DEMERSAL FISH RESOURCES IN MALAYSIAN WATERS

Transcription

1

2 DEMERSAL FSH RESOURCES N MALAYSAN WATERS EGHTH TRAWL SURVEY OF THE COASTAL WATERS OFF THE EAST COAST OF' PENNSULAR MALAYSA (JUNE - AUGUST 1988) Ahmad Adnan bin Nuruddin Fisheries Research nstitute, Batu Maung, Penang.

3 -- \ 1 ft-., \ CONTENTS ),,,' l 1 i, Page J LST OF FGURES V 1i, 1 LST OF TABLES LST OF APPENDCES ABSTRACT/ABSTRAK J, i 1. NTRODUCTON 1 t 2. MATERALS AND METHODS 1 t 3. RESULT ~ 3.1 Number of hauls conducted Catch data analysis 3 t Catch rates by areas 3! Catch rates by depth of water Catch composition Catch rates for the various groups/families 10 i, 4. PRODUCTMTYN THE SURVEYED REGON 13,~ 5. DSCUSSON AND CONCLUSON 15 V V V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 17 J REFERENCES 17 j FGURES 19 i' _f TABLES 25! 1 r APPENDCES 42 t.i i ill ~

4 Figures 1. Survey area off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, showing sub-areas, trawl stations and trawling direction, K.K. MERSUJ, Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones and sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Average catch rates (kg/hr) by sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Average catch rates (kg/hr) depth-zones, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Degrees of productivity in the surveyed region, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Average catch rates of past and present surveys, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Average catch rates by sub-areas for past and present surveys, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Table 1. Table 2a. Table 2b. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Table 2c. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Table 2d. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones for Sub-area V, East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia, Table 3. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth zones, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

5 Table 4. Table 5a. Table 5b. Table 5c. Table 5d. Percentage catch by weight by sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area V, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Table 6. Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, Table 7. Table 8a. Table 8b. Table 8c. Table 8d. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones of past and present surveys, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones of past and present surveys in Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones of past and present surveys in Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones of past and present surveys in Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones of past and present surveys in Sub-area V, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia. Appendix 1. Appendix 2. Appendix 3. Record of fishing operations of K.K. MERSUJ off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, Commercial fish catch of individual hauls (kglhr) of fish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, K.K. MERSUJ, Trash fish catch of individual hauls (kg/hr) of fish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

6 The eighth demersal fish resource survey conducted off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia was carried out from 26 June to 31 August A total of 129 hauls were conducted in Sub-areas,, and V and in waters between 10 and 70 metres. The catch rates of commercial fish, trash fish and major fish groups, both by areas and depth of water, are described. The catch composition, expressed as P7rcentage catches by weights of dominant fish groups, also by areas and depth of water, are also discussed. The best average catch rate was obtained from Sub-area while the best depth of water, irrespective of sub-areas, was between 41 and 50 metres. Commercial fish made up 68.4% of the total catch. The overall average catch rate of the whole survey region had declined from 90.5 kg/hr in the 1984 survey to 72.4 kg/hr. The overall average catch rates of Sub-area increased while those of Sub-areas, and V decreased when compared to the 1984 survey. Survei sumber ikan demersal yang kelapan di perairan pantai timur, Semenanjung Malaysia, telah dilaksanakan dari 26 Jun hingga 31 August Sejumlah 129 karau telah dijalankan di Pecahan-kawasan,, dan V dan di kedalaman air dari 10 hingga 70 meter. Kadar tangkapan ikan komersial, ikan baja dan kumpulan ikan yang utama, dari segi kawasan dan kedalaman air, dibincangkan. Komposisi tangkapan, diberi di dalam bentuk peratusan tangkapan mengikut berat, juga dari segi kawasan dan kedalaman air, juga dibincangkan. Purata kadar tangkapan yang terbaik diperolehi dari Pecahan-kawasan manakala kedalaman air yang terbaik, tanpa mengira kawasan, adalah di antara 41 dan 50 meter. kan komersial merupakan 68.4% dari keseluruhan tangkapan. Purata kadar tangkapan keseluruhan survei ini telah menurun dari 90.5 kg/jam pada survei tahun 1984 kepada 72.4 kg/jam. Purata kadar tangkapan keseluruhan di Pecahan-kawasan telah bertambah manakala untuk Pecahan- kawasan, dan V ianya telah menurun berbanding dengan survei tahun 1984.

7 t This report is the eighth in the series of demersal fish resource surveys carried out off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Earlier surveys conducted in this area were in August/October 1970 (Pathansali et al., 1974), March/May 1971 (Jothy et al., 1975), August/September 1972 (Lam et al., 1975), July/August 1974 (Lamp and Shaari, 1976), June/July 1981 (Ahmad Adnan, 1990), a survey carried out in AprillMay and September/ October 1983 (Anon., 1983) and a survey carried out in AprillMay 1984 (Anon., 1984). The primary objective of this survey was to estimate the status of the demersal fish resources in the coastal waters off the east coast of peninsular Malaysia. t also serves to monitor the species diversity of the fisheries resources in these waters. The findings from this survey were intended to assist fisheries managers in managing the demersal fisheries. The detailed survey results made available in this report, including the appendices which give the lists of species found in various fish groups, will be useful to researchers in the stock assessment of the surveyed region, particularly when a long time series of catch data is required. This survey was carried out from 26 June to 31 August MATERALS AND METHODS n n k n :l The survey was carried out using the research vessel K.K. MERSUn, a metre Fibreglass-reinforced plastic (FRP) stem trawler which joined the Fisheries Research nstitute fleet in early 1983 and was first deployed to carry out a demersal fish resource survey in the same year. The principal particulars of this vessel are: a '0 Length overall m Maximum trial speed 11.1 knots,i 11 Length registered m Service speed 9.5 knots l. Breadth moulded 5.80 m Fish hold 9.62 m 3 h Depth moulded 2.35 m ce hold 5.1 m 3 g Designed draft 1.95 m Fresh water tank m3 Gross tonnage GT Fuel oil tank m3 Net tonnage GT Complement 18 persons

8 The vessel is powered by a 500ps x 900rpm YANMAR main engine, a 62ps x 1500rpm YANMAR auxiliary engine and a KAMOME Control Pitch Propeller. t is equipped with a Satellite Navigator, a Marine Radar, a Sonar, an Echo-sounder and a Colour Fish Finder. The fishing equipment available onboard are two sets of combination winches, a set of winch control stand, a set of towline winch, a set of power block and a set of line hauler. The sampling gear used for this survey was the Standard German type otter trawl made of nylon with a cod-end mesh size of 40 mm and a head-rope of 34.8 metres. To standardise the sampling method, the net used in this survey was similar in design to that used in earlier surveys and had been described by Pathansali et al. (1974). As in the previous surveys conducted in this area, the sampling stations covered waters between 10 to 70 metres deep from the Malaysia! Thailand border to the southern most tip of east lohore. Following the survey methodology established from the first survey in 1970, the whole surveyed region was divided into four sub-areas (Fig. 1). The limits of these subareas have been described by Pathansali et al. (1974). Sampling at trawling stations were carried out in 5-day cruises with 2 days in between cruises set aside for bunkering and sale offish caught during the cruise. Sampling, which was carried out in one-hour tows, was limited to daylight hours, generally between 0600 hr. and 1800 hr. For each haul, the catch was divided into either commercial fish or trash fish categories. Trash fish are those which are not used for direct human consumption as well as juvenile commercial species which are too small to be marketed as food fish. Each category was then sorted according to species, genus or family and the weights of each of these groups were recorded. When the catch of trash fish was very large, a sub-sample of this catch was taken for sorting. The weights of the groups within this sub-sample will then be raised to the total trash catch. The details of the trawling and catch sorting and processing methods were described by Pathansali et al. (1974).

9 3.1 Number of hauls conducted A total of 129 trawl tows were attempted throughout the survey. The breakdown of the number of successful and unsuccessful hauls by sub areas is given below. The unsuccessful trawls were generally those in which the trawl nets were tom during the trawling operation and occasionally when the net did not perform properly while being trawled. Successful Unsuccessful Total Sub-areal Sub-area Sub-area Sub-arealY Total Catch data analysis Catch rates by areas The overall average catch rate obtained from this survey was 72.4 kg/hr. Commercial fish amounted to 49.5 kg/hr and trash fish contributed the remaining 22.9 kg/hr (Table 1). This is lower than the overall average catch rate of 90.5 kg/hr obtained during the 1984 survey (Anon., 1984). This decline can be attributed to the lower average catch rate of trash fish since the figure for this category of fish in 1984 was 39.8 kg/hr. The average catch rate of commercial fish was very similar to the 50.7 kg/hr obtained in the earlier survey. The overall average catch rates of earlier surveys in this area were kg/hr in 1970 (Pathansali et al., 1974), kg/hr in 1971 (Jothy et a., 1975),254.8 kg/hr in 1972 (Lam et al., 1975) and kg/hr in 1974 (Lamp and Mohd. Shaari, 1976), 160.0kg/hrin 1981 (AhrnadAdnan, 1990) and kg/hr in 1983 (Anon., 1983). The highest overall average catch rate of95.2 kg/hr was obtained in Sub-area (Table 1, Fig. 3). The average catch rates of both the commercial fish and the trash fish components of the total catch, i.e kg/hr and

