ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHING IN THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE OF …€¦ · ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHING IN THE...

13
ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHING IN THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE OF THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA BY GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ 1 ), E. ALBERTO ARAGÓN-NORIEGA 2,4 ) and ALFREDO ORTEGA-RUBIO 3 ) 1 ) Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Integral Regional, Unidad Sinaloa, Blvd. Juan de Díos Bátiz 250, San Joachin, Guasave, Sinaloa 81101, Mexico 2 ) Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, Unidad Sonora, Km 2.35 Camino al Tular, Estero de Bacochibampo, Guaymas, Sonora 85454, Mexico 3 ) Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, Mar Bermejo No. 195, Col Playa Palo de Santa Rita, La Paz, B.C.S. 23090, Mexico ABSTRACT Shrimp is the most important marine resource for the three communities of the Upper Gulf of California (UGC): San Felipe in the state of Baja California, and Golfo de Santa Clara and Puerto Peñasco in the state of Sonora. This fishery generates 80% of the profits in the region. A fishery tendency analysis was made from 1996 to 2007 in the UGC. For the first time, this fishery analysis showed that the Biosphere Reserve and the recently declared Vaquita Refuge Area are important grounds for artisanal fishing. The CPUE and total catches used to describe the fishing effort in the area, could be used to establish any further relationship between shrimp population and environmental variables, because of their high correlation coefficient (0.85). Shrimp capture in the marine protected areas has maintained a continuous level of production with economic incentives, making it attractive to fishermen despite recent restrictions on their activities. As shrimp vessels reduce in number, small boats gradually increase in number and productivity, maintaining high incomes from the fishery. A detailed interdisciplinary study of the fishing effort in the UGC must be conducted, because of the endangered species found in this area, which require adequate management for their conservation without compromising the welfare of the fishermen. RESUMEN El camarón es el recurso pesquero más importante en el Alto Golfo de California (AGC) para las tres comunidades pesqueras que en ella se encuentran: San Felipe, Baja California, Golfo de Santa Clara y Puerto Peñasco, Sonora. Esta pesquería por si sola genera el 80% de los ingresos pesqueros totales en la región. Se hizo un análisis de la tendencia de la pesca de camarón del periodo 1996 al 2007. Por primera vez se describe la importancia de la pesca dentro de la Reserva de la biosfera del Alto Golfo de California y del Refugio de la Vaquita Marina. Debido 4 ) Fax: +52.6222212238; e-mail: [email protected] © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 Crustaceana 82 (12): 1481-1493 Also available online: www.brill.nl/cr DOI:10.1163/156854009X463865

Transcript of ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHING IN THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE OF …€¦ · ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHING IN THE...

ARTISANAL SHRIMP FISHING IN THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE OF THEUPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA

BY

GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ1), E. ALBERTO ARAGÓN-NORIEGA2,4)

and ALFREDO ORTEGA-RUBIO3)1) Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Integral Regional, Unidad Sinaloa,

Blvd. Juan de Díos Bátiz 250, San Joachin, Guasave, Sinaloa 81101, Mexico2) Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, Unidad Sonora, Km 2.35 Camino al Tular,

Estero de Bacochibampo, Guaymas, Sonora 85454, Mexico3) Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, Mar Bermejo No. 195, Col Playa Palo de

Santa Rita, La Paz, B.C.S. 23090, Mexico

ABSTRACT

Shrimp is the most important marine resource for the three communities of the Upper Gulfof California (UGC): San Felipe in the state of Baja California, and Golfo de Santa Clara andPuerto Peñasco in the state of Sonora. This fishery generates 80% of the profits in the region.A fishery tendency analysis was made from 1996 to 2007 in the UGC. For the first time, thisfishery analysis showed that the Biosphere Reserve and the recently declared Vaquita Refuge Areaare important grounds for artisanal fishing. The CPUE and total catches used to describe the fishingeffort in the area, could be used to establish any further relationship between shrimp populationand environmental variables, because of their high correlation coefficient (0.85). Shrimp capturein the marine protected areas has maintained a continuous level of production with economicincentives, making it attractive to fishermen despite recent restrictions on their activities. As shrimpvessels reduce in number, small boats gradually increase in number and productivity, maintaininghigh incomes from the fishery. A detailed interdisciplinary study of the fishing effort in the UGCmust be conducted, because of the endangered species found in this area, which require adequatemanagement for their conservation without compromising the welfare of the fishermen.

