Kory Angstadt

The Effects of Derelict Blue Crab Traps on Marine Organisms in the Lower York River, Virginia

Abstract Derelict (abandoned or lost) traps targeting blue crab Callinectes sapidus have the potential to affect the blue crab fishery and other marine-oriented species. We used side-scan sonar to locate derelict traps and assess their extent and accumulation rate. Experimental traps were monitored at four locations to calculate catch rates of marine organisms and trap degradation rates. In 2006, 635–676 derelict traps were identified in a 33.5-km2 area of the lower York River in Virginias portion of the Chesapeake Bay. Trap loss rates are estimated at 30%, resulting in the potential addition of over 100,000 traps annually to the Chesapeake Bay derelict trap population in Virginia. The top four species captured in the experimental traps were blue crab, Atlantic croaker Micropogonias undulates, oyster toadfish Opsanus tau, and white perch Morone americana. Experimental derelict traps captured 50.6 blue crabs·trap−1·season−1 during April–November 2006 and 13.6 Atlantic croakers·trap−1·season−1 during May–A...

Derelict fishing gear in Chesapeake Bay, Virginia: Spatial patterns and implications for marine fauna

Derelict fishing gear is a source of mortality for target and non-target marine species. A program employing commercial watermen to remove marine debris provided a novel opportunity to collect extensive spatially-explicit information for four consecutive winters (2008-2012) on the type, distribution, and abundance of derelict fishing gear and bycatch in Virginia waters of Chesapeake Bay. The most abundant form of derelict gear recovered was blue crab pots with almost 32,000 recovered. Derelict pots were widely distributed, but with notable hotspot areas, capturing 40 species and over 31,000 marine organisms. The target species, blue crab, experienced the highest mortality from lost pots with an estimated 900,000 animals killed each year, a potential annual economic loss to the fishery of

Use of Fully Biodegradable Panels to Reduce Derelict Pot Threats to Marine Fauna

300,000. Important fishery species were captured and killed in derelict pots including Atlantic croaker and black sea bass. While some causes of gear loss are unavoidable, others can be managed to minimize loss.

Location, Location, Location: The Importance of Cull Ring Placement in Blue Crab Traps

Fishing pots (i.e., traps) are designed to catch fish or crustaceans and are used globally. Lost pots are a concern for a variety of fisheries, and there are reports that 10-70% of deployed pots are lost annually. Derelict fishing pots can be a source of mortality for target and bycatch species for several years. Because continual removal of derelict gear can be impractical over large spatial extents, modifications are needed to disarm gear once it is lost. We tested a fully biodegradable panel with a cull or escape ring designed for placement on the sides of a crab pot that completely degrades into environmentally neutral constituents after approximately 1 year. This panel is relatively inexpensive, easy to install, and can be used in multiple fisheries. We used the blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) fishery as a test case because it is a large pot fishery and blue crab pots are similar to traps used in other pot fisheries. We had commercial fishers deploy pots with panels alongside standard pots in Chesapeake Bay (U.S.A.) to assess potential effects of our experimental pots on blue crab catch. We compared the number, biomass, and size of crabs captured between standard and experimental pots and evaluated differences in catch over a crabbing season (March-November) at five locations. There was no evidence that biodegradable panels adversely affected catch. In all locations and time periods, legal catches were comparable in abundance, biomass, and size between experimental and standard pots. Properly designed biodegradable panels appear to be a viable solution to mitigate adverse effects of derelict pots.

Experiments with By-Catch Reduction Devices to Exclude Diamondback Terrapins and Retain Blue Crabs

Abstract Wire-mesh crab traps capture both legal- and sublegal-sized blue crabs Callinectes sapidus. The likelihood of injury and subsequent mortality of small crabs when confined with larger conspecifics increases as the time of confinement lengthens. While the installation of cull (escape) rings has reduced the entrapment of sublegal crabs, the capture of undersized blue crabs continues. In most states, there are no regulations requiring placement of cull rings in a specific location on a trap wall. Since blue crabs tend to crawl along the floor of the upper chamber of crab traps, we tested escape efficiency for sublegal blue crabs in traps with cull rings that were flush with the upper chamber floor. Placement of cull rings flush with the upper chamber floor or partition increases the odds of escape within 4 h of capture by 39 times over traps with cull rings placed higher on the trap wall. A reduction in the entrapment and potential injury or mortality of undersized blue crabs can be realized by prope...

