Wp: 2013/ Summary of the Industry-DFO Collaborative Post-season Trap Surveys for Snow Crab in Div. 2J3KLOPs4R by D.E. Stansbury, D. Fiander and D. Maddock Parsons
INTRODUCTION The industry-department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) collaborative post-season (CPS) trap surveys for snow crab started in 2003 in NAFO Div. 3KLPs4R. In 2005, 2007 and thereafter the survey has been conducted in NAFO Div. 2J. The Fisheries Science Collaborative Program (FSCP) which funds this survey has been developed by the DFO to bring together DFO scientists and Atlantic fishers to collaborate on fisheries science research. This document is meant to summarize the 9 years of surveys since 2004.The approach is to examine catch rate series based on mean number of male crab per trap over all the Newfoundland and Labrador region. Comparing NAFO divisions, the inshore and offshore components of each division where appropriate and finally down to the Crab Management Areas (CMA). We hope this document will be used as a catalogue of the survey series and a source of information for the fishing industry and science. METHODOLOGY The surveys, conducted by snow crab harvesters, focus on commercial fishing grounds within individual CMAs. Survey stations are fixed and generally follow a grid pattern, with maximum station spacing of 5 X 5 (Fig.1). At each station, 6 (inshore) or 10 (offshore) commercial (135 mm mesh) crab traps are set in each fleet. All crab caught are sexed and counted. Biological sampling of male crab is conducted at sea, by observers, from two traps at each station. Sampling includes determination of carapace width, shell condition, leg loss and presence of bitter crab disease (BCD). One small mesh trap is added at selected stations (Figs. 5-7) to collect information on pre-recruits and females. Incidents of BCD are also recorded. Male crab sampled from large mesh pots are classified based on size and shell condition for this analysis. Crab less than 95 mm are classified as sub-legal and those greater than or equal to 95 mm are classified as legal. For the catch rate analysis, two shell conditions (new, old) are used. For carapace width (CW) frequencies an additional category of soft shell is split from the new shell. Male crab sampled from small mesh pots are also classified on chelae height (CH). A model (Dawe et al. 1997) separates two clouds of chelae height on carapace width into adult ( large-clawed) and juvenile (small clawed). The model is defined as: CW =0.0806*CH 1.1999 Once a male develops a large claw it is terminally molted and will not continue to grow. This can happen at any size greater than 40 mm CW (Dawe et al. 2007). For spatial representation, stations have been grouped according to NAFO division, inshore and offshore component within the division and CMA within each shore component. Prior to 2010 only stations that were consistently sampled from 2004 to 2009 were used in this analysis. Since 2010, a set of CORE stations are now selected for inclusion in the analysis. The criteria for a CORE station follows loosely on the same criteria used for common stations that were used at the 2009 Regional Assessment Process (RAP). Thus, the stations occupied in 2009 and 2010 had no influence on whether a station was core or non-core. As done in previous years, 2003 was dropped from the criteria for core