RESUMEN

El camarón es el recurso pesquero más importante en el Alto Golfo de California (AGC) paralas tres comunidades pesqueras que en ella se encuentran: San Felipe, Baja California, Golfo deSanta Clara y Puerto Peñasco, Sonora. Esta pesquería por si sola genera el 80% de los ingresospesqueros totales en la región. Se hizo un análisis de la tendencia de la pesca de camarón delperiodo 1996 al 2007. Por primera vez se describe la importancia de la pesca dentro de laReserva de la biosfera del Alto Golfo de California y del Refugio de la Vaquita Marina. Debido

4) Fax: +52.6222212238; e-mail: [email protected]

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 Crustaceana 82 (12): 1481-1493Also available online: www.brill.nl/cr DOI:10.1163/156854009X463865

1482 GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ ET AL.

al alto coeficiente de correlación (0,85), la captura total y el CPUE analizados para el esfuerzopesquero pueden ser utilizados para establecer futuras relaciones entre las variables ambientales yla población de camarón en la región. La captura del camarón mantiene un continuo crecimiento enlas áreas naturales protegidas (ANP) siendo atractivo para los pescadores a pesar de las recientesrestricciones a la pesca. Al disminuir el esfuerzo de las embarcaciones mayores dentro las ANP,se ha incrementado gradualmente la productividad de las embarcaciones artesanales, lo que hapropiciado un aumentando en el numero de embarcaciones y de los ingresos económicos en laregión, manteniéndose una alta rentabilidad de la pesquería. El esfuerzo pesquero realizado porpescadores de las comunidades en el AGC dentro de las ANP requiere de un estudio más complejoe interdisciplinario, ya que en esta ANP se encuentran especies en peligro de extinción, el cualrequieren de un manejo adecuado para su conservación sin que afecte los intereses individuales delos pescadores.

INTRODUCTION

Small-scale marine fisheries provide an important source of food and incomefor coastal communities worldwide (FAO, 2002), and Mexico has an importanttradition in small-scale fisheries. The Gulf of California is one of the majormarine fishery areas, contributing 20% of the national production and includingmore than 50,000 small vessels (Cisneros, 2001; SAGARPA, 2002). The Gulf hasbeen divided into four regions based on biological, ecological, and oceanographiccharacteristics. One of these regions is the Upper Gulf of California (UGC), whichis of great importance for the production of shrimp and other species that depend onestuarine conditions (Galindo-Bect et al., 2000; Ramírez-Rojo & Aragón-Noriega,2006).

The Upper Gulf of California and the Colorado River Delta were togetherdeclared a Biosphere Reserve on 10 June 1993; this reserve covers an area of934,756 hectares and includes both marine and terrestrial environments (DOF,1993; fig. 1). The Reserve was created to protect species inhabiting the region,some of which are commercially important, endemic, or under risk of extinction(INE, 1995; Van Jaarsveld et al., 1998). The area is supported by a managementprogramme that was designed to promote sustainable activities by durable andconservational use of biodiversity (SEMARNAT, 1995; Rojas-Bracho et al., 2006).

Due to the harsh climatic conditions along the Upper Gulf coast, the most im-portant economic activities in the region are the fisheries. Two types of commercialshrimp fishing take place in the UGC: artisanal (or small-scale) and industrial fish-ing. Artisanal fisheries use 7-m fiberglass boats (“pangas”) with outboard enginesand two fishermen; deployment and retrieval of fishing gear (hook and line, gill-nets, pots, longlines) is performed manually. This type of fishing is carried out byorganizations called cooperatives or by individual fishermen from three ports ofthe UGC: Puerto Peñasco and El Golfo de Santa Clara, both in the State of Sonora,and San Felipe, in Baja California (Cudney & Turk, 1998).

SHRIMP FISHING IN THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA 1483

Fig. 1. The Biosphere Reserve of the Upper Gulf of California (June 1993) and the VaquitaRefuge area (December 2005), with the location of the three communities along the Upper Gulf

of California.

Industrial fishing is conducted using 20-23 m steel ships with minimum crewsof five, and with machinery to operate fishing gear (trawl nets, longlines, gillnets).Industrial fishing is carried out mainly by fishermen from Puerto Peñasco and otherports outside the UGC region such as Guaymas and Mazatlán.

