries Register (FAO 2000) and artisanal fishing vessels must be registered in the Artisanal Fisheries National Register (FAO 2000). There are no management measures specific to Corvina Drum in place (Chao and Robertson 2007), so we have awarded a core point of 1. 2.00 Management measures are in place over a major portion over the species' range but implementation has not met conservation goals OR management measures are in place but have not been in place long enough to determine if they are likely to achieve conservation and sustainability goals. Substantial management measures are in place over a large portion of the species range and have demonstrated success in achieving conservation and sustainability goals.

3.00

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 There is inadequate scientific monitoring of stock status, catch or fishing effort. There does not appear to be any scientific monitoring of stock status or fishing effort for Corvina Drum throughout its range (Chao and Robertson 2007).

-0.25 Management does not explicitly address fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems. Management does not explicitly address fishery effects on habitat, food webs or ecosystems. -0.25 This species is overfished and no recovery plan or an ineffective recovery plan is in place. -0.25 Management has failed to reduce excess capacity in this fishery or implements subsidies that result in excess capacity in this fishery. +0.25 There is adequate scientific monitoring, analysis and interpretation of stock status, catch and fishing effort. +0.25 Management explicitly and effectively addresses fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems. +0.25 This species is overfished and there is a recovery plan (including benchmarks, timetables and methods to evaluate success) in place that is showing signs of success OR recovery plan is not needed. +0.25 Management has taken action to control excess capacity or reduce subsidies that result in excess capacity OR no measures are necessary because fishery is not overcapitalized.

0.50 Points for Management

BYCATCH Core Points (only one selection allowed) Select the option that most accurately describes the current level of bycatch and the consequences that result from fishing this species. The term, "bycatch" used in this document excludes incidental catch of a species for which an adequate management framework exists. The terms, "endangered, threatened, or protected," used in this document refer to species status that is determined by national legislation such as the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (or another nation's equivalent), the IUCN Red List, or a credible scientific body such as the American Fisheries Society. 1.00 Bycatch in this fishery is high (>100% of targeted landings), OR regularly includes a "threatened, endangered or protected species."

2.00

Bycatch in this fishery is moderate (10-99% of targeted landings) AND does not regularly include "threatened, endangered or protected species" OR level of bycatch is unknown. Information on bycatch in the Corvina Drum hook and line fishery is not available. It is likely that some other finfish species are incidentally caught but hook and line fisheries tend to have low levels of this type of bycatch (Morgan and Chuenpagdee 2003). Interactions with sea turtles and marine mammals are likely also low. We have assigned a medium score to account for the lack of information.

3.00

Bycatch in this fishery is low (<10% of targeted landings) and does not regularly include "threatened, endangered or protected species."

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed) -0.25 Bycatch in this fishery is a contributing factor to the decline of "threatened, endangered, or protected species" and no effective measures are being taken to reduce it. -0.25 Bycatch of targeted or non-targeted species (e.g., undersize individuals) in this fishery is high and no measures are being taken to reduce it. -0.25 Bycatch of this species (e.g., undersize individuals) in other fisheries is high OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, and no measures are being taken to reduce it. Corvina Drum are caught as bycatch in the flounder gillnet fishery of Coquimbo Bay, Chile (Hernandez et al. 2010). However, the extent of this bycatch is not known, so we have not subtracted any points. -0.25 The continued removal of the bycatch species contributes to its decline. +0.25 Measures taken over a major portion of the species range have been shown to reduce bycatch of "threatened, endangered, or protected species" or bycatch rates are no longer deemed to affect the abundance of the "protected" bycatch species OR no measures needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear). +0.25 There is bycatch of targeted (e.g., undersize individuals) or non-targeted species in this fishery and measures (e.g., gear modifications) have been implemented that have been shown to reduce bycatch over a large portion of the species range OR no measures are needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear). +0.25 Bycatch of this species in other fisheries is low OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, but effective measures are being taken to reduce it over a large portion of the range.