stations in all NAFO divisions. Therefore, core stations are stations that have been occupied consistently from 2004 to 2008 for NAFO divisions 3K, 3L and 3O. For NAFO division 2J and subdivision 3Ps the common stations sampled in 2007 and 2008 determined core stations. Stations sampled in 2007 for 4R offshore, determined the core stations, while inshore 4R are stations occupied consistently in 2004, 2006 and 2007. New for the 2012 survey, an additional 17 stations in 2J have been added to the core stations. Size frequencies plots are derived from core stations for both small and large mesh pots. Incidents of Bitter Crab Disease (BCD) are derived from new shelled crab from core stations for small mesh pots for both sexes in this analysis. There were 980 large pot core stations sampled in 2012, down from 1003 in 2011, but the same as in 2010 (Table 1). Using the criteria for CORE stations (see above), there is the potential of 1021 large mesh core stations in any given year. This occurred only in 2007. Every effort is been made to retain fishing core/common stations. Sampling of the small mesh pot stations has been consistent since 2009 at 152 stations. NAFO divisions 2J3KLOPs4R RESULTS The number of core stations occupied by year and NAFO division for large and small traps are given in Table 1. Total number of core stations fished in any one year varied from 798 to 1021 with most of the variability in NAFO sub-division 3Ps and division 4R. By using the core station criteria more stations are used in the analysis since 2010 than in previous years, when common stations were used. The number of stations sampled within each CMA is given in table 2. Even in Sub-division 3Ps and division 4R sampling within the CMA s have been consistent over the last 6 years One of the goals of the survey protocol is to start September 1 of each year. In most NAFO divisions, the start time is within 10 days of this, with the exception of 2J and 3O in the early years of the survey (Table 3). Prior to 2012, the within NAFO division duration of the survey has taken 46 days on average; maximum 87 days (3L 2009). However, in 2012, division 2J (80) and 4R (55) have taken the maximum number of days to complete, where as 3O (3) and 3Ps (18) has taken the fewest number of days.there has been considerable variation in the duration of the survey within and between divisions. NAFO divisions 3L and 3Ps averaged 59 and 53 days respectively to complete the survey whereas 2J and 4R were approximately 48 and 35 days respectively, while division 3K took 54. Average soak times have become less variable over the last 3 or 4 years of the survey within each CMA (Table 4). Given that the survey is a fixed station design, one would not expect a great deal of variation in depth fished within CMA (Table 5). A map of the CMA and the potential survey stations are presented in Figure 1. Geographical reference of the catch rate (mean number/tow) for large and small mesh traps are given in Figs. 2-7. 4
Divisional Overview Division 3K and 3L have similar catch rates in their inshore component for both new and old shell, legal size (=>95mm) crab until 2009, when there is a reduction in the 3K old shell component (Fig. 8.). For both divisions in the inshore the catch rate of old shelled crab is at a new high. NAFO subdivision 3Ps inshore is noticeably lower in the early years of the survey but has been increasing from 2004 to 2010 with some variability since. In the offshore, 3L is showing an increase in legal size crab whereas 3K and 3Ps are showing a decline There is also a decline in 2J since the start of the survey with perhaps a slight annual increase from 2009 through to 2012. Catch rates of sub-legal size in offshore 3L (Fig. 9) increased from 2006 to 2010 but have declined since. Subdivision 3Ps has also shown a decline since in 2010, while there is little change in the other divisions. NAFO division 2J NAFO Div. 2J has been surveyed for 6 consecutive years (2007-12) Catch-rate series for the various shell condition and size category are in Figures. 