Ecosystem approaches to aquatic health assessment: linking subtidal habitat quality, shoreline condition and estuarine fish communities

Experiments were completed in SE Virginia during June–July 2014 and 2015 to examine the responses of blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus) and diamondback terrapins (Malaclemys terrapin) to commercial-style crab pots modified in visual and other ways that might attract and retain crabs while excluding terrapins as by-catch. In a seawater tank, far fewer crabs entered crab pots fitted with red plastic by-catch reduction devices (BRDs), relative to pots without BRDs. Crab retention times, however, were significantly longer in pots fitted with red BRDs. In a second experiment, fewer terrapins entered crab pots with funnels painted red relative to black. From a field pilot study, the legal crab catch from pots with red BRDs was similar to pots without BRDs, and terrapin by-catch was reduced. Relative to those treatments, fewer crabs and more terrapins were captured in pots with orange BRDs and blue BRDs, and in pots with a magnetic field directed into the funnel openings. Based on these results, a final field trial yielded comparable crab catch from 15 pots without BRDs and 15 pots fitted with red plastic BRDs. Of a by-catch of 68 terrapins, 58 were from pots without BRDs. The structure and color of BRDs can exclude most terrapins; because crab retention rates are high, the net effect of BRDs on crab catch is relatively minor, even though fewer crabs may enter pots fitted with BRDs.

Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines

5 INTRODUCTION 5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES 6 I. BENTHIC HABITAT MAPPING 8 BACKGROUND 8 METHODS 8 SIDE SCAN SURVEY 8 POST-PROCESSING OF ACOUSTIC IMAGES WITH QTC SIDEVIEW 9 MANUAL PROCESSING 12 GIS PRODUCTS 13 JAMES RIVER BENTHIC HABITAT MAPPING 13 BENTHIC MAPPING SURVEY 13 POST-PROCESSING OF ACOUSTIC IMAGES WITH QTC SIDEVIEW 13 GROUND-TRUTH PROTOCOL 14 RESULTS 17 SUMMARY 19 APPLICATION OF ACOUSTIC BENTHIC MAPPING PROTOCOLS TO THE PIANKATANK RIVER 20 BENTHIC MAPPING SURVEY 20 POST-PROCESSING OF ACOUSTIC IMAGES WITH QTC SIDEVIEW 20 GROUND-TRUTH PROTOCOL 20 RESULTS 21 SUMMARY 27 BENTHIC MAPPING AND CHARACTERIZATION WORKSHOP 27 II. FISH COMMUNITY HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS 28 BACKGROUND 28 METHODS 28 FISH SURVEY ON THE JAMES RIVER 28 GUILD DEVELOPMENT 30 METRIC SELECTION 30 METRIC ANALYSES 30 RESULTS 31 DISCUSSION 32 OVERALL SUMMARY 44 LITERATURE CITED 45 APPENDIX 1. BENTHIC MAPPING WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 49 APPENDIX 2. BENTHIC MAPPING WORKSHOP AGENDA 50 ATTACHMENTS (DIGITAL PRODUCTS): DVD 1: LOWER JAMES RIVER NEARSHORE SEABED CLASSIFICATION DVD 2: PIANKATANK RIVER NEARSHORE SEABED CLASSIFICATION DVD 3: LOWER JAMES RIVER ORIGINAL ACOUSTIC IMAGES (MST FORMAT) DVD 4: PIANKATANK RIVER ORIGINAL ACOUSTIC IMAGES (MST FORMAT)

Summary Tables: Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines

Recommended Citation Berman, M., Nunez, K., Killeen, S., Rudnicky, T., Bradshaw, J., Angstadt, K., Tombleson, C., Duhring, K., Brown, K., Hendricks, J., Weiss, D., Hershner, C., & Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program. (2016) Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering (SRAMSOE) No. 450. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary. http://doi.org/10.21220/V58C79

Gloucester County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines

Recommended Citation Berman, M., Nunez, K., Killeen, S., Rudnicky, T., Bradshaw, J., Angstadt, K., Tombleson, C., Duhring, K., Brown, K., Hendricks, J., Weiss, D., Hershner, C., & Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program. (2016) Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering (SRAMSOE) No. 450. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary. http://doi.org/10.21220/V58C79

Middlesex County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines

Recommended Citation Berman, M.R., Nunez, K., Killeen, S., Rudnicky, T., Bradshaw, J., Duhring, K., Stanhope, D., Angstadt, K., Tombleson, C., Weiss, D. and Hershner, C.H. 2014. Gloucester County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report: Methods and Guidelines, SRAMSOE no.441, Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, Virginia, 23062