The blue shrimp, Litopenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson, 1871) fishery represents∼90% of the shrimp capture in the UGC. Based on catch volume and beach eco-nomic value, this fishery is the most important in the UGC. This species is highlypriced in the local and international markets (Cudney & Turk, 1998). Fluctuationsin shrimp capture have occurred as a result of overfishing by commercial trawlers,Colorado River flows and illegal fishing (Galindo-Bect et al., 2000).

The potential profit of important species has motivated the fishing effort in theUGC, which jeopardizes critical species such as the totoaba, Totoaba macdonaldi(Gilbert, 1890) (Pisces, Sciaenidae), and the rare vaquita Phocoena sinus (Norris& McFarland, 1958) (Mammalia, Phocoenidae). The fish and the marine mammalare accidentally caught in gillnets used in the UGC (Jaramillo-Legorreta et al.,

1484 GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ ET AL.

2007). These species are also at risk of extinction due to low existing numbers(Morris & Doak, 2003) and reduced habitat (Rojas-Bracho et al., 2006). A buy-out program of shrimp trawling vessels was recently implemented in orderto reduce the fishing effort and to protect soft-bottom biological communities(García-Caudillo & Gómez-Palafox, 2005). However, the buy-out program lacksfundamental information for proper regulation of the shrimp fishery.

There are few studies focusing on the shrimp fishery in the Upper Gulf ofCalifornia and Colorado River Delta (Galindo-Bect et al., 2000; Aragón-Noriega &García-Juárez, 2002). These studies primarily concentrated on the relation betweenshrimp captures and Colorado River flow; none has provided a description andanalysis of the shrimp fishery in the zone.

In this work, we identify and compute the economic value of shrimp captureas one of the most important artisanal fisheries of the Upper Gulf of CaliforniaBiosphere Reserve and of the recently created Vaquita Refuge, by the threecommunities within the protected marine areas. We also analysed the currentsituation of the shrimp fishery in the UGC through primary (interviews) andsecondary (official catch reports) data. We describe the basic variables such asCatch per Unit of Effort (CPUE), effort, and catch fluctuations. We also identify thefishing ground for each community. Finally, we assessed the relative sustainabilityof the shrimp fishery by means of a sustainability index.

METHODS

A total of 2,554 catch reports by artisanal fishermen of the three fishingcommunities of the UGC was compiled and analysed. Artisanal fishery dataspanning January to December from 1996 to 2007 were collected from officialrecords in the ports of San Felipe, El Golfo de Santa Clara, and Puerto Peñasco.Further information was gathered from a closed survey based on direct interviewsof 146 artisanal fishermen in those three ports. Questionnaires were designed tocompute the direct cost structure of fishing operations, as well as fishing sites.Following the Cochran (1989) method, we obtained the fishermen population tointerview as follows:

n =Z2qE2p

1 + 1N [Z2q−1

E2p]

where: n = sample size; Z = CI = 95%; p & q = equation distribution;E = 6% precision level; N = fishermen community size. Using the Greenberg(1993) method, local fishermen of each port were randomly selected.

SHRIMP FISHING IN THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA 1485

From the landing records of artisanal shrimp fishermen in the local governmentfishery offices, we obtained the following data: capture site, species, weight oflandings, and the first-hand or “beach” economic value of those landings. Withthis information, we computed a gross income (disregarding investment costs) foreach of the three communities.

Shrimp fishing capture tendency in the UGC from 1996 to 2007 was measuredthrough the Sustainable Fishery Index, as detailed by Ponce-Díaz et al. (2006), toestimate growing and decreasing periods of the fishery as follows:

Ic = Ln(Cyear/Cmean)

where: Cyear = capture in the i year, Cmean = capture mean through completeperiod analysed.

The artisanal shrimp catch was processed and spatially represented in a ge-ographic information system (GIS), identifying fishing sites within the VaquitaRefuge (fig. 1), and overlapping the Vaquita Refuge area through the use ofArcView 3.2 software and downloaded via 2002 Conica Lambert projection tomaps of the total shrimp fishery and the shrimp fishery by community. The per-centage of fishing in the Vaquita Refuge was determined from the overall projectedfishing sites.

RESULTS

Fishery analysis

The greatest number of authorized small boats (pangas) for shrimp fishing wereregistered in San Felipe (SF), followed by Puerto Peñasco (PP) and El Golfo deSanta Clara (GSC), in that order. The number of pangas officially registered ineach community has changed since 1996. In that year, PP had the highest numberof pangas of the three communities. After 1996, a substantial number of pangaswere authorized to join the fleets of GSC and SF. In 1997, GSC and PP in the stateof Sonora were authorized to increase their fleet by 41% and 98%, respectively(fig. 2A). SF in the state of Baja California had an increase of almost 100% of thefleet. In GSC the number of pangas raised to 557, for PP raised to 673, and for SFthe number of pangas raised to 840. This quantity of pangas remains in our days.