10 12. The legal size component of the sampled population is predominantly new shell crab in 2007 with a shift to older shelled animals in 2008 (Fig. 10). The old shell component is virtually non existent in 2009 but has returned to average levels in since. Annual size frequency shows no modal progression (Fig. 13). NAFO division 3K In NAFO Div. 3K (inshore and offshore) the catch rate series for sub-legal and legal size crab has fluctuated (Fig. 16-17). At the CMA level, 3KB has shown the highest catch rate among the CMA s and is also the most variable. Since 2007,both the sublegal and legal size catch varied together, suggesting possible year effects in the survey for CMA 3KB. In all the CMA s there is no evidence off a progression in catch rates as it relates to size. For example, knowing the change in catch rate of sub-legal crab does not give any predictive power with the change in catch rate for legal size crab (Fig 18). At the divisional scale the mode at 38 mm in the small mesh traps that was evident in 2007 (Fig 21) did not manifest itself with an increase in larger animals in subsequent years. Figures 22-23 display the size frequency for inshore and off shore from large mesh trap. In the small mesh traps since 2006 (Fig. 24-25) there is a much higher proportion of terminally moulted sub-legal crab in the inshore than in the offshore. Annual size frequencies are shown in Figs. 26-30 from large mesh traps for individual CMA s. There are only 2 CMA (3KC, 3K4) using small mesh traps (Figs. 31 and 32) The increasing trend in percent occurrence of BCD in males in 3KC since 2004 ceased in 2008 and was at the lowest level in the time series in 2010 (Fig.33). Presently it is about 5% to 6 % in 2011 and 2012. Prevalence has never exceeded 10% for males 5
in either CMA. The incidents of BCD in females in 3K4 have increased since 2005 to 15 % in 2010 and have since declined to about 6% in 2012. NAFO division 3L In 3L inshore, the catch rate series had varied little for legal size crab (Fig. 34) while the offshore series has increased from 2007 to 2012 (Fig. 35). Immediate recruits, as indicated by new shell crab (Fig 34 Lower panel), catch rate has changed little over the time series along with the catch rate for old shell animals. The sub legal size crab catch rates has declined in 2012 in all inshore CMAs with the exception of 6B-Conception Bay (Fig 36). In 3L offshore, Immediate recruits catch rate has steady increased from 2007 to the highest observed level in 2012 (Fig. 35 lower panel). Old shell crab has all showed an increase from 2008 to 2011 but declined in 2012. Sub-legal catch rates peaked in 2009 or 2010 in all offshore CMAs and showed significant declines since, except in CMA 8B (Fig. 37). The average size of old shell crab sampled from large mesh traps (at the divisional scale) declined from 101 mm (CW) in 2004 to 95 mm in 2011-12 (Fig 40). The average size for new shell animals has increased from 95 mm in 2009 to 101 mm in 2012. The mean size of small clawed crab increased from 65 to 85 mm (CW) from 2006 to 2012 (Fig. 41). Figures 42 45 display the size frequency for inshore and offshore from large and small mesh trap. There is evidence of modal progression displayed in 3L offshore from the small mesh pots (Fig. 45). This modal progression has been driven by the samples taken from MSEX (Fig. 63). A similar, but not as clear progression from 2006 to 2009 is also shown in CMA 9A, but here we miss the modes in 2007 and 2008 (Fig. 61). This continued growth is evident in 2010 with a mode at 97 mm for new shell crab sampled from the large mesh plots (Fig. 51). Annual size frequencies are shown in Figures 46-57 from large mesh traps for individual CMA s. Size frequencies from small mesh traps are displayed in Figs. 58-63. Trinity and Conception bays have both exhibited outbreaks of BCD over the years (Fig. 64). Trinity Bay (6A) had percent occurrence of BCD over 40% in females while most other CMA s were less than 15%. Conception Bay (6B) has alternated between 20 and 5% since 2003 to 2006, with little in the 2007 sampling. For 2008, all CMAs had less than 5% infection with the exception of Conception Bay which was slightly above 10%. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, there was little to no BCD observed in any of the 3L CMA s. However, Conception Bay (6B) had percent infection near 10% in 2012 (Fig. 64). NAFO division 3O In CMA 8B the only CMA in NAFO division 3O, the catch rate series has varied without trend for legal size crab (Fig. 65). Size frequency plots from large mesh pots showed no modal progression (Fig. 68). There was no small mesh pots used in NAFO division 3O in 2011 however, modal progression is quite evident from 2005 to 2010, with another new pulse of possible recruitment at 35 mm size in 2012 (Fig. 70). There has never been BCD observed in division 3O in this survey (Fig. 71). 6
