Sadovy, Y. and A.M. Eklund. (in review). Synopsis of biological information on Epinephelus striatus (Bloch, 1792), the Nassau grouper and E. itajara (Lichtenstein, 1822) the jewfish. NOAA Tech Report Series.

Samoilys, M. 1988. Abundance and species richness of coral reef fish on the Kenyan coast: the effects of protective management and fishing. Proc. Int. Coral Reef Symp., 6th. 2:261-266.

Salm, R.V. and J.R. Clark. 1984. Marine and Coastal Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners and Managers. IUCN. Gland, Switzerland. 302 pp.

Shackell, N. and J. Lien. 1994. An under-utilized conservation option for fishery managers: marine protected areas in the northwest Atlantic. p. 21-30. In: Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable Fisheries. N. Shackell and J.H.M. Willison (eds.). SAMPAA, Wolfville, Nova Scotia.

Shackell, N., and J. Lien. 1995. An under-utilized conservation option for fishery managers: Marine protected areas in the Northwest Atlantic. Pages 13-20 in N.L. Shackell and J.H. Martin Willison (editors). Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable Fisheries. Published by Science and Management of Protected Areas Association.

Our objective was to identify the main issues and research priorities for understanding the role of marine protected areas (MPAs) in conservation fishery strategy. We considered whether fisheries would be more sustainable if zoning were used to classify areas as no-, limited-and full use fishery areas. One goal of MPAS is to enhance fisheries for fishing communities, can fishing communities be treated equitably if MPAs are established solely on an ecological basis? What design (number, size and distribution) of MPAS would be most effective in sustaining fishing communities and ocean biodiversity? We propose that a network of ecologically representative marine MPAs would benefit marine biodiversity in general as well as major commercial species, but that provisions (e.g. subsistence fishing) for communities close to MPAs should be an option. Specific conservation efforts may be required for fish populations outside MPAs (e.g. seasonal closures during spawning and a reduction in total allowable catch). Optimal size, shape and regional distribution of seasonal or permanent MPAs could be determined by fishery workers and biologists in order to counteract effects of over fishing (e.g. low number of spawners, smaller size-at-age and size-at-maturity). Efficacy of MPAs could be measured by monitoring ecological change (e.g. changes in community composition, disappearance of rare species, increase in opportunistic species) and status of commercial fish populations (e.g. abundance, age structure, size-at-age, recruitment variability). MPAs may be more effective as well as easier and cheaper to regulate than other regulatory tools (e.g. total allowable catches, mesh size, by-catch, amount of discard). Several options are available for establishing seasonal and permanent MPAs yet establishment has been exceedingly slow in Canada.

Shackell, N.L., and J.H. Martin Willison. 1995. Marine protected areas and sustainable fisheries. Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, Center for Wildlife and Conservation Biology, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova Scotia BOP IXO, Canada (publishers). 300 Pages.

Shafer, C.L. 1990. Nature Reserves, Island Theory and Conservation Practice. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 189 pp.

Shepherd, S.A. 1990. Studies on the southern Australian abalone (Genus Haliotis). XII. Long- term recruitment and mortality dynamics of an unfished population. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwat. Res. 41:475-492.

Shepard, S.A., and L.D. Brown. 1993. What is an abalone stock: Implications for the role of refugia in conservation. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50: 2001-2009.

This paper concerns the conservation of abalone stocks in a genetic and fisheries sense. We review genetic and ecological information relating to the differentiation of abalone stocks in South Australia and propose that metapopulation theory provides an apt framework in which to develop the concept of an abalone stock. We consider what is a minimum viable population for abalone and illustrate our discussion with a case study of an abalone population that declined through a combination of fishing, recruitment failure, and inadequate protection by a refugium. Refugia can play an important role in abalone conservation by maintaining egg production and genetic diversity and by preserving populations for scientific study.

Sheridan, A.K. 1995. The genetic impacts of human activities on wild fish populations. Reviews in Fisheries Science. 3: 91-108.

Shrippa, M.J. and C.P. Goodyear. 1994. Simulation modeling of conservation standards for spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nevulosus) in Everglades National Park. Bulletin of Marine Science. 54: 1019-1035.

Shulman, M.J. and E. Bermingham. 1995. Early life histories, ocean currents, and the population genetics of Caribbean reef fishes. Evolution. 49(5): 897-910.