At the beginning of the period analysed, the increased fishing effort correlatedwith increased catches in SF and GSC. The general tendency of catches over theeleven-year period of this study was a general, but fluctuating increase. For SF andGSC, the highest catches were obtained in 2006 with 400 and 531 metric tons,respectively, but a great reduction was observed in 2007, dropping to 321 and 265metric tons, respectively. It is also important to note that the main shrimp catcheswere obtained by fishermen of the SF and GSC communities (fig. 2B).

1486 GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ ET AL.

Fig. 2. A, tendency of effort; B, shrimp capture; C, CPUE in the three communities of the UpperGulf of California. SF, San Felipe; GSC, Golfo de Santa Clara; PP, Puerto Peñasco.

Since increased effort also resulted in increased catches, the CPUE exhibitedthe same trend as the catches. Once again, SF and GSC were the most importantcommunities, with either community holding the highest position over the courseof this study. Here it is important to note that no one community recorded morethan 1 ton/panga/year over the period of analysis (fig. 2C).

After we totalled the three communities’ catches and effort, we analysed thetendency of the three communities as one (fig. 3). The effort jumped from 1996 to1997 when the number of pangas increased from 848 to 1269. The rate of increasein panga numbers was then modest until 2002, because in 2003 the number ofpermitted pangas increased to 2070. The number of pangas has remained constantsince.

SHRIMP FISHING IN THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA 1487

Fig. 3. Tendency of shrimp capture, effort, and CPUE in the Upper Gulf of California.

Shrimp catches and CPUE exhibited comparable profiles, with important peaksin 1998 (502 tons), 2002 (821 tons), and 2006 when production was 1008 metrictons of shrimp. However, production dropped to 611 in 2007. The CPUE showedthe same behaviour, and the difference in those years when a peak was observedwas minimal. The CPUE was 0.4, 0.48, and 0.49 ton/panga/year for 1998, 2002,and 2006, respectively (fig. 3).

The sustainable fishing index calculated for the three communities revealed thatthe shrimp fishery has been growing over the past four years. A historical analysisof shrimp capture describes two phases of the fishery within the marine protectedareas (MPA) (fig. 4). The initial period started before 1996 and lasted until 2001,

Fig. 4. Sustainable index of shrimp capture in the Upper Gulf of California.

1488 GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ ET AL.

with low captures of 199 to 502 tons of shrimp, followed by a second period with asubstantial increase in the total capture in the area. The mean capture of 706 ± 166tons was larger than the maximum capture obtained in the previous period (fig. 4).

GIS interpretation

Our survey data and GIS analysis showed that fishing is conducted within theVaquita Refuge and in the Biosphere Reserve (fig. 1): 84.42% of the total shrimpcatch in the UGC occurred in the MPA, and 55.73% of the total surface of theMPA is used for fishing (fig. 5); 75.72% of the shrimp artisanal catch is done inthe Biosphere Reserve and in 92.22% of the Vaquita Refuge.

Fig. 5. Spatial distribution of artisanal shrimp fisheries compared with the declared boundaries ofthe Vaquita Refuge in the Upper Gulf of California by community. A, Puerto Peñasco; B, Golfo de

Santa Clara; C, San Felipe; D, all MPAs together.

SHRIMP FISHING IN THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA 1489

Fishermen from Puerto Peñasco fish close to the Sonora shoreline: 65% ofcaptures occurs inside the Biosphere Reserve, but they do not fish in the VaquitaRefuge. Fishermen from El Golfo de Santa Clara conduct all of their fishing insidethe MPA. Shrimp is captured in 37% of the Vaquita Refuge and in 35% of themarine surface of the Biosphere Reserve. San Felipe fishermen fish near the BajaCalifornia shoreline in the UGC from the core zone to Puertecitos, covering 85%of the MPA. They capture shrimp in 80% of the Vaquita Refuge area, and 75% ofthe shrimp fishery takes place in the Biosphere Reserve.