NAFO subdivision 3Ps The catch rate series in 3Ps inshore had over doubled for sub-legal (12-28 crab/trap) from 2006 to 2007(Fig. 72). This increase has culminated in a greater than 70% increase of legal size crab in 2008. However, this coherence did not continue into 2009 and 2010. In 2010 the catch rate for legal size crab was the highest in the time series and the majority of these crabs were new shelled immediate recruits. For 2011, there is a marginal increase in both legal and sub-legal size crab in 2012. In the offshore, the sub-legal and legal catch rates have declined since 2009 or 2010 (Fig. 73). Where once there was a large residual old shell component present in 2010 and 2011, this is now reduced along with the immediate recruits since 2009. At the CMA level, 10BCD has shown the highest catch rate among CMA s for both sublegal and legal size crab (Fig. 74) with a substantial increase in legal size in 2009 that may be an anomaly given the 2010 value. The exception we seen in 2011 in 11S legal size crab catch rate appears anomalously high given perhaps very low values for 2012. The increases in sub-legal size catch rates are evident in the size frequencies for inshore and offshore from large and small mesh trap (Figs. 78-81). Annual size frequencies are shown in Figs. 82-86 from large mesh traps for individual CMA s. Size frequencies from small mesh traps are displayed in Figs. 87-89 BCD has not been detected in 2007-12. Levels of BCD have never been observed above 10% in the survey in 3Ps (Fig 90). NAFO division 4R The catch rate series in 4R inshore has been low relative to all other NAFO divisions in the NL region. Catch rates for sub-legal size crab has doubled from 2008 to 2009 (Fig. 91). This increase has led to a doubling in legal size crab catch rate in 2010. However, this relationship does not continue as there was a steady decrease in sublegal crab from 2010 to 2012 with legal size crab at its highest values in 2011 and 2012. These high catch rates are predominantly new shelled legal size crab in all inshore CMAs with little residual old shell crab (Fig. 94). The offshore has been sampled in 2003 and 2007-12 and the catch rates have been relatively low (Fig. 92). There was no indication of immediate recruits in the survey for the entire time series. Annual size frequencies for the division are shown in Figures 95-96 from large and small mesh traps. Modal progression is evident from 2009 to 2012 in large mesh traps at the divisional level (Fig 95) lead by the progression in the inshore (Fig 97) predominantly in Bay St. George (12C) and Bonne Bay (12G) figures 100 & 103. This recruitment pulse 7
in CMA 12C is detected one year earlier in 2008 using the small mesh traps (Fig 105). Unfortunately there have been no other significant signs of recruitment since. No significant level of BCD has been recorded in 4R during this survey (Fig. 109). DISCUSSION The 109 figures in this catalogue are meant to be informative to both scientists and crab harvesters. Each reader we hope will find the summaries suitable to their level of interest, whether it is at the regional, divisional, inshore vs. offshore or to their own CMA. This survey was first used in the Regional Assessment Process (RAP) in 2006 and should continue into the further to give a post-season index of crab abundance at the appropriate spatial level required. This survey is the only source of fishery independent data for most of the 30 CMAs in the Newfoundland and Labrador region. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank all harvesters that have taken part in the survey over the seven years. Without a co-operative working arrangement this work would not be possible. I would also like to thank the staff of the FSCP section at DFO NL region for providing data and given clarification on issues. REFERENCE Dawe, E., D. Mullowney, D. Stansbury, D. Taylor, E. Hynick, P. Veitch, J. Drew, G. Evans, E. Colbourne, P. O Keefe, K. Skanes, D. Fiander, R. Stead, D. Maddock Parsons, P. Higdon, T. Paddle, B. Noseworthy, and S. Kelland. 2006. An Assessment of Newfoundland and Labrador Snow Crab in 2007. CSAS Res. Doc. 2009/057, 160 p. 8
Table 1. Number of core stations sampled using large and small mesh traps by NAFO Divs. And Year. Large Mesh NAFO 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 TOTAL 2J 0 10 0 74 57 57 73 74 74 74 493 3K 251 251 251 251 251 234 233 251 248 221 2442 3L 332 332 332 332 332 307 331 314 327 329 3268 3O 30 30 30 30 30 26 30 30 30 30 296 3PS 161 145 190 204 204 192 204 204 173 200 1877 4R 90 30 90 130 90 130 109 130 128 101 1028 TOTAL 864 798 893 1021 964 946 980 1003 980 955 9404 Small Mesh NAFO 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 TOTAL 2J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3K 26 30 31 31 30 30 26 30 30 30 287 3L 35 41 41 41 42 57 62 63 61 42 487 3O 0 5 4 5 5 5 5 0 5 5 39 3PS 17 12 20 21 21 21 21 21 20 21 194 4R 28 11 26 38 43 38 38 38 36 43 329 TOTAL 106 99 122 136 141 151 152 152 152 141 1336 1
Table 2. Number of Core Stations for ALL Years by CMA. Large mesh. Large mesh NAFO manare a 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2J 2J 10 74 57 57 73 74 74 74 3K 3k4 136 136 136 136 136 135 129 136 134 117 3KB 15 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 20 20 20 3KBC 19 19 19 19 19 13 19 19 19 19 3KC 15 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 3KD 47 56 56 56 56 56 46 46 56 55 46 3L>200 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 4 10 10 3LEX 11 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 5A 5 20 20 20 20 20 12 20 20 20 20 6A 17 29 29 29 29 29 27 28 29 27 29 6B 18 24 24 24 24 24 19 24 24 24 21 6C 27 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 44 47 47 8A 18 36 36 36 36 36 26 36 36 36 36 8B 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 9A 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 MS 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 9 16 18 MSEX 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 NS 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 20 21 3O 3O 30 30 30 30 30 26 30 30 30 30 3PS 10A 27 76 58 76 87 87 75 87 87 57 84 10BC 7 19 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 38 10D 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11E 20 26 38 35 38 38 38 38 38 37 38 11S 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11SX 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 12C 55 59 59 59 20 59 38 59 57 59 12E 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 12F 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 12G 11 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 OFF 40 40 39 40 40 40 40 11 2
Table 3. Number of Core Stations for ALL Years by CMA. Small mesh. Small Mesh NAFO manar ea 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 3K 3K4 20 24 25 25 24 25 20 24 24 16 3KBC 4 3KC 9 6 6 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 3 3LEX 2 3L 6A 6 8 8 8 8 8 27 28 29 27 8 6B 7 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 6C 5 8 8 8 8 9 6 9 9 9 7 8B 5 9A 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 MSEX 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 NS 9 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 4 5 3O 3O 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 3PS 10A 9 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 11E 12 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 11S 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4R 12C 13 14 13 18 13 13 13 11 12 12E 1 12F 7 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 12G 8 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 OFF 17 12 12 12 12 12 12 8 3