10 30.9 kglhr, respectively, were also highest among the four sub-areas. The second highest overall average catch rate was in Sub-area with 70.0 kglhr, out of which 47.0 kglhr was from commercial fish and the remaining 23.0 kglhr from trash fish. The average catch rates of both these categories were also the second highest among all the sub-areas. The next highest overall average catch rate, i.e kglhr, was obtained from Sub-area. The commercial fish average catch rate of 46.4 was only marginally lower than Sub-area. However, the trash fish average catch rate of 17.2 kg/hr was the lowest among the four sub-areas. The lowest overall average catch rate of 60.4 kglhr was produced by Sub-area V. The commercial fish catch rate of 40.7 kglhr from this area was the lowest among all the sub-areas. However, the average catch rate of trash fish, which was 19.7 kglhr, was the third highest for the whole survey region. Sub-area was also the most productive among all the sub-areas during the previous survey in 1984 for the overall as well as the commercial fish catches (Anon, 1984). However, the rankings of the other three subareas during this survey was quite different from that obtained during the previous survey. Sub-area, which was the second most productive area for this survey, was the least productive in Catch rates by depth of water Within Sub-area, the most productive depth-zone was between 21 and 30 metres with an overall average catch rate of 95.2 kg/hr (Table 2a, Fig. 2). This was made up of 67.0 kg/hr of commercial fish and 28.2 kg/hr of trash fish. The major contributor of the commercial fish within this depth-zone was the rays which accounted for 36.2 kg/hr. The next most productive depthzone was between 41 and 50 metres with 78.7 kg/hr with commercial fish contributing 47.7 kg/hr. The third most productive depth-zone was between 51 and 60 metres where the overall average catch rate was 60.4 kglhr, out of which 42.1 kg/hr was contributed by commercial fish. n comparison, the metres and the metres depth-zones had much lower overall average catch rates, i.e kg/hr and 22.2 kg/hr, respectively. The most productive depth-zone in Sub-area was between 41 and 50 metres with an overall average catch rate of kg/hr (Table 2b, Fig. 2). The average catch rate of commercial fish within this depth-zone was

11 [-he hr~ 3.0 'ere ral [he lan the : of ~of ler, lird for 30 2). ash ::me eas ~ial ubthe )thash een t of the ral md :.'ig. Nas 89.1 kg/hr, which was also the highest among all the depth-zones encountered within this sub-area. The next best depth-zone was between 51 and 60 metres with a corresponding figure of 80.2 kg/hr, out of which 53.2 kg/hr was contributed by commercial fish. Next was the metres depth-zone where the overall average catch rate was 55.7 kg/hr and the commercial average catch rate was 31.2 kg/hr. The commercial fish average catch rate here was slightly lower than the 35.1 kg/hr obtained in the metres depth-zone, which was the least productive among all the depth-zones encountered in this sub-area. However it should be noted that only one haul was conducted within the metres depth-zone and the entire catch was made up of commercial may not be representative fish. Thus the figures obtained for this depth-zone of this depth of water. n Sub-area, the best depth was between 41 and 50 metres with an overall average catch rate of79.9 kg/hr and was followed closely by the metres depth-zone which had a corresponding figure of76.8 kg/hr (Table 2c, Fig. 2). The commercial fish average catch rates of these two depthzones were also very similar, i.e kg/hr and 60.1 kg/hr, respectively. The next best depth-zone fish was between 21 and 30 metres where the overall average catch rate was 48.9 kg/hr, out of which 31.0 kg/hr, which was about half of the corresponding figure in the two earlier mentioned depth-zones, was contributed by commercial fish. The least productive depth-zone was between 51 and 60 metres where the overall average catch rate was only 20.7 kg/hr, with 14.3 kg/hr being attributed to commercial fish. Within Sub-area V, the most productive depth-zone was between 31 to 40 metres with an overall average catch rate 98.4 kg/hr (Table 2d, Fig. 2). However, the commercial fish average rate of 43.5 kg/hr was less than half the total catch. Next was the metres depth-zone where the overall average catch rate was 56.6 kg/hr, out of which 42.8 kg/hr was contributed by commercial fish. The next best depth-zone was between 21 and 30 metres in which the overall average catch rate was 46.2 kg/hr while the commercial fish average catch rate was 41.1 kg/hr. The least productive depth-zone for this sub-area was between 41 and 50 metres where the overall average catch rate was 38.8 kg/hr, with commercial fish contributing 32.9 kg/hr towards this total. Thus, it can be seen that three of the depth-zones encountered within this sub-area had very similar average catch rates for commercial fish.

12 When the depth-zones of the whole surveyed region, irrespective of sub-areas, was considered, the most productive depth was between 41 and 50 metres where the overall average catch rate was 89.1 kg/hr. (Table 3, Fig. 4). The next most productive depth-zone was between 31 and 40 metres in which the overall average catch rate was 72.2 kg/hr while the commercial fish average catch rate was 46.2 kg/hr. Next was the metres depthzone, followed close by the metres depth-zone. The overall average catch rates for these two depth-zones were 66.8 kg/hr and 64.4 kg/hr, respectively, while the corresponding figures for the commercial fish components were 47.8 kg/hr and 44.7 kg/hr, respectively. The next productive depth-zone was between 61 and 70 metres in which the overall average catch rate was 55.7 kg/hr, with 31.2 kg/hr being attributed to the catch of commercial fish. The least productive depth-zone was between 10 and 20 metres where the overall average catch rate was only 22.2 kg/hr with commercial fish contributing 14.9 kg/hr towards this total. Thus, the shallowest and deepest depth-zones appeared to have lower productivity when compared to the other depth-zones. t should be noted that only a few hauls were conducted within these two depth-zones and therefore the results obtained for these depths may not be representative Catch composition Commercial fish constituted 68.4% of the total catch by weight for the \;Vholesurveyed region, irrespective of sub-areas and depth-zones. The remaining 31.6% was made up of trash fish (Table 4). The percentage catch of commercial fish had shown an increase from the 1984 survey, when they made up only 56.1% of the total catch by weight (Anon., 1984). Sub-area had the highest percentage catch by weight of commercial fish at 73.0% (Table 4). All the other three sub-areas have almost identical percentages of commercial fish catches, ranging from 67.2% to 67.5%. During the previous survey, the percentage catch of commercial fish in each of the sub-areas did not exceed 60%, with Sub-area having the lowest percentage at 49.3%. Within Sub-area, the best depth-zone for commercial fish was between 31 and 40 metres where they constituted 76.7% of the total catch (Table Sa). Next came the metres and metres depth-zones where the total catch at each depth comprised of 70.4% and 69.7% of commercial \\- 5 tc 01 to, d{

13 ive of,1 and 3, Fig. tresin lercial depthverage kglhr, 11fish ~ next )Verall to the een 10 rrwith S, the ctivity r a few results for the :s. The e catch ~n they nercial lentical 67.5%. in each lowest sh was 11 catch swhere mercial fish, respectively. These depth-zones were followed by the waters between 10 and 20 metres and between 41 and 50 metres with each having 67.1% and 60.6% of commercial fish, respectively. Thus, it appeared that all the depth-zones within this sub-area have quite similar percentage catches of commercial fish and there also appeared to be no clear trend of commercial fish dominance in relation to the depth of water. The metres depth-zone in Sub-area had 100% catch of commercial fish. However, only one haul was conducted in this depth-zone and thus, the catch of this haul may not be representative of the depth-zone. f this depth-zone is not considered, the best depth-zone for commercial fish will be between 41 and 50 metres where commercial fish constituted 69.0% of the total catch. Next came the metres depth-zone where commercial fish constituted 66.3% of the total catch followed by the metres depth-zone where 56.0% of the total catch was made up of this category of fish. Although there was a decline in the percentage catch of, commercial fish with increasing depth, the rate of decline was quite small, particularly between the metres and metres depth-zone. The metres depth-zone appeared to be the best depth for commercial fish in Sub-area, where this category made up 78.2% of the total catch (Table 5c). The next best depth-zones were the metres and the metres depth-zones, in which commercial fish made up 75.1 % and 69.1 % of the total catches, respectively. The lowest percentage catch of commercial fish, i.e. 63.3%, was registered in the metres depthzone. Here too it appeared that there is declining trend in the percentage catch of commercial fish with increasing depth of water, starting from the metres depth-zone. However, like in Sub-area, the rate of decline was quite small. to be between Within Sub-area V, the best depth-zone for commercial fish appeared 21 and 30 metres, where they made up 89.0% of the total catch (Table 5d). The next best depth-zone was between 41 and 50 metres where commercial fish constituted 84.6% of the total catch. Next came the metres depth-zone where commercial fish contributed 75.7% of the total catch. The lowest commercial fish constituent, i.e. 44.2%, was observed in the metres depth-zone. Therefore, there did not appear to be any trend in the percentage catch of commercial fish in relation to the depth of water.