Shrimp fishery economic value

The economic value of the shrimp fishery from 1996 to 2007 is shown in table I.Shrimp capture represents 58% of the total gross incomes in the MPA. The valueof catch during this period was ∼US$ 6.0 million. Operation costs of the artisanalfishery were relatively high, even though the travel distance from the three ports tothe fishing sites are short. Shrimp captured in the MPA generated an annual grossprofit of ∼US$ 1.9 million with a return rate of 32%. Even if fishing effort hasincreased, gross profits provide high incomes.

DISCUSSION

This study was motivated by issues of biodiversity conservation in which theshrimp fishery plays a role; we saw an opportunity to detail the basic aspectsof the UGC fishery. Most of the previous work focused on the relation betweenshrimp captures and Colorado River flow. Galindo-Bect et al. (2000) explored therelation between total shrimp catch and Colorado River flow, suggesting that theentire UGC shrimp capture is affected by the Colorado River. Aragón-Noriega &García-Juárez (2002) were concerned with the use of catch data coming only fromthe community of El Golfo de Santa Clara (GSC); their opinion was that GSC isthe nearest fishing community to the Colorado River Delta. In this analysis, wedetermined that the fishing area of this community is in the far northern side ofthe UGC close to the Colorado River Delta (fig. 5). Therefore, we conclude thatGSC shrimp captures are affected by Colorado River discharges, which also havean effect on the shrimp capture by San Felipe (SF) fishermen. To determine therelationship between shrimp captures and Colorado River discharge, the catchesfrom SF and GSC, but not Puerto Peñasco, should be considered.

Another important issue is the use of data to explore the relationship betweenan environmental variable and shrimp production. Aragón-Noriega & García-Juárez (2002) used the CPUE because they believed that CPUE provides morereliable data than shrimp abundance. In our analysis, the CPUE and the total

1490 GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ ET AL.

TA

BL

EI

Cat

ch,

first

-han

dva

lue

prod

uct,

and

oper

atio

nco

stin

the

shri

mp

artis

anal

fishe

ryof

the

Upp

erG

ulf

ofC

alif

orni

ain

side

the

Vaq

uita

Ref

uge

and

the

Bio

sphe

reR

eser

vefr

om19

96to

2007

1)

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Ave

rage

Cat

ch(m

etri

cto

ns)

184

185

478

431

448

494

842

548

443

731

289

203

440

Val

ueof

catc

h2)

1,47

2,04

62,

139,

676

6,29

7,50

75,

304,

037

5,96

1,46

25,

549,

570

9,03

7,81

45,

627,

052

5,43

0,44

99,

831,

305

5,06

1,27

47,

468,

102

5,76

5,02

4C

osto

fca

tch2

)1,

002,

757

1,43

8,71

84,

366,

062

3,67

2,51

54,

087,

178

3,83

8,63

85,

958,

631

3,79

3,75

83,

634,

056

6,65

8,74

33,

391,

053

5,05

8,14

63,

908,

355

Gro

sspr

ofit2

)46

9,28

870

0,95

81,

931,

445

1,63

1,52

21,

874,

284

1,71

0,93

23,

079,

183

1,83

3,29

31,

796,

393

3,17

2,56

21,

670,

220

2,40

9,95

71,

856,

670

Ret

urn

rate

(%)

3233

3131

3131

3433

3332

3332

32

1)

Sour

ce:F

ish

gove

rnm

ento

ffice

sin

the

com

mun

ities

ofth

eU

pper

Gul

fof

Cal

ifor

nia.

2)

InU

.S.d

olla

rs.

SHRIMP FISHING IN THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA 1491

catches could be used to establish any relationship between shrimp populationand environmental variables because the correlation coefficient between CPUE andtotal catch was very high (0.85). Therefore, further analysis of shrimp populationsand environmental fluctuations could use either of these variables, as Galindo-Bectet al. (2000) did in their study. The use of PP shrimp data to relate to ColoradoRiver fluctuations remains our largest criticism of Galindo-Bect et al. (2000).

Our analysis showed that the Biosphere Reserve and the recently declaredVaquita Refuge are important grounds for artisanal fishing. Shrimp generatesthe greatest income for artisanal fishermen. These results represent an importantchallenge to the goals of the Reserve and the Vaquita Refuge, moreover, becausethe number of registered small boats (pangas) is greater than those recommendedwhen the refuge was declared (DOF, 2005). Pressure on the fishery will continueas Mexican authorities reduce the size of industrial fleets in the zone by buyingtheir fishing permits, thereby forcing fishermen into small-scale fishing.