Table 4. Start and End Dates of the Survey in each NAFO Div. and Year. Timing of surveys for Core Stations. NAFO YEAR StartDate EndDate # Days NAFO YEAR StartDate EndDate # Days 2J 2005 01-Oct 02-Oct 1 3PS 2003 12-Oct 14-Nov 33 2007 21-Aug 27-Oct 67 2004 06-Sep 25-Nov 80 2008 26-Sep 27-Oct 31 2005 28-Aug 06-Oct 39 2009 27-Sep 20-Oct 23 2006 07-Sep 06-Nov 60 2010 02-Sep 29-Oct 57 2007 21-Aug 31-Oct 71 2011 21-Sep 21-Oct 30 2008 01-Sep 06-Nov 66 2012 29-Aug 17-Nov 80 2009 02-Sep 14-Nov 73 2013 20-Sep 20-Oct 12 2010 30-Aug 05-Nov 67 3K 2003 01-Oct 17-Nov 47 2011 30-Aug 24-Sep 25 2004 07-Sep 09-Oct 32 2012 02-Sep 20-Sep 18 2005 28-Aug 20-Oct 53 2013 05-Sep 21-Sep 16 2006 06-Sep 17-Oct 41 4R 2003 11-Sep 22-Sep 11 2007 20-Aug 25-Oct 66 2004 12-Sep 04-Oct 22 2008 03-Aug 25-Oct 83 2005 18-Sep 25-Oct 37 2009 01-Sep 21-Oct 50 2006 26-Sep 19-Oct 23 2010 02-Sep 21-Oct 49 2007 22-Aug 03-Oct 42 2011 30-Aug 09-Nov 71 2008 03-Sep 13-Oct 40 2012 03-Sep 22-Oct 49 2009 04-Sep 01-Oct 27 2013 05-Sep 23-Oct 48 2010 30-Aug 26-Oct 57 3L 2003 08-Oct 19-Nov 42 2011 31-Aug 14-Oct 44 2004 06-Sep 23-Nov 78 2012 03-Sep 28-Oct 55 2005 29-Aug 01-Nov 64 2013 04-Sep 14-Oct 40 2006 07-Sep 07-Nov 61 2007 20-Aug 26-Sep 37 2008 01-Sep 27-Oct 56 2009 01-Sep 27-Nov 87 2010 30-Aug 09-Nov 71 2011 29-Aug 04-Nov 67 2012 02-Sep 30-Oct 31 2013 04-Sep 25-Sep 21 3O 2004 24-Sep 12-Nov 49 2005 31-Aug 21-Sep 21 2006 26-Sep 09-Oct 13 2007 06-Sep 21-Sep 15 2008 04-Sep 21-Oct 47 2009 05-Sep 23-Sep 18 2010 31-Aug 29-Sep 29 2011 31-Aug 23-Sep 23 2012 13-Sep 16-Sep 3 2013 05-Sep 08-Sep 3 4
Table 5. Average soak times for Core Stations by NAFO Div., Year and Crab Management Area. (CMA). (Large Mesh) Large Mesh NAFO CMA 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2J 2J 13 15 21 15 15 15 15 14 3K 3K4 22 15 15 16 14 15 15 15 25 16 3L 3KB 42 34 25 32 25 23 24 24 79 23 20 3KBC 25 20 25 19 21 31 17 32 24 48 3KC 106 27 23 25 24 24 85 27 25 37 25 3KD 99 52 39 21 45 26 44 40 29 28 58 3L>20 0 13 13 19 21 14 13 22 12 14 24 3LEX 22 14 12 18 15 17 16 14 18 20 16 5A 302 172 26 137 25 202 35 37 78 48 36 6A 77 162 70 28 51 40 172 72 75 84 88 6B 163 179 55 49 23 59 23 26 91 20 56 6C 278 79 45 41 55 50 41 24 55 29 46 8A 189 42 52 205 44 34 43 32 43 70 30 8B 14 41 23 13 23 16 14 153 22 14 9A 17 23 24 18 18 18 24 27 18 20 MS 13 28 19 14 15 14 22 28 142 15 MSEX 15 14 15 16 16 17 18 15 17 15 NS 94 14 15 15 14 15 15 30 30 14 3O 3O 16 15 15 15 17 16 16 15 14 15 3PS 10A 55 161 56 56 26 39 175 37 51 27 38 10BC 135 18 14 20 13 15 27 38 18 19 17 10D 26 15 13 13 20 16 16 14 12 11E 44 41 21 80 26 30 29 42 25 25 38 11S 49 20 14 16 12 13 21 19 22 13 24 11SX 13 18 13 20 14 15 14 14 19 4R 12C 23 56 28 35 22 19 50 21 61 28 12E 25 24 19 21 17 40 196 142 24 23 21 12F 38 87 21 21 20 27 62 52 42 21 25 12G 35 23 19 34 18 19 21 19 21 21 28 OFF 51 21 84 20 21 36 28 14 5
Table 6. Average soak times for Core Stations by NAFO Div., Year and Crab Management Area. (CMA). (Small Mesh) Small Mesh 3K 3K4 26 16 15 18 15 18 13 15 19 15 3KBC 45 3KC 104 28 22 24 23 25 121 26 25 24 24 3L 3LEX 8 6A 86 72 38 26 25 61 172 72 75 84 97 6B 151 45 25 38 21 25 27 26 24 24 69 6C 57 161 41 54 98 50 25 22 28 24 24 8A 14 9A 25 25 25 26 25 25 41 24 26 MSEX 15 18 16 13 14 14 16 13 18 NS 13 14 13 12 14 14 14 42 13 13 3O 3O 14 17 14 20 18 16 14 17 3PS 10A 34 24 57 26 26 88 27 57 24 17 11E 58 69 21 37 25 27 25 32 26 27 24 11S 13 12 12 13 18 21 22 13 24 4R 12C 19 20 21 22 18 39 20 27 25 12E 16 12F 87 19 20 19 24 48 43 48 20 24 12G 24 18 21 18 17 18 18 20 19 32 OFF 54 13 11 13 24 13 19 14 6