14 When the whole survey region was considered, the percentage catch by weight of commercial fish appeared to be quite similar for many of the depth zones encountered. Each of the 5 depth-zones between 10 and 60 metres had percentage catch of commercial fish ranging from 64.0% in the metres depth-zone to 71.6% in the metres depth-zone (Table 6). The lowest commercial fish constituent was in the metres depthzone, where they contributed only 56% of the total catch. On the overall, the most dominant commercial fish group caught during this survey, irrespective of sub-areas or depth-zones, was the mullids which made up 10.4% of the total catch (Table 4). They were present in all depth-zones but appeared to be more dominant in waters between 41 to 70 metres (Table 6). Their percentage catch by weight in the three depth-zones within this range were between 13.4% and 16.2%. This group was ranked fourth in terms of percentage catch during the previous survey in The second most dominant group was the rays which contributed 8.1% of the total catch of this survey. Although present in all the depthzones, they were much more dominant in the shallower waters. n the metres depth-zone, they contributed 32.2 % of the total catch. Their percentage catch by weight in the depth-zones deeper than 40 metres ranged from 0.4% in the metres depth-zone to 3.8% in the metres depth-zone. This group was also the second most dominant during the 1984 survey. The third most dominant group, representing 8.0% of the total catch, was the nemipterids. This group was the most dominant in the 1983 and 1984 survey, although they made up only 7.1% and 7.0% of the total catch, respectively. Their degree of dominance appeared to be slightly increasing with increasing depth of water. The representation of this group increased from 4.9% in the metres depth-zone to 8.8% in the metres depth-zone and finally to 15.3% in the metres depth-zone. The next most dominant group was the carangids which made up 6.8% of the total catch. Their degree of dominance appeared to be quite similar for all the depth-zones in waters up to 60 metres in depth, ranging from 6.0% in the metres depth-zone to 8.1% in the metres depth-zone. Their percentage catch dropped 4.0% in the deepest depth-zone, i.e. between 61 and 70 metres. During the 1984 survey, the carangids were ranked third in terms of dominance. c( n W _ c( d(

15 .ge catch ly?fthe and 60 % in the le (Table ~sdepthp caught ~mullids ent in all 41 to 70 tth-zones ls ranked ntributed le depthhe h. Their ~sranged o metres the 1984 tal catch, 1983 and tal catch, lcreasmg increased,0 metres made up be quite l, ranging,0 metres pth-zone, gids were The priacanthids was the fifth most dominant group with a representation of 6.6% in the total catch. They were more dominant in the waters between 31 and 60 metres, where they percentage catch ranged from 6.9% in the metres depth-zone to 8.8% in the metres depthzone. They represented less than 3.0% of the total catches in the other depthzones encountered. This group was eighth in terms of dominance during the previous survey. The next most dominant group was the squids which contributed 6.4% of the total catch. Although present in all depth-zones, their degree of dominance was relatively much higher in the metres depth-zone where they contributed 15.8% of the catch. t should be noted that only two hauls were conducted in this depth-zone and the number of species and fish groups caught was relatively fewer than the other depth-zones. Their percentage contributions in the other depth-zones were quite similar, ranging from 5.6% in the metres depth-zone to 7.7% in the metres depth-zone, with the exception of the deeper metres depth-zone, where they, contributed only 4.0 of the catch. The squids were seventh in terms of dominance during the 1984 survey. The lutjanids were next in terms of dominance, contributing 4.5% of the total catch. They appeared to be relatively more dominant in the depthzones deeper than 30 metres where their representation of the catches ranged from 4.5% in the metres depth-zone to 5.7% in the metres depth-zone. Their percentage catch was only 1.3% in the metres depth-zone and they were not present in the metres depthzone. This group was ranked fifth in dominance during the previous survey. The marine catfish or Arius spp., which was also referred to as tachysurids in earlier reports, was the next dominant group, contributing 2.9% of the total catch. They appeared to be relatively more dominant in the waters between 31 and 60 metres where their representation in the three depth-zones ranged from 3.0% to 4.8%. They contributed 2.3% of the total catch in the metres depth-zone and were quite negligible in the other depth-zones encountered. Although many other commercial fish groups and species were caught during this survey, each of their respective percentage catch by weight was relatively small. The synodontids, the sharks, Scolopsis taeniopterus and

16 Abalistes stellaris each contributed between 1.0% and 2.0% of the total catch. The sphyraenids or barracudas, Thenus orientalis, the serranids or groupers, the sepioids or cuttlefish, Muraenesox spp. or conger eels and Euthynnus spp. each contributed between 0.5% and 1.0% of the total catch. Each of the other species or fish groups recorded during this survey contributed less than 0.5% of the total catch. Thus, it appeared that the dominant groups of this survey were also among the most dominant groups during the previous survey carried out in Catch rates for the various fish groups/families The mullids, which was the most dominant fish group during this survey, had an average catch rate of7.5 present in all sub-areas and depth-zones abundant kg/hr for the whole survey region and were (Table 1, Table 3). They were more in Sub-area where their average catch rate was 16.2 kg/hr. The next best sub-area was Sub-area where their average catch rate was 8.0 kg! hr. This group appeared to be less abundant in Sub-areas and V where their average catch rates were 2.6 kg/hr and 2.4 kg/hr, respectively. They also appeared to be more abundant in the deeper waters of the survey region. Their average catch rates in the depth-zones deeper than 40 metres ranged from 7.8 kg/hr to 11.9 kg/hr, while in the shallower depth-zones their average catch rates ranged from 0.3 kg/hr to 2.4 kg/hr. The mullids were encountered in 98 of the 120 successful hauls conducted, suggesting that as a group, they were quite well distributed. The most dominant species within the family Mullidae was Upeneus sulphureus, which contributed almost 50% of the catch weight of this family, even though it was caught at only 29 of the successful hauls. Although Parupeneus heptacanthus and Upeneus tragula were encountered at 55 and 50 hauls, respectively, their percentage catch by weight were relatively much lower. The rays, which was the second most dominant group, had an average catch rate of 5.9 kg/hr for the whole survey region and were present in all bet the sub-areas (Table 1). They were most abundant in Sub-area where their mc average catch rate was 11.0 kg/hr. Their average catch rates were 5.2 kg/hr m and 4.3 kg/hr in Sub-areas and V, respectively. However, they were quite scarce in Sub-area where they averaged only 0.5 kg/hr. They appeared to the a" av su till 4.~ ah 5.5 rar 30 me disl

17 the total ranids or eels and tal catch. s survey Nere also ed out in s survey, :m.dwere ere more ghr. The LS 8.0 kg! V where :ly. They yreglon. s ranged ~average ountered a group, lefamily Yo of the.9 of the ; tragula ge catch average mt in all ere their i.2 kg/hr ~requite leared to prefer shallower waters, although they were not present in the two hauls conducted in the metres depth-zone (Table 3). Their average catch rate was 21.5 kg/hr in the metres depth-zone. However, their average catch rates were quite low within the other depth-zones where they were found. They ranged from 1.4 kg/hr to 2.4 kg/hr for the waters between 31 and 60 metres and as low as 0.2 kg/hr for the metres depth-zone. The rays were encountered in only 27 of the successful hauls, indicating that they were not widely distributed throughout the whole survey region. The nemipterids, which was the most third most abundant fish group, obtained an average catch rate of 5.8 kg/hr for the whole survey region and were present in all sub-areas (Table 1). They were most abundant in Subarea where they averaged 9.1 kg/hr of trawling. Their average catch rates in the other sub-areas appeared to be quite similar, ranging from 4.4 kg/hr to 5.1 kg/hr. Although present in all the depth-zones their were more abundant in the deeper depth-zones (Table 3). Their average catch rates between 41 and 70 metres ranged from 5.6 kg/hr to 8.5 kg/hr, while in the shallower depth-zones they ranged from 1.1 kg/hr to 4.2 kg/hr. The nemipterids were encountered in 110 of the successful hauls conducted, indicating that this group was widely distributed throughout the whole survey region. The carangids, which was the fourth most dominant group, had an average catch rate of 4.9 kg/hr for the whole survey region (Table 1). Their average catch rate of 6.5 kg/hr in Sub-area was the highest among all the sub-areas. They appeared to be almost equally abundant among the other three sub-areas, where their average catch rates ranged from 4.2 kg/hr to 4.7 kg/hr. This group was also present in all the depth-zones but were more abundant in waters between 31 and 50 metres, with average catch rates of 5.9 kg/hr and 6.4 kg/hr, respectively, for the two depth-zones within this range (Table 3). The next best depth-zones were the waters between 21 and 30 metres and between 51 and 60 metres. Thus, there appeared to be an increasing trend in abundance from the shallower waters which peaked between 31 and 50 metres depth before declining as the depth of water increases. The carangids, which is made up of many species, was encountered in 115 of the successful hauls. Therefore, as a group, they were widely distributed throughout the whole survey region. The major species within the family Carangidae which were caught were Carangoides malabaricus