+0.25 The continued removal of the bycatch species in the targeted fishery has had or will likely have little or no impact on populations of the bycatch species OR there are no significant bycatch concerns because the fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).

2.00 Points for Bycatch

REFERENCES Chao, L. and Robertson, R. 2007. Cilus gilberti. In: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4. Downloaded March 14, 2011. Fernndez, C. and Oyarzn, C. (2001), Trophic variations of the Chilean croaker Cilus gilberti during the summer period 199798 (Perciformes, Sciaenidae). Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 17: 227233. doi: 10.1046/j.1439-0426.2001.00273. Fishbase. 2011. Micropogonias furnieri, whitemouth croaker. Accessed March 14, 2011. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). 2000. Fishery country profile: The Republic of Chile. FAO, Rome, Italy. 9 p. Hernandez, S., Gonzalez, M.T., Villarroel, J.C. and Acuna, E. 2010. Seasonal variation in fish bycatch associated with an artisanal flounder fishery on Coquimbo Bay, Chile. Revista de Biologia marina y Oceannografia 45:695-703. Locascio, J., Peebles, E. and Mann, D. 2008. Sound production and spawning by black drum (Pogonias cromis) in southwest Florida. Proceedings of the 60th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, November 5-9, 2007. Pp. 591-595. Manickchand-Heileman, S.C. and Ehrhardt, N.M. 1996. Spawning frequency, fecundity and spawning potential of the whitemouth croaker Micropogonias furnieri in Trinidad, West Indies. Bulletin of Marine Science 58:156-164. Mann, G. 1954. Vida de los peces en aguas chilenas. Instituto de Investigaciones veterinarias: Santiago, Chile. 342 p. Meja J., Samam M. & Pastor A. 1970. Informacin bsica de los principales peces de consumo. IMARPE Inf. Esp. n IM-62 - 20 p. Morgan, L.E. and Chuenpagdee, R. 2003. Shifting gears: addressing the collateral impacts of fishing methods in US waters. Pew Science Series. Washington, DC, Island Press.

Mug-Villanueva, M., Gallucci, V.F. and Lai, H.-L. 1994. Age determination of corvina reina (Cynoscion albus) in the Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica, based on examination and analysis of hyaline zones, morphology and microstructure of otoliths. Journal of Fish Biology 45:177-191. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2009. An appraisal of the Chilean fisheries sector. OECD Publishing. Oyarzun, C., Fernandez, C., Landeta, M. and Cortes, N. 2001. Ontogenetic and temporal fluctuations in feeding habits of the Chilean croaker Cilus gilberti (Perciformes, Sciaenidae) in southern Chile. Cahiers de biologie marine 42:295-302. Prentice, J.A. and Colura, R.L. 2009. Preliminary observations of orangemouth corvina spawn inducement using photoperiod, temperature and salinity cycles. Journal of the World Mariculture Society 15:162-171. Richtera, P., Seguelb, R., Ahumadaa, I., Verdugob, R., Narvaeza, J. and Shibatac, Y. 2004. Arsenic speciation in environmental samples of a mining impacted sector of central Chile. Journal of Chilean Chemical Society 49:333-339. Servicio Agricola y Ganadero (SAG). 2000. Informe contaminacion Rio Loa. II regionantofagasta. Periodo Marzo 1997-Febrero 2000. Ministerio de Agricultura. Chile. Sielfeld, W., Vargas, M., Berrios, V. and Aguirre, G. 2002. Warm ENSO events and their effects on the coastal fish fauna of Northern Chile. Investigaciones marinas 30:122-124. Simeone, A., Bernal, M. and Meza, J. 1999. Incidental mortality of Humboldt penguins Spheniscus humboldti in gill nets, central Chile Marine Ornithology 27:157-161 Vargas, M.F., Cifuentes, S.P, and Emparanza, E.M. 1999. Espectro trfico de peces concurrentes al rea de crianza Playa Chipana (2119'S - 7004'W) del norte de Chile. Revista de Biologa Tropical 47:597-600. World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). 2006. World Database on Protected Areas.