Table 7. Minimum and Maximum depths by CMA for Core Stations. (Large Mesh) Large Mesh 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 NAFO manare a min max min max min max min max min max min max min max min max min max min max 2J 2J 83 176 48 176 46 175 13 176 49 176 46 166 46 180 44 176 3K 3K4 50 155 61 151 62 148 62 150 62 153 61 156 60 154 62 153 13 155 62 151 3KB 55 148 78 126 52 151 68 137 68 153 42 149 63 150 79 124 39 148 43 150 3KBC 63 91 61 89 62 89 62 91 60 93 60 90 61 91 71 91 61 89 62 91 3KC 5 92 23 94 15 98 11 95 15 103 15 98 14 104 12 102 14 95 16 92 3KD 43 114 43 110 47 110 46 110 46 112 46 112 45 110 46 114 45 110 42 137 3L 3L>200 31 59 32 60 32 59 31 56 32 59 31 59 31 60 35 40 32 59 31 57 3LEX 28 54 29 54 28 54 28 54 28 54 28 54 28 55 28 54 28 54 31 54 5A 15 101 20 101 14 101 18 97 19 98 49 96 19 101 20 100 20 100 18 100 6A 27 99 26 96 21 93 20 96 27 107 19 96 26 108 25 101 25 98 21 105 6B 21 82 16 81 16 79 15 71 14 80 13 70 21 79 5 79 10 68 16 79 6C 32 57 27 57 31 57 33 57 31 60 31 60 32 57 31 58 33 59 32 70 8A 19 62 17 63 14 62 17 61 19 61 33 62 16 61 19 61 17 61 16 62 8B 26 37 24 38 24 38 25 40 25 39 25 38 25 40 25 39 24 39 21 36 9A 29 42 34 44 30 44 31 43 31 39 30 47 30 48 31 45 31 48 31 47 MS 30 53 29 54 30 54 31 54 30 54 30 54 31 82 36 51 30 53 31 54 MSEX 28 61 30 61 28 61 27 61 28 112 28 61 27 61 29 62 28 71 28 61 NS 20 55 21 55 21 97 20 55 20 54 20 54 20 84 20 55 20 55 20 56 3O 3O 5 42 22 42 23 42 22 43 22 42 22 42 22 42 22 42 22 42 22 42 3PS 10A 11 112 27 77 24 98 19 93 19 107 25 98 21 109 20 88 25 85 23 104 10BC 31 54 18 70 22 68 26 68 24 68 24 75 24 68 24 68 28 68 24 68 10D 36 48 35 47 36 48 36 47 36 48 35 48 36 47 33 48 36 48 11E 24 109 21 104 25 114 34 120 25 115 27 114 25 120 29 100 21 109 23 126 11S 21 44 19 46 22 44 20 45 20 46 20 45 20 45 20 45 20 45 20 45 11SX 15 90 14 92 14 92 15 92 15 90 15 91 15 89 13 90 16 88 12C 6 46 6 45 6 45 6 30 6 44 8 36 6 45 6 46 5 45 12E 24 25 24 25 24 25 23 25 25 25 24 25 24 24 24 25 25 25 25 30 12F 24 51 26 47 25 49 20 51 24 63 24 52 22 47 24 51 21 48 25 56 12G 1 56 9 56 10 57 9 59 9 55 9 66 10 60 10 56 9 61 9 52 4R OFF 13 96 14 93 13 96 14 97 11 98 13 96 21 55 7
Table 8. Minimum and Maximum depths by CMA for Core Stations. (Small Mesh) Small Mesh NAFO manar ea 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 min max min max min max min max min max min max min max min max min max min max 3K 3K4 73 120 73 141 73 143 73 145 73 143 72 143 74 119 72 142 71 145 72 112 3KBC 62 77 3KC 5 86 26 88 15 86 11 88 15 85 20 84 14 85 12 85 14 86 79 82 3LEX 32 39 6A 27 88 27 88 32 88 30 94 35 98 19 96 26 108 25 101 25 98 45 105 6B 21 82 16 81 16 79 15 71 14 80 13 70 21 79 21 79 10 68 16 79 6C 48 55 31 56 39 56 41 52 32 57 31 57 32 56 31 58 45 57 33 53 8B 21 31 9A 37 44 37 44 38 43 37 39 36 43 37 43 31 39 38 43 38 44 MSEX 31 46 31 46 31 47 31 47 31 47 32 47 31 46 36 48 32 53 NS 31 49 39 46 39 46 41 48 41 46 39 41 38 48 38 46 38 46 38 46 3O 3O 27 32 31 35 28 32 27 32 27 33 28 33 28 34 27 33 3PS 10A 26 90 24 98 19 93 19 107 26 98 24 109 25 88 25 85 23 104 11E 56 109 60 104 69 107 66 120 56 106 58 109 60 120 31 100 54 109 66 109 11S 22 44 25 44 25 45 25 46 25 45 25 45 25 45 25 45 20 31 4R 12C 6 27 6 27 6 27 6 30 6 27 8 27 6 27 6 27 5 26 12E 28 28 12F 25 51 26 41 28 42 20 51 26 57 25 52 27 47 28 51 21 48 25 56 12G 1 55 14 56 14 57 9 56 14 55 16 60 14 60 14 56 14 57 13 52 OFF 18 65 17 66 18 65 18 65 16 64 18 65 21 55 8
ALL STATIONS Crab Management Areas. Survey Stations Core Stations Figure 1. Map of Crab Management Area (CMA-top), Potential survey stations- (bottom left) and core stations (bottom right). (The years in red are the years used to define core stations in each area ) 9
Figure 2. Catch distribution (mean numbers/trap) for 2003-06 for large mesh traps. 10
Figure 3. Catch distribution (mean numbers/trap) for 2007-10 for large mesh traps 11
Figure 4. Catch distribution (mean numbers/trap) for 2011-13 for large mesh traps. 12
Figure 5. Catch distribution (mean numbers/trap) for 2003-06 for small mesh traps. 13
Figure 6. Catch distribution (mean numbers/trap) for 2007-10 for small mesh traps. 14
Figure 7. Catch distribution (mean numbers/trap) for 2011-13 for small mesh traps. 15