18 which contributed 25.5% of the group total catch weight and was found in 80 hauls, Selaroides leptolepis, which contributed 23.9% and was found in 71 hauls and Seriolina nigrofasciata which contributed 12.7% and was found in 63 hauls. Other relatively well distributed members ofthis group included Atule mate which was found in 73 hauls, Selar crumenophthalmus found in 43 hauls, Alepes melanoptera found in 39 hauls and Decapterus spp. found in 34 hauls. However, their contributions towards the total catch weight of this group were quite small, i.e. less than 8.0% each. The priacanthids, which was the fifth most abundant group, have an average catch rate of 4.8 kg/hr for the whole survey region. They were most abundant in Sub-area where their average catch rate was 8.4 kg/hr (Table 1). They were almost equally abundant in Sub-areas and V with average catch rates of 4.9 kg/hr and 4.8 kg/hr, respectively. Sub-area had the lowest average catch rate of this group at only 2.2 kg/hr. This group appeared to prefer waters between 31 and 60 metres where their average catch rates ranged between 4.5 kg/hr and 7.9 kg/hr for the three depth-zones available in this depth range (Table 3). They averaged 1.4 kg/hr and 1.6 kg/hr in the metres and metres depth-zones, respectively, and were not found within the metres depth-zone. They were found in 96 of the successful hauls which suggest that they were widely distributed inthe depthzones where they were encountered. The squids, which was the next most dominant group, had an average catch rate of 4.6 kg/hr for the whole survey region (Table 1). They were more abundant in Sub-areas and with average catch rates of 5.1 kg/hr and 6.1 kg/hr, respectively. The corresponding figures for Sub-areas and V were 3.7 kg/hr and 3.2 kg/hr, respectively. They were present in all depthzones and did not exhibit strong preference for any depth of water, although they were slightly less abundant in the deepest depth zone. Their average catch rates in the other depth-zones ranged from 3.5 kg/hr to 5.6 kg/hr (Table 3). The squids were found in 114 hauls and were thus very well distributed within the whole survey region. The major sub-group within this family, Loligo spp., was encountered in all of these 114hauls and contributed 98.6% of the total catch weight of this group. Sepiotheuthis lessoniana, another species belonging to this group, was found in 22 hauls and contributed the remaining 1.4% of the group total catch weight. ca n sir ra1 th< kg de] fol dis Ar reg:

19 md in md in found luded found \' spp. catch lve an : most Table 'erage owest red to rates.ilable in the -e not of the were kg/hr [ and lepthrerage lepthlough rerage Table buted mily, >8.6% lother ~d the The seventh most abundant group, the lutianids, had an average catch rate of3.2 kg/hr for the whole survey region. They were much more abundant in Sub-area, where they averaged 6.3 kg/hr, when compared to the other sub-areas where their average catch rates ranged from 1.9 kg/hr to 2.7 kg/hr (Table 1). This group appeared to prefer waters deeper than 31 metres. Their average catch rates within the four depth-zones between 31 and 70 metres ranged from 2.5 kg/hr to 4.6 kg/hr (Table 3). They averaged only 0.9 kg/hr in the metres depth-zone and were not found in the metres depth-zone. As a group, the lutianids were found in 75 hauls. The major species in this group were Lutjanus vitta which was found in 40 hauls and contributed 33.9% of the total catch of this group, Lutjanus malabaricus found in 38 hauls and contributing 27.7%, Lutjanus lineolatus found in 23 hauls and contributing 25.4% and Pristipomoides spp. found in 19 hauls and contributing 9.6%. Each of the other species of this group that were encountered contributed less than 3.0% of the total Lutjanidae catch. Arius spp., which was the next most abundant group had an average catch rate of2.1 kg/hr for the whole survey region. They were more abundant in Sub-area where they averaged 3~9 kg/hr (Table 1). They appeared to be similarly abundant in the three other sub-areas where their average catch rates ranged from 1.4 kg/hr to 1.7 kg/hr. This group were more abundant in the depth-zones between 31 and 60 metres, where they averaged from 1.9 kg/hr to 3.5 kg/hr (Table 3). They were much less abundant depth-zones in the other where their average catch rates were 0.5 kg/hr. This group was found in 64 of the successful hauls, suggesting that they were not well distributed throughout the,survey region. The next most abundant groups which averaged between 1.0 kg/hr and 2.0 kg/hr were the synodontids, the Sharks and Scolopsis taeniopterus. Each of the rest of the fish groups and species found during this survey averaged less than 1.0 kg/hr. A map showing the degree of productivity region is shown in Figure 5. in various parts of the surveyed Sub-area had 1 with a catch rate of between 301 kg/hr and 400 kg! hr which was conducted less than 20 nautical miles from shore. There were

20 also 6 hauls with catch rates of between 101 kg/hr and 200 kg/hr and 14 hauls with catch rates of between 51 kg/hr and 100 kg/hr. Most of these hauls were located in the lower half of this sub-area. The remaining 19 successful hauls, i.e. nearly 50% of the total number of successful hauls carried out in this sub-area, have catch rates which did not exceed 50 kg/hr. These were mainly located in the upper half of the sub-area. Most of the successful hauls in Sub-area were carried out in the upper half of this sub-area. This was due to untrawlable grounds in the lower half of this sub-area, particularly in the waters close to coastline. This subarea had 3 hauls which yielded catch rates of between 201 kg/hr and 300 kg! hr, 7 hauls with catch rates of between 101 kg/hr and 200 kg/hr and 11 hauls with catch rates of between 51 kg/hr and 100 kg/hr. The remaining 6, i.e. only 21 % of the successful hauls here, have catch rates of less than 51 kg! hr. Sub-area did not have any hauls which yielded catch rates exceeding 200 kg/hr. There were 7 hauls with catch rates of between 10 1 kg/hr and 200 kg/hr which were mainly found in the upper half of the sub-area. There were also 6 hauls with catch rates of between 51 kg/hr and 100 kg/hr, out of which 4 were also located in the upper half of the sub-area. There were 13 hauls, i.e. 50% of the successful hauls of this sub-area, which have catch rates of less than 51 kg/hr and the majority of these were located in the lower half of this sub-area. Sub-area V had less productive fishing grounds when compared to the other 3 sub-areas. There was, however, 1 haul which yielded a catch rate of between 301 kg/hr and 400 kg/hr. This haul was conducted approximately 10 nautical miles from shore. There were also 4 hauls with catch rates of between 101 kg/hr and 200 kg/hr and another 4 hauls with catch rates of between 51 kg/hr and 100 kg/hr. The remaining 17 hauls, i.e. 65% of the successful hauls conducted in this sub-area, have catch rates which did not exceed 50 kg/hr. These hauls were located throughout the sub-area. av COl hac.e. Fi~ cor the cor rat( and rate:

21 nd 14 these ng'19 hauls kg/hr. in the lower s sub- )0 kg! hauls 6, i.e. ;1 kg! :eding T and There out of ~re 13 catch in the red to :h rate lately tes of tes of of the id not The overall average catch rate of 72.4 kg/hr in the present survey appeared to have decreased by 19.9% from the 90.5 kg/hr obtained during the previous survey in 1984 (Table 7). The percentage reduction is even higher when compared to the 1983 and 1981 surveys, i.e. by 43.9% and 54.7%, respectively. Thus, the declining trend of the overall average catch rates from the 1972 survey is continued by the present survey (Fig. 6), although the rate of decrease appeared to be since the last few surveys. Commercial fish also experienced a reduction in their average catch rate which, however, was only by 2.3%, i.e. from 50.7 kg/hr in 1984 to 49.5 kg/hr during this survey. On the other hand, trash fish experienced a 42.4% reduction which then influenced the drop in the overall average catch rate. Sub-area, however, showed a 23.1 % increase in the overall average catch rate, i.e. from 56.8 kg/hr in 1984 to 70.0 kg/hr during the present survey (Table 8a, Fig. 7). This was the only sub-area which exhibit such an increase. Both the commercial and trash fish components of the total catch registered increases when compared to the previous. The commercial fish catch showed a substantial increase by 38.1%, from 34.0 kg/hr in 1984 to 47.0 kglhr in the present survey. On the other hand, the trash fish component showed only a marginal reduction by 0.8%. Thus, the increase in the overall average catch rate can be attributed to the increase in the commercial fish average catch rate. However, the overall, commercial fish and trash fish average catch rates of this sub-area during the survey have declined when compared to the earlier surveys in the 1980s. The overall average catch rate had dropped by 45.4%'and 17.2% when compared to the 1983 and 1981 surveys, respectively. Sub-area showed a 21.5% decline in the overall average catch rate, i.e. from kg/hr in 1984 to 95.2 kg/hr for the present survey (Table 8b, Fig. 7). This decline was influenced by the big drop in the trash fish component of the total catch from 50.7 kg/hr in 1984 to 30.9 kg/hr during the present survey, i.e. a decline of39.0%. n comparison, the decline in the commercial fish catch rate was smaller at only 9.0%. The average catch rates of this survey were also lower than those obtained during the 1983 and 1981 surveys, with the exception of the commercial rate in 1981 which is lower by 10.2% than the present fish average catch survey. The overall

22 average catch rate of the present survey was reduced by 29.5% and 16.6% when compared to the 1983 and 1981 surveys, respectively. The overall average catch rate of Sub-area was reduced by 36.1% when compared to the previous survey, i.e. from 99.7 kg/hr in 1984 to 63.7 kg/hr (Table 8c, Fig. 7). This decrease can be attributed to the 65.9% reduction in the trash fish average catch rate which fell from 50.6 kglhr in 1984 to only 17.2 kg/hr during the present survey. The commercial fish average catch rate showed only a 5.5% reduction from 49.1 kglhr in 1984 to 46.4 kglhr. The percentage drop in the overall average catch rate of this sub-area was quite substantial when compared to the earlier surveys carried out in the 1980s. The reduction was by 57.1% and 81.6% when compared to the 1983 and 1981 surveys, respectively. Sub-area V showed a decline of35.7% in the overall average catch rate, i.e. from 94.0 kg/hr in 1984 to 60.4 kg/hr for the present survey (Table 8d, Fig. 7). Both the commercial fish and the trash fish average catch rates experienced reductions by 26.8% and 48.7%, respectively. During the 1984 survey, both these categories registered average catch rates of 55.5 kg/hr and 38.5 kg/hr, respectively. The corresponding figures for the present survey was 40.7 kg/hr and 19.8 kg/hr. When compared to the 1983 and 1981 surveys, the overall average catch rate of the present survey showed reductions by 40.3% and 25.6%, respectively. Thus, it appeared that the demersal fish resources in the survey region had further declined since the last survey which was carried out four years earlier. However, the rate of decline seems to be lower than that shown by the 1984 survey. The most dominant fish groups of the present survey were also very similar to those of the earlier survey, thus suggesting that there have been no major or drastic changes in the main species composition, which may be an outcome had the resources been subjected to intense fishing pressure during the years between the present and previous surveys.