Operation costs determine to a great extent where fishing is conducted inthe UGC and depend on distances from fishing sites to ports and the seasonaldistribution of natural resources. San Felipe is the fishing port nearest to therecently declared Refuge; fishermen of this port work in that vicinity throughoutthe year. Although El Golfo de Santa Clara holds a great number of registeredpermits and pangas, fishermen from this port do not fish near the Refuge becauseof high operation costs related to travel distance. Fishermen of Puerto Peñasco fishnear the Sonoran coast to reduce operation expenses by saving gasoline and oil.

Shrimp capture in the MPA has maintained a continuous level of productionwith economic incentives, making it attractive to fishermen despite recent restric-tions on their activities. But, the persistent recruitment of new fishermen to the areawill not enhance the overall welfare of fishermen, and there is no guarantee thatthe fishery will be sustained over the next years (Ponce-Díaz et al., 2006).

Shrimp production requires adopting strategies that allow for the managementand conservation of the ecosystem (Palumbi et al., 2003), but includes thefishermen’s points of view throughout the negotiation process (Lundquist &Granek, 2005) as well as the views of law enforcement officials. This entailsknowing what fishermen would be willing to obtain in return for reduced fishingeffort in the Vaquita Refuge (Lundquist et al., 2005).

Conservation success in this case must be based on agreements that dignifyinhabitants of the UGC. Governments of all levels and conservation organizationsshould promote development of the region. We must strive to improve the qualityof the life of fishermen while recovering the shrimp ecosystem and ensuringsustainability in the context of socio-economic, ecological, and institutional factors(Harris et al., 2005; Leslie, 2005). The success of most fishery managementpolicies to conserve species is contingent upon the vulnerability of the species and

1492 GERARDO RODRÍGUEZ-QUIROZ ET AL.

the size of the protected area (Mangel, 1998; Carter, 2003). As a first step towardsinstituting a monitoring and management strategy for the area, further researchis needed to assess the ecological impacts of small-scale fisheries employing so-called “non-destructive” techniques (Lunn & Dearden, 2006).

In conclusion, we believe that a practical policy for management of the shrimpfishery in the marine protected areas is needed to avoid the perception thatmarine protected areas are only suitable for biodiversity conservation, to addressinconsistencies between conservation and fisheries approaches to the regionalmanagement of natural resources. Better collaboration and coordination betweengovernment agencies and society groups (non-governmental organizations andfishermen) will enhance shrimp fishing programs in the Upper Gulf of Californiaand would help to reduce conflict in the two marine protected areas.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

GRQ thanks CONACYT 112401 and COTEPABE-IPN 347 for his scholarshipduring his doctoral studies. EAAN received financial support from CONACYTcontract 48445, and AOR received financial support from CONACYT-SEMARNAT Project 2006-C01-23449.

REFERENCES

ARAGÓN-NORIEGA, E. A. & A. R. GARCÍA-JUÁREZ, 2002. Reclutamiento de postlarvas de ca-marón azul Litopenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson, 1871) a condiciones antiestuarinas provocadaspor actividades antropogénicas. Hidrobiológica, 12: 37-46.

CARTER, D. W., 2003. Protected areas in marine resource management: another look at theeconomics and research issues. Ocean and Coastal Management, 46: 439-456.

CISNEROS, M., 2001. Pesca y manejo pesquero en el Golfo de California. Estudios Sociales, 11:57-69.

COCHRAN, G. W., 1989. Sampling & techniques: 1-413. (Wiley and Sons, New York).CUDNEY, R. & P. J. TURK, 1998. Pescando entre mareas del Alto Golfo de California: 1-166.

(Centro intercultural de estudio de desiertos y océanos, Puerto Peñasco, Sonora).DOF (DIARIO OFICIAL DE LA FEDERACIÓN), 1993. Decreto por el que se declara área natural

protegida con el carácter de Reserva de la Biosfera, la región conocida como Alto Golfo deCalifornia y Delta del Río Colorado. Diario Oficial de la Federación, Junio 1993.

— —, 2005. Programa de protección de la vaquita dentro de área de Refugio ubicada en la porciónoccidental del Alto Golfo de California. Diario Oficial de la Federación, Septiembre 2005.

FAO (FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS), 2002. The stateof world fisheries and aquaculture. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,Rome).