Figure 8. Distribution of small mesh trap locations in 2012 (top left) and 2013 (top right). Bottom panels show changes made in 2013 for station locations added (bottom left) and removed (bottom right) from the survey. 16
Figure 9. Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) for new and old shell crab 95mm in the inshore and offshore by NAFO Div. Data summarized for core stations by year. 17
Figure 10. Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) for sub legal (<95mm cw) and legal ( 95mm cw) size crab in the inshore and offshore of each NAFO Div. Data summarized for core stations. Both shell types combined. 18
Figure 73. Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) from core stations in the Inshore for sub legal (<95mm) and legal ( 95mm) size crab (top panel). Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) for legal size crab only by shell type (new and old) (lower panel). 81
Figure 74. Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) from core stations in the Offshore for sub legal (<95mm) and legal ( 95mm) size crab (top panel). Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) for legal size crab only by shell type (new and old) (lower panel). 82
Figure 75. Mean #/tow for sub legal (<95mm cw top panel) and legal ( 95mm bottom panel) size crab by Crab Management Area. 83
Figure 76. Annual CPUE (mean #/tow) from core stations for legal ( 95mm) size crab by shell type (new and old) by Crab Management Area. 84
Figure 77. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new, and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from the NAFO Div. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 85
Figure 78. Annual size frequencies of crab by claw type (unknown, small and large) sampled from core stations using small mesh pots from the NAFO Div. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 86
Figure 79. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from the inshore of each NAFO Div. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 87
Figure 80. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from the offshore of each NAFO Div. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 88
Figure 81. Annual size frequencies of crab by claw type (unknown, small and large) sampled from core stations using small mesh pots from the inshore of each NAFO Div. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 89
Figure 82. Annual size frequencies of crab by claw type (unknown, small and large) sampled from core stations using small mesh pots from the offshore of each NAFO Div. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 90
Figure 83. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 91
Figure 84. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 92
Figure 85. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 93
Figure 86. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 94
Figure 87. Annual size frequencies of crab by shell condition (soft, new and old) sampled from core stations using large mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 95
Figure 88. Annual size frequencies of crab by claw type (unknown, small and large) sampled from core stations using small mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 96
Figure 89. Annual size frequencies of crab by claw type (unknown, small and large) sampled from core stations using small mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 97
Figure 90. Annual size frequencies of crab by claw type (unknown, small and large) sampled from core stations using small mesh pots from each Crab Management Area. Sample size indicated by N=. Mean carapace width (mm) by shell condition given in the legend. Black bar indicates legal size. 98
Figure 91. Annual percent occurrence of Bitter Crab Disease (BCD) estimated from samples taken from small mesh pots from core stations for males and females new shell crab by Crab Management Area (CMA). Sample size indicated above each bar. 99