Sluka, R.D. 1995. Influence of habitat on density, species richness, and size distribution of groupers in the Upper Florida Keys, USA and Central Bahamas. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL. 230 pp.

Sluka, R., M. Chiappone, and K.M. Sullivan. 1994. Comparison of juvenile grouper populations in southern Florida and the central Bahamas. Bulletin of Marine Science 54(3): 871-880.

Visual surveys conducted in shallow-water (<10 m depth) reef habitats were used to compare juvenile epinepheline grouper density, size distribution, and diversity in the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park (ECLSP), Bahamas and in the northern region of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The community of juvenile groupers in an area closed to fishing (ECLSP) and in an area with extensive fisheries exploitation (FKNMS) were contrasted for specific reef habitats. Across habitats, the mean density of groupers was three times higher in the ECLSP compared to the FKNMS. Sites in the FKNMS had a significantly lower grouper density. While the ECLSP site had a higher overall percent frequency of groupers in the larger size classes, there were no significant differences in the length-frequency distributions between the two areas. The composition of species observed in each area was remarkably different and was attributed to differences in habitat requirements among species. At the FKNMS sites, grays by (Epinephelus cruetatus), red hind (E. guttatus), red grouper (E. morio), and black grouper (Mycteroperca bonaci) comprised the majority of individuals observed. At the ECLSP sites Nassau grouper (E. striatus) and coney (E. fulvus) were dominant. The survey results characterized reef types and the grouper community. This information is used to evaluate the value of Marine Fisheries Reserves (MFRs) and their role in providing the reef habitats needed to protect juvenile groupers.

Smith, P.J., R.I.C.C. Francis, and M. McVeagh. 1991. Loss of genetic diversity due to fishing pressure. Fish. Res. 10: 309-316.

Smith-Vaniz, W.F., J.A. Bohnsack and J.D. Williams. 1995. Reef Fishes of the Florida Keys. Pages 279-284 in Our Living Resources. U.S. Department of the Interior - National Biological Service. Washington, D.C.

South Atlantic Council Reef Fish Plan Development Team. 1990. The potential of marine fishery reserves for reef fish management in the U.S. southern Atlantic. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-261. 40 pages.

Marine fishery reserves (MFRs), areas with no consumptive usage, are recommended as viable option for management of reef fisheries in the U.S. southern Atlantic region. MFRs are designed to protect reef fish stocks and habitat from all consumptive exploitation within specified geographical areas for the primary purpose of ensuring the persistence of reef fish stocks and fisheries. Fishery reserves are intended to protect older and larger fishes. This will benefit reef fisheries by protecting critical spawning stock biomass, intra-specific genetic diversity, population age structure, recruitment supply, and ecosystem balance while maintaining reef fish fisheries. The MFR concept is easily understandable by the general public and possibly more easily accepted than some other management strategies. Fishery reserves provide some insurance against management and recruitment failures, simplify enforcement, and have equitable impact among fishery users. Data collection needs solely for management are reduced and management occurs without complete information and understanding about every species and interaction. Use of fishery reserves will establish U.S. leadership in producing model strategies for cooperative international reef resource management in the Caribbean. Large resident fishes that wander out of reserves can help maintain certain trophy fisheries. MFR sites with natural species equilibrium will allow measurement of age, growth, and natural mortality for fisheries purposes and will provide a basis for other educational economic, and scientific benefits. Because there is no fishing within MFRs, impacts of hook and release mortality are eliminated and the temptation for incidental poaching is reduced. A mixed management strategy is recommended where 20% of the shelf is MFR while the remaining 80% is managed for optimal yield by any of several traditional options. Coordinated fishery reserve efforts in state waters would enhance the benefits of MFRs. Obstacles to fishery reserves include auomatic resistance to new approaches in U.S. marine fisheries, opposition by some local special interests near proposed reserves, and uncertainty concerning the size, location, and number of reserves necessary to ensure persistence of the reef fisheries. The incentive for deliberate poaching may be increased within reserves; thus, at-sea surveillance and enforcement may be necessary. New artificial reefs may be needed to replace those lost by inclusion within fishery reserves. Other fishery management plans should be coordinated to control trolling and other fishing activities within reserves that may impact reef fishes. The short-term impacts on total harvest caused by placing fishing habitat into fishing reserves should be compensated for by long-term fishery benefits.