GALINDO-BECT, M., E. P. GLENN, H. M. PAGE, K. FITZSIMMONS, L. A. GALINDO-BECT,J. M. HERNANDEZ-AYON, R. L. PETTY, J. GARCÍA-HERNÁNDEZ & D. MOORE, 2000.Penaeid shrimp landings in the Upper Gulf of California in relation to Colorado Riverfreshwater discharge. Fishery Bulletin, U.S., 98 (1): 222-225.

SHRIMP FISHING IN THE UPPER GULF OF CALIFORNIA 1493

GARCÍA-CAUDILLO, J. M. & J. V. GÓMEZ-PALAFOX, 2005. La pesca industrial de camarón enel Golfo de California: situación económico-financiera e impactos socio-ambientales: 1-104.(Conservación Internacional-Región Golfo de California, Guaymas, Sonora).

HARRIS, G. M., C. N. JENKINS & S. L. PIMM, 2005. Refining biodiversity conservation priorities.Conservation Biology, 19: 1957-1968.

INE (INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ECOLOGÍA), 1995. Programa de manejo: áreas naturales protegi-das, Reserva de la Biosfera Alto Golfo de California y Delta del Río Colorado: 1-94. (Mexico,D.F.).

JARAMILLO-LEGORRETA, A. M., L. ROJAS-BRACHO, R. L. BROWNELL, A. J. READ,R. R. REEVES, K. RALLS & B. L. TAYLOR, 2007. Saving the vaquita: immediate action,not more data. Conservation Biology, 21: 1653-1655.

LESLIE, H. M., 2005. A synthesis of marine conservation planning approaches. ConservationBiology, 19: 1701-1713.

LUNDQUIST, C. J. & E. F. GRANEK, 2005. Strategies for successful marine conservation:integrating socioeconomic, political and scientific factors. Conservation Biology, 19: 1771-1778.

LUNDQUIST, C. J., E. F. GRANEK & R. H. BUSTAMANTE, 2005. Special section: implementationand management of marine protected areas. Conservation Biology, 19: 1699-1700.

LUNN, K. E. & P. DEARDEN, 2006. Monitoring small-scale marine fisheries: an example fromThailand’s Ko Chang archipelago. Fisheries Research, 77: 60-71.

MANGEL, M., 1998. No-take areas for sustainability of harvested species and a conservationinvariant for marine reserves. Ecology Letters, 1: 87-90.

MORRIS, W. & D. DOAK, 2003. Quantitative conservation biology: theory and practice ofpopulation viability analysis. (Sunderland, Massachusetts).

PALUMBI, S. R., S. D. GAINES, H. LESLIE & R. R. WARNER, 2003. New wave: high-tech toolsto help marine reserve research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1: 73-79.

PONCE-DÍAZ, G., F. ARREGUÍN-SANCHÉZ & L. F. BELTRAN-MORALES, 2006. Indicadores desustentabilidad y pesca: casos en Baja California Sur, Mexico. In: L. F. BELTRÁN-MORALES,J. URCIAGA-GARCÍA & A. ORTEGA-RUBIO (eds.). Desarrollo sustentable: ¿Mito o realidad?:1-272. (Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, S.C., Mexico).

RÁMIREZ-ROJO, R. A. & E. A. ARAGÓN-NORIEGA, 2006. Postlarval ecology of the blue shrimpLitopenaeus stylirostris and brown shrimp (Farfantepenaeus californiensis) in the ColoradoRiver estuary. Ciencias Marinas, 32: 45-52.

ROJAS-BRACHO, L., R. R. REEVES & A. JARAMILLO-LEGORRETA, 2006. Conservation of thevaquita Phocoena sinus. Mammal Review, 36: 179-216.

SAGARPA, 2002. Anuario estadístico de pesca. Instituto Nacional de la Pesca: 1-266. (Secretaríade Agricultura, Ganadería, Recursos Naturales y Pesca, Mexico).

SEMARNAT, 1995. Programa de manejo. Areas naturales protegidas 1. Reserva de la Biosfera delAlto Golfo de California y Delta del Río Colorado. (SEMARNAT/CONANP, Mexico).

VAN JAARSVELD, A. S., S. FREITAG, S. L. CHOWN, C. MULLER, S. KOCH, H. HULL, C.BELLAMY, M. KRUGER, S. ENDRODY-YOUNGA, M. W. MANSELL & C. H. SCHOLTZ,1998. Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies. Science, New York, 279: 2106-2108.

First received 14 July 2008.Final version accepted 6 October 2008.