23 ed by 36.1% 1984 to 63.7 ) the 65.9% ;0.6 kg/hr in mercial fish ghr in rate of this veys carried :n compared verage catch lrvey (Table e catch rates ingthe 1984 f 55.5 kg/hr esentsurvey 981 surveys, :ductions by lrvey region t four years at shown by survey were 19 that there :omposition, :ensefishing veys. The author wishes to express his gratitude to Y. Bhg. Dato' Mohd. Mazlan bin Jusoh, the Director-General of Fisheries, Malaysia for his permission to publish this paper, and Mr. brahim Saleh, the Director of Research, for his encouragement in the preparation of the paper. The author would also like to thank Ms. Chee Phaik Ean, the Head of the Resource Branch, Fisheries Research nstitute, for her encouragement and suggestions. Thanks are also due to the officers and staff of the Resource Branch, for their help in the collection and processing of the data, particularly to Mr. Kong Meng Choo for helping in the data processing and Mr. Abdul Rahman bin Abdul Majid for helping in the preparation of the maps in this report. The assistance of Mr. Abu Talib bin Ahmad in proof reading the manuscript and the layout of the tables and appendices is very much appreciated. Ahmad Adnan N. (1990). "Demersal fish resources in Malaysian waters Fifth trawl survey of the coastal waters off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia" (June-July 1981). Fisheries Bulletin No. 60. Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture, Malaysia: Anon. (1983). Unpublished report on the sixth trawl survey of the coastal waters off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, April/May & September/October Anon. (1984). Unpublished report on the seventh trawl survey ofthe coastal waters off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, April-May Jothy, A.A., G. Rauck, S. A. L. Mohd. Shaari, K. S. ong, P. C. Liong and J.L.Carvalho (1975). "Demersal fish resources in Malaysian waters - 3. Second trawl survey of the coastal waters off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia" (March-May, 1971). Fisheries Bulletin No.4. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Malaysia: 1-36.

24 Lam W.c., W.Weber,A. K. Lee, K. S. Ong and P.C. Liong (1975). "Demersal fish resources in Malaysian waters rd East Coast Trawl Survey off the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia" (l4th August - 20th September, 1972). Fisheries Bulletin No.9. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Malaysia: Lamp, F. and S. A. L. Mohd. Shaari (1976): "Demersal fish resources in Malaysian waters Fourth trawl survey of the coastal waters off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia" (30th July - 12th August 1971). Fisheries Bulletin No. 12. Ministry of Agriculture, Malaysia: Pathansali, D., G. Rauck, A.A. Jothy, S. A. L. Mohd. Shaari and T.R Curtin (1974); "Demersal Fish Resources in Malaysian Waters - 1. Trawl Survey of the coastal waters off the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia". Fisheries Bulletin No.1. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Malaysia: 1-46.

25 .' "Demersal :awl Survey gust - 20th Agriculture 'esources in waters off 19ust 1971). 'sm: T.R Curtin - 1. Trawl Malaysia". Fisheries, t " ,3D Figure 1. Survey area off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia showing sub -areas, trawl stations and trawling direction, K.K. MERSUJ, 1988.

26 150 "'"120!! ~ 90 '" ~ ::. 60 j i: 30 ~ C~ Ul 1()' ~ ! f ~ CJ 'll CJ ~120 Ql! > i 90 c( i Ql 0 'll.. 1() ~ F 1'20 j 90 Sub-area i 60 f 30 i,.. ~ i 1().20 2, ~ '50 J"i ~ J ~ -60 i l 30 1()' ~ J. f J,, ( ( (.! < Depth-zones (m) _ Commercialfish c=jtrash fish Totalea ] Figure 2. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth zones and sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

27 Cl :..! 90 f! or;... 0 ca 0 60 G> Cl f! G> ~ 30 0 Figure 3. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 'C 120 :E Cl :..! 90 f! or;.b ca 0 60 G> Cl f! G> > < 30 0 Depth-zones c:::j Trash fish Figure 4. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

28 /0 /0 g /0 o 0 / 1 0 / / g / 0 / g g Q / g g g g CJ / 0/ 0 0 / g Q 0 g A g o g g g :; Q o g g 0 g o o o g o 0 Q,. o 9" '"0 9"&'~ 0,,. ".-,.,. 0 ",'" 0 0 '" - 0 C) g o 0 Q 0 o Q 3 0 o Q J 0 Q 0 00' o o Figure 5. Degrees of productivity in the surveyed region, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

29 ~ en 400.:.:.Ī.. Q).. ụ.,. Q) Cl ~ 300 U l! 200 Q) > < Year of survey Figure 6. Average catch rates (kg/hr) of past and present surveys, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia.

30 ,; 700 ~ l! 600. ~ 500 ~ l.'! 300 "~ Sub-area ! 700 ~.! 600 ~ 500 ~ l! 300 "~ ,! 900 i 800,; 700 ~ l.! 600 ~ 500. Sub-area ~ l! 300 "~ :l 700 ~ ~ 600 ~ 500 ~ 400 Sub-area V 01 t! 300 "~ _ Commercial fish C:::JTrash Fish --Tolal 1 J Figure 7. Average catch rates (kglhr) by sub-areas for past and present surveys, East Coast, Penisular Malaysia. Ta 24

31 No. of hauls Sub-area V Whole area Fish groups/species: Aba/istes stel/aris Alutera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyura CARANGJDAE Chirocenfrus dorab Chi/oscy//ium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Sfo/ephorus spp Euthynnus spp Fannio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOLGNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp NEMPTERDAE fJ7 Pampus argentus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE Pentapus setosus P/atycepha/us spp P/ectomynchus pictus Po/ynemus sextarius Pomadasys spp Pricanthus spp Pselfodes erumei Rachycentron canadus Rastrel/iger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddensis Sardinel/a spp SCAENDAE Sc%psis taeniopterus SCOMBEROMORJDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENJDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orienta/is Trichiurus spp Others Wt. of commercial fish (kg) Wt. of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul tko) Average catch rates (kg/hr) by Sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

32 No. of hauls Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species: Abalistes stellaris Alutera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyura CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chiloscy/lium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Sto/ephorus spp Euthynnus spp Formio niger Geffes spp Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOLGNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp. NEMPTERDAE Pampus argentus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE Pentapus setosus Plalycephalus spp Plectorhynchus pictus Polynemus sex/arius Pomadasys spp Pricanthus spp Psettodes erumei Rachycentron canadus Rastrelliger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddensis Sardinella spp SCAENDAE Scolopsis taeniopterus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orientalis Trichiurus spp Others WL of commercial fish (kg) WL of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul (kgl Table 2a. Average catch rates (kglhr) by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Tab] Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, ~.'10.)->

33 12 No. of hauls Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species: Abatistes stellaris A/utera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyura CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chiloscy/lium indicum Euthynnus spp. CAESODDAE Drepane punctata S/olephorus spp Formio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp leognathdae Lethrinus spp lolgndae i lutjandae MUlliDAE Muraenesox sp NEMPTERDAE Pampus argentus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE Pentapus setosus Plalycephalus spp Plectorhynchus pic/us Polynemus sextarius Pomadasys spp Pricanthus spp Psettodes erumei Rachycentron canadus Rastrelliger spp RAYS Rhynchoba/us djiddensis Sardinella spp SCAENDAE Scolopsis taeniop/erus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orientatis Trichiuros spp ~ Others ~2.095 Wl of commercial fish (kg) Wl of trash fish (kg) ~ Total w1. of haul (kg) ea, East Table 2b. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, j i 27

34 No. of haus El Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species: Aba/istes stel/aris A/utera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Bradlyu-a CARANGDAE Chirocentrvs dorab Chiloscyl/ium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Sto/ephorvs spp. Euthynnus spp. Formio niger Gerres spp Q10 Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOLGNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp. NEMPTERDAE Pampus argentus Pampus chinensis! PENAEDAE Pentapus setosus P/atycepha/us spp P/ectorhynchus pictus Po/ynemus sextarius Pomadasys spp. Pricanthus spp Psettodes ervmei Rachycentron canadus Rastrel/iger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddensis Sardinel/a spp. SCAENDAE Scorops~taenwptervs SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE ' SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orlentalls Trichiurvs spp Others Wt. of commercial fish (kg) Wt. of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul (kg) Table 2c. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia,

35

36 No. of ha(.js Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species: Aba/istes stellaris A/utera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyura CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chiloscyllium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Sto/ephorus spp Euthynnus spp Formio niger Gerres spp ( Gymnocranius spp ( LEOGNATHDAE l Lethrinus spp L LOLGNDAE L LUTJANDAE L MULLDAE P Muraenesox sp No NEMPTERDAE N Pampus argenlus P, Pampus chinensis P, PENAEDAE P Penlapus selosus PE P/atycepha/us spp P; P/eCforhynchus pietus P, Polynemus sextarius Po Pomadasys spp Po Prieanthus spp Pri Psettodes erumei Ps, Raehyeenlron eanadus Ra, Rastrelliger spp Rs; RAYS RA Rhynchobatus djiddensis Rh) Sardinella spp Sar SCAENDAE SC Se%psis laeniopterus Seo SCOMBEROMORDAE SC( SEPDAE SEF SERRANDAE SE' SHARKS SH,G SGANDAE SG SPHYRAENDAE SPH SYNODONTDAE SYN THERAPONDAE THE Thenus orientalis Then Trichiurus spp Trieh Others ~ W. of commercial fish (kg) W W. of trash fish (kg) W. a Total wi. of haul (kg) ~ ' Table 3. Average catch rates (kg/hr) by depth-zones, East Coast, Table Peninsular Malaysia,

37 3 No. of hauls : Sub-area V Fish 9roups/Species: Aba/isles stellaris A/utera monoceros Ariomma inetica 't Arius spp " BOTHDAE ~; Brachyura L CARANGDAE Chirocenlrus etorab Chiloscyllium ineticum CAESODDAE Drepane punclala Sto/ephorus spp Eulhynnus spp Formio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lelhrinus spp LOLGNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp NEMPTERDAE Pampus argenlus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE Penlapus selosus P/alycepha/us spp P/eclorhynchus piclus Po/ynemus sex/arius Pomadasys spp Pricanlhus spp Psettoctes erumei Rachycentron canaetus Raslrelliger spp RAYS ' ~ \ i Rhynchobalus etjictetensis SarrJinella spp SCAENDAE \ '. Sc%psis laeniopterus ! SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orlenlalls Trichiurus spp Others Wt of commercial fish (kg) Wt of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul k ;~ East Coast, Table 4. Percentage catch by weight by sub-areas, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, , m

38 No. of haljs Depth of water (m) Fish groups/spedes:, Abalistes stellaris A1utera monoceros Ariomma indica Mus spp BOTHDAE BrachYLJ1l CARANGDAE ChirocentnJs dorab Chiloscyllium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Sto/ephorus spp Euthynnus spp Formio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOUGNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp. NEMPTERlDAE Pampus argentus Pampus PENAEDAE chinensis Pentapus setosus Plalycephalus spp Pleclorhynchus pictus Polynemus sextarius Pomadasys spp Pricanthus spp : Psettodes erumai ! Rachycenlton canadus Rastralliger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddensis Sardinella spp SCAENDAE Scolopsis taeniopterus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orlentaus Trichiurus spp Others Wt of commercial fish (kg) Wt of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul (kg) Table Sa. Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Tabl Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, ~'""'"~~>.

39 12 12 No. of halls Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species: Aba/istes stel/ans Alutera monoceros Momma indica Mus spp BOTHDAE Brachytn CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chi/oscyllium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Sto/ephorus spp Euthynnus spp Formio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lethnnus spp LOUGlNlDAE LUTJANDAE MULUDAE 4.2n Muraenesox sp NEMPTERDAE Pampus a,gentus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE Penlapus setosus P/atycepha/us spp P/ectorhynchus pictus Polynemus sex/anus Pomadasys spp Pricanthus spp Psettodes erumei Rachycentron canadu$ Rastre//iger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djicklensis SarrJine//a spp SCAENDAE Scolopsis laeniopterus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPOAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNOOONflDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orienta/is Trichiurus spp Others Wt of commercial fish (kg) Wt of trash fish (kg) ) Total wt. of hsul (kg) Sub-area, East Table 5b. Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, d L...-

40 No. of hauls Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species:! i Aba/istes stel/aris A/utera monoceros Momma indica Mus spp BOTHDAE Brachytra CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chiloscyl/ium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata StoJephorus spp. Euthynnus spp. Formio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp Q LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOLGNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp. NEMPTERDAE Pampus argentus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE Pentapus setosus P/atycepha/us spp P/eclorhynchus pictus Polynemus sex/arius Pomadasys spp. Pricanthus spp Psettodes erumei Rachyceniron canadus Rastre//iger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddensis Sardinel/a spp. SCAENDAE Scolopsis taeniopjerus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orienta/is Trichiurus spp Others Wt. of commercial fish (kg) Wt. of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul (kg) , Table Sc. Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

41 '2 No. of hauls Depth of water (m) ~0 Fish groups/species: " )36 Aba/istes stel/aris Alulera monoceros Ariomma indica :29 Arius spp BOTHDAE ' Brachyu-a ' 43 CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chiloscy/lium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata L Sto/ephorus spp. Euthynnus spp tl Formio niger Garres spp. t 13 Gymnocranius spp i LEOGNATHDAE i Lathrinus spp :9 LOLGNDAE ,2 LUTJANDAE MULUDAE Muraanasox sp. 3 NEMPTERDAE Pampus argantus Pampus chinansis PENAEDAE Pantapus satosus Platycephalus spp. Plactorhynchus pictus Polynemus sextarius Pomadasys spp. Pricanthus spp Psattodas arumai Rachycantron canadus Rastrel/ger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddansis Sardinel/a spp SCAENDAE Scolopsis taanioptarus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thanus orlentalis Trichiurus spp Others Wt. of commercial fish (kg) Wt. of trash fish (kg) Total wt. of haul (kg) i i i' -area, Table 5d. Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones for Sub-area V, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia,

42 No. of hauls Depth of water (m) Fish groups/species: Aba/istes stellaris Alutera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Brach}'\Sll CARANGDAE Chirocentrus dorab Chiloscyllium indicum CAESODDAE Drepane punctata Stolephorus spp Euthynnus spp Formio niger Gerres spp Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOLGrNDAE LUTJANDAE MULLDAE Muraenesox sp NEMPTERDAE Pampus argentus Pampus chinensis PENAEDAE i Pentapus setosus Platycephalus spp , Plectothynchus pictus , Polynemus sextarius , Pomadasys spp Pricanthus spp Psettodes erumei Rachycentron canadus Rastrelliger spp RAYS Rhynchobatus djiddensis Sardinella spp SCAENDAE Scolopsis taeniopterus SCOMBEROMORDAE SEPDAE SERRANDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENOAE SYNODONTDAE THERAPONDAE Thenus orienta/is Trichiurus spp Others Wl of commercial fish (kg) Wl of trash fish (kg) Total Wl of haul (kg) Table 6. Percentage catch by weight by depth-zones, East Coast, Tab Peninsular Malaysia, , 36 ~ -...-~~.. ~.~

43 11 1 3! Depth of water (m) >60 10->60 \(, 1. August/October Number of hauls (31) (38) (36) (25) (21) (151) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total MarchlMay 1971 Number of hauls (28) (31) (41) (39) (11) (150) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total '1 im 3. August/September Number of hauls (5) (31) (36) (31) (20) (21) (144) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total July/August Number of hauls (18) (33) (27) (12) (7) (97) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total June/July AprlMay & Sep/Oct Number of hauls (6) (11) (22) (22) (15) (2) (78) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total ! Number of hauls (17) (24) (21) (24) (26) (3) (115) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay Number of hauls (13) (21) (23) (22) (34) (7) (120) Commercial fish S Trash Fish Total Present Survey (June-August 1988) Number of hauls (2) (25) (19) (35) (36) (3) (120) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total :t Coast, Table 7. Average catch rates by depth-zones of past and present surveys, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia,

44 Depth of water (metres) >60 1. August/October 1970 Number of hauls (4) (10) (7) (6) (9) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total MarchMay 1971 Number of hauls (5) (4) (12) (16) (7) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AugUSt/September 1972 Number of hauls (1) (8) (8) (14) (10) (7) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total July/August 1974 Number of hauls (5) (7) (7) (4) (4) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total i 5. June/July 1981 Number of hauls (3) (5) (11) (3) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay & Sep/Oct 1983 Number of hauls (7) (3) (6) (5) (8) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay 1984 Number of hauls (4) (4) (7) (9) (5) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total Present Survey (June.August 1988) Number of hauls (2) (10) (4) (12) (12) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total Table 8a. Average catch rates by depth-zones of past and present surveys 11 in Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, r~~~ ~

45 Depth of water (metres) >60 1. August/October 1970 Number of hauls (6) (6) (5) (5) (3) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total MarchMay 1971 Number of hauls (6) (9) (9) (13) (2) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total August/September 1972 Number of hauls (1) (5) (5) (3) (1) (9) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total July/August 1974 Number of hauls (1) (6) (8) (8) (3) Commercial fsh Trash Fish Total June/July 1981 Number of hauls (1) (1) (1) (4) (8) (1) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprMay & Sep/Oct 1983 Number of hauls (1) (1) (2) (5) (7) (3) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprMay 1984 Number of hauls (3) (3) (9) (2) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total Present Survey (June-August 1988) Number of hauls (1) (11) (13) (3) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total Table 8b. Average catch rates by depth-zones of past and present surveys in Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

46 Depth of water (metres) eO >60 1. August/October 1970 Number of hauls (15) (13) (6) (8) (6) Commercial fish Trash Fish lotal MarchlMay 1971 Number of hauls (16) (14) (11) (3) (1) Commercial fish n Trash Fish Total August/September 1972 Number of hauls (2) (12) (17) (3) (1) Commercial fsh Trash Fish 125 n Total July/August 1974 Number of hauls (12) (18) (8) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total June/July 1981 Number of hauls (1) (5) (11) (2) (1) (1) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay & Sep/Oct 1983 Number of hauls (8) (14) (3) (7) (6) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay 1984 Number of hauls (7) (9) (4) (4) (8) (1) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total Z Prasent Survey (June-August 1988) Number of hauls (9) (8) (7) (2) Commercial fsh Trash Fish Total Table 8c. Average catch rates by depth-zones of past and present surveys T~ in Sub-area, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

47 Depth of water (metres) ~ >60 1. August/October 1970 Number of hauls (6) (9) (18) (6) (3) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total ~ MarchlMay 1971 Number of hauls (1) (4) (9) (7) (1) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AugUSt/September 1972 Number of hauls (1) (6) (6) (11) (8) (5) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total July/August 1974 Number of hauls (2) (4) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total June/July 1981 Number of hauls (4) (2) (5) (5) (3) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay & Sep/Oct 1983 Number of hauls (1) (6) (10) (7) (5) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total AprlMay 1984 Number of hauls (2) (8) (9) (6) (12) (4) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total Present Survey (June-August 1988) Number of hauls (6) (6) (5) (9) Commercial fish Trash Fish Total :nt surveys 88. Table 8d. Average catch rates by depth-zones of past and present surveys in Sub-area V: East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, 1988.

48 Date 5ub Haul 5tart End Speed Depth Warp Bottom Catch area No. Time Location Time location (knot) (m) length type rate Lat(") Lat (') Long (") Long (') Lat (.) Lat (') Long (") Long (') (m) (kg/hr) 26-Jun M Jun Jun Jun M M M M M D-Jun Jul O4-Jul Jul Jul Jul UN UN D-Jul Jul M UN5 12-Jul M 88.6: M M M M Jul Aug UN Aug Aug M M M' Appendix!. Record offishing operations ofk.k. MERSUn on the west coast of P~ninsular Malaysia, j 42

49 ~ottom Catch Date Sub Haul Start End Speed Depth Warp Bottom Catch type rate area No. Tme Location Tme Location (knot) (m) length type rate (kglhr) SM S' S S S S S S Lat( ) Lala Long C1 Long a Lat C1 Lal a Long (") Long a (m) (l<glhr) 09-Aug Aug , S Aug S UNS S S S Aug S S MS MS MS Aug MS MS :10 S S V S S Aug V S S S UNS S UNS o.Aug V Aug V UNS UNS UNS 22-Aug V S S Aug V M UNS M M Aug V M Aug V M M Aug UNS O-Aug M M V Aug V ' UNS M' Note: M-Mud S-Sand MS- MUddy nd SM sandy mud UNS Unsucceaaful haul! 11:1 coast of Appendix 1. Cont.... (page2of2) 43

50 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS:.!! Abah$les ste/lans 1.00 F A/ute,. monocefds 1.00 P Ariommaindics Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyura CARANGDAE p. P P Pc Pc Pro Ps R. Ra RA Rh. Sa. SC ChirocenlnJs dorab 0.35 Chiloscyf/ium indicum 1.00 CASODDAE See Drapana punctate SC' Stolaphoros spp. Euthynnus spp. Formio niger SE Gemt.s spp o.n 1.60 SE Gymnocranius spp. LEOGNATHDAE Lethrinus spp LOUGNDAE SHJ SG. LUTJANDAE SPH SYN THE Than Trich Othe MUraef'lf1$OK sp. NEMPTERDAE Wt.o Wt.o Total Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch of individual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 1 of20)

51 SHARKS SGAHDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE Thenu. orientalis Trichlu,.,. opp. Others W. oconvnon:ja f1ah (kg) W. of trnh f1ah (kg) Total wt. of houl (kg) n Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kglhr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 2 of20)

52 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Abai&te5 stedatis 1.70 AJutera monocefds AtiotntN indica Anu. spp BOTHDAE Bnlchy\Jnl CARANGDAE Chiloc.nns Chiloscyflium dowb indicum CASOODAE Dtepone punct.t. Stolopholu. spp. Euthymu. spp. _niger G."". spp. Gymnoctanius spp. LEOGNATHDAE Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch of individual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 3 of20) J :"C~~ :~

53 " 111 HAUL NO i i i FSH GROUPS:, PENAEDAE 'i! 1,70 1: Pent.pus setosus Platycaphafu. spp. Plectomynchus Polynemus pictus sextlrius PomadlJ.ys spp, Pncsnthus spp Psettodes erurne; Rachycentron canadus Rash, spp. RAYS Rhynchobalu. djiddansis S4rffinalla spp SCAENDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE Thanu. orianlag. Trichiurus Others spp. W. of comrnerc"" fish (kg) W. of 1n.h fish (kg) Total wt. of haul (kg) n.4o Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 4 of 20)

54 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Aba/isle! stellaris AJutera monocelo$ Ariomm. indica U U 0.15 Anus spp BOTHDAE N N 4.00 B1chyul1l CARANGDAE S S Chirocenlro. doab Chiloscyflium indicum CASODDAE Dtepane punct.,. StolephotlJ. 'P'. Euthynnus spp. H H Formio niger Ge".. OPl' A A Gymnocren;us spp LEOGNATHDAE U U \ Lelhrinus spp LOUGNDAE Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 5 of20)

55 THERAPONDAE Thonus orientalis TrichiuUS spp. Olhef> W. of commerclol f1lh (kg) W. of lluh foh (kg) Total wt. of hl"1 (kg) n.70 Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 6 of20)

56 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Aba/i<tes sfeoans Alule,. monocelo Ariomma indica U 0.13 Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyurtl CARANGDAE N Chirocenlnls dorab Chiloscyllium indicum CASODDAE DrapJfHt punctata Stoaphoros spp. Euthynnus spp. Formioniger Genes spp. Gymnocran spp. LEOGNATHDAE Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch of individual hauls in kglhr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 7of20)

57 Pent.pus setosu$ P./yUph.'us spp. U 0.50 Pl8ctomynehus piclus PolyMmus serlarius N Pomad8sys spp Pricanthu$ spp S P.settodes fjlumfj; Rachycantron c.n.dus U R.strelligar spp. RAYS 2.00 Rhynchob.tus djidtjansjs E S8tt1in.1f8 spp. SCAENDAE S 50 SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE W. of common:101 foh (kg, W. of truh foh (kg) To"'l wi. of hlul (kgl Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kglhr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 8 of20)

58 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Abalistes $leljaris Alutefa monoceros Ariommaindica 0.22 U Arius spp BOTHDAE N 0.15 Btaenyura 0.14 CARANGDAE S ChitDcentrus donjb Chiloscyl/ium indicum CASODDAE Die".,.. punct.t StoophofUS.pp Euthynnus spp. H 1.20 Fonnio niger Genas spp A Gymnocranius spp LEOGNATHDAE U Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 9 of20)

59 Pent.pus seto$us Pf.tyceph.lu. spp. Pl&ctorllynchu. pichi. Polyntnnus sejdarius Pomeduys spp. Pricanthus spp. Psettodes erumei Rachycentron can.dus Rutre/ligerspp. RAYS Rhynchobahl. djiddansis sa_.spp. SCAENr;lAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE 'Thenus orientali& Trichiu1US Olh spp. W. of commercial fqh (kg) W. of truh foh (kg) Total wt. of haul (k9) Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kglhr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 10 of20)

60 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Abali3les st ris Aute,. mofjoceros Ariomm. indica U Arius pp BOTHDAE 0.20 N Brachyura 0.40 CARANGDAE S Ch_trusdorob Chilosqllium indicum CASODlDAE Ore".". punct.t11 Stolep/lonls opp Euthynnus spp. _niger Gen8sspp A Gyrmocrenjus spp LEOGNATHDAE U H Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in k.g/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 11 of20)

61 HAUL NO. FSH GROUPS: PENAEDAE Pent.pus se#nu$ Platyoceph.lu. spp. P1ectorlrynchu. pictu. Poynemus sextariu& Pom_sys spp. Pricanthus spp. Psetlodes erumei RaclJycenl10n Cnldu. R treniger u N ,50 S U, RAYS Rhynchobatus cjiddensis sa_opp. SCAENDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE TMnus orienton.s TrichiUJu. spp. <>tmn wt. of commerclaillah (kg) wt. of _ llah (kg) lobll wi. of haul (kg! Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kglhr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 12 of20)

62 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Abalim tellari! 3.80 AMera monocelds Ari0tnm4 indu Ariu$ spp BOTllDAE 0.20 Brachyura CARANGDAE Chitocen/Tu. dorab Chio!cyllium indicum CASODDAE Drape"" punctat. Soep/rol1l$spp. Eutllynrnn spp. Fonnio nigar Gaira. spp. G~spp. LEOGNATllDAE Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 13 of20)

63 HAUL NO. FSH GROUPS: PENAEDAE Ptlntapus SlJto.su.s Platycepha/us opp. Plectorllynchus pictus Poynemu:s.sextariu.s ~sysopp. Pricanthu$ spp. Psettode.s efufte; Rachycentron canadus Rastnllliger opp. RAYS Rhynchobatus Sa_'a SCAENDAE opp. djiddensis SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE W. THERAPONDAE T>enus orientalis Trichlurus spp au- of co_101 f1ah (kg) W. of traoh f10h (kg) Total wt. 01 houl (kg) No'~: StDd~d nctio1u denolf!s/nf! ndividual s;-c;ulgttnus wi/hin 1M prftcltd;ngfun group. lst, Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 14 of20) 57

64 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Aba/isles st./lan AJute,. monocero.s AriolJ'1rtN indic. U U U Anus spp BOTHDAE N N N Brachyura CARANGDAE S S S r Chin>cenlnJs _ Chiloscyflium ndicum CASODDAE 0.05 Drepane punct.t. Stoephol1ls app. Euthynnus spp. H H H Fotmio niger Ge""s spp. A A A Gyrnnoctanius spp LEOGNATHDAE U U U Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 15 of20)

65 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: PENAEDAE ! Pentspus setosus 0.19 Platycapha'us spp. U U U!, Plectomynchus pictus PofynemU3 sekterius N N N 1.00 PomacHsyo spp. Pric,nthus spp. S S 1.50 S Psettodes efume; RacryocentmnCllnadus U U U Rastrolligerspp. ill ' RAYS 5.50 Rhynchobatus djiddensis E E E sa_a.pp SCAENDAE S S S SCoopsis taeniopterus F F F SCOMBEROMORDAE SHARKS SGAHDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE Thanus_ Trich 1US spp. Others W. of commercial f1ah (kg) W. of lraah f1ah (kg, Total wt. of haul (kg, Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 16 of20)

66 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Aba/i.", e/leris Alutera monoceros Ariomma indica Arius spp BOTHDAE Brachyura CARANGDAE Chirocentrus doreb ChiJo.scyflium indicum CASODDAE Drepene punctete Slolep/JonJ. spp. Euthynnus spp. Fannia niger Gerres spp. Gymnocreniu. spp. LEOGNATHDAE Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 17 of20)

67 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: PENAEDAE Pentapus uto&us Pfetycep/Jalus spp Pfectorlynchus pictus Polynemus sextarius Pomadllsys Spp. Pricanthu$ spp Puttodes eromei Rachycentmn can_s 3.60 Resile. spp. RAYS Rhynchobafus djiddensis 1.00 SJltiinoH.spp. SCAENDAE SCoopsis teenioptenjs SCOMBEROMORJDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE 1enu._N. TrichiunJs spp. Olhefs W. of comnwn:lolliah W. of h lah (kg) Total wt. of haul (kg) (kg) n n Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kglhr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 18 of20)

68 HAUL NO FSH GROUPS: Abalistes steharis AJutera monocero.s Ariomma indica U Anus spp BOTHDAE N Brachyur CARANGDAE S Chirocentlll.s Chiloscytlium rjorab indicum CASODDAE Drepane punct.,. Slolaphonn spp. Euthynnu, spp. Formio nipar G."", spp. GymllOCllJnius spp. LEOGNATHDAE Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch of individual hauls in kg/hr, East Coa Peninsular Malaysia, (page 19 of20)

69 HAUL NO. FSH GROUPS: PENAEDAE Pent.pus selosus P1atyceph.,. Spp. Pectomynchu. pictu. Poynemu. ",xtanu. Pomacla.ys spp. Pricanthus spp. Psettodes erume; Rachycen1Jon c.nlldu. R'_';gar spp. RAYS Rhynchobalu. djkjdenm S.nlinella spp. SCAENDAE SHARKS SGANDAE SPHYRAENDAE THERAPONDAE n.anu. onentafs Trichu= Others spp. W. of commerclll f1ah (kgl W. of trah f1ah (kg) Total wt. of haul (kgl Appendix 2. Commercial fish catch ofindividual hauls in kg/hr, East Coast, Peninsular Malaysia, (page 20 of20)

70 0\ ~ Appendix 3. Trash fish catch of individual hauls (kg/hr) offish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular _. Malaysia, K.K. MERSUll, (page 1 of5) HAUlfilO. ' ,.,.,S 11,. 10 3) :n.22 Z5 77 " F1aH GROUP&:... 0Jn A... ~'" 0." OTHDA! D O.Cl lllactyula e ,... CAUOOlA! 0.13 CAAOOA ll o.,s '0 LA_ 2.!l.AOOCOPHAUlAE.Cl 111) 0.., ll 1.' U7,'" L!OO ,., ~.. ' ~ PlAT"tCOPAUW! 0.'" 03ll -- Q31 03S 1.17,.37 ".211 CO.OPOlA2...,.57 1m ' '.73 a om o.,s ~,.00 ~ --,-~,; a.,. aylooo ' ', ,... "'- "'''' TlM:ATl '21 US 1.10 ' l.tl 1Cl 13) acl.110 'S.lll WL of "" 37.D , '"'ll TS. '.12 1m a'" 1Cl...,..,., ".11) acl acl 1lD '",5.(1) om.'" lll.ld

71 ..., <1." CU, "" " 0.00 OlD 1el..,.~ , <>7. ~1i'..,;>; 7lUCAJ... U5 0llER0 8.llD.lXl 1el U> Wt.. P, Oel - 3.SO 1s.oo S7D1 U> :lud o.el Oel 3.SO 21.:l11..'" "'CO "'.00 ClOD 4DD ld.7d SlllJ:l Appendix 3. Trash fish catch of individual hauls (kg/hr) offish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, K.K. MERSUn, (page 2 of 5) --."HA=UL'"'N"'O, =-=--=---,~--,~~~~-~~~~-~--,~-----~-~--~-~-~-~-~-~-~-=--~--,-~~ FSH GROUPS: Ariomm. ndice BOTHDAE CAESK>DDAE CARANOlOAE - F<tuWN_ E E E G~.", LA8RllAE 0.71 S S S LAOOCEPtlAlJllAE a a a1 L.EOONATHOAE S S S.",. Lu(jonua MONOCANTHOAE MUWDAE a R.-.gor &pp s... opp SCO.OPSlDAE 7.SS SCORPAENOAE SEPOAE 2.54 Sganuoop Sq* SYNOOONnDAE \ 1.00 V 4hli O.U &.70 a.so O.1lll 7.U 33.1lll 2a.ol :B.Ol 6S.OO S3.oo

72 Appendix 3. Trash fish catch of individual hauls (kg/hr) offish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, K.K. :MERSUT, (page 3 of5) -_. -- Doyo_ -.,.. LABRiDA!: LAOOCEPH..1JDAE ll.cs E 0.03 ~ " < '" O.1lil , lM 1.24 E 0." un o.n '", '''' U ll!o U 0.14 om ' l.3o -., OYOOONTOl! TETtJlOOC*TOl! r T-.._ 0." 0." lot 0.1' A' U !15 _.... -_. 0. Q CU" 10.!lS 7." "'17... ~02,..., " , "' ,... 0." ~ " 0.25 o.os U 0..- E C0l.0'0HW< !1S F Sll 0. """"""- OTHERS ' Q.37 wt. efn.h "" >",... ' '.:> CD ,. ".01 ~m 4> D." 13.:>1 ~ '8,00 25<D U7 3.52

73 -- OlHEllO W.., f! Appendix 3. Trash fish catch of individual hauls (kg/hr) of fish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, K.K. MERSUn, (page 4 of5) HAUL NO. ea t7 ea 88 lo llll loll FSH_OOPS: AmbN&ilapp APOOONOAE ARJOAE 5.58 U U U BOTHDAE lachyura N N N CAEllOOOAE O.se CARANClOAE a a a ~- EpnophHM C C C O.se 0.43 G~_ 0.32 C C C 0. LAOOCEPHALlAE O.se 2.17 LElOONATHlDAl! E E E -yo- Pent Pentopt/otllong/rrlMluo PLATYCEPHAl.JlAE H H H 0.10 SCOLllPSOA A A A BCORPAENDAE BEPllAE 0.05 U U U 1.24 S/sonUtp BPAJUlAE 1.24 BYNODONTllAE THERAPONDA! OTHElla W. 01 (k9t

74 Appendix 3. Trash fish catch of individual hauls (kg/hr) offish resource survey off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, K.K. MERSUJ, (page 5 of 5) HAUL NO. FSH GROUPS: A/utere monoceros Ambassis spp. APOGONDA BRACHYURA. CAESODDA"E CARANGDAE S ECHNEDAE Fistu/arla vlllosa LAGOCEPHALDAE LEOGNATHDAE Lolf105PP MULUDAE Pantaprlon long/manus Plotosus spp Johnlus aneus 6.23 S Squllia spp Tlrenus orienta/is 0.15 U TRYGONDAE 1.10 OTHERS Wt. 9f nsh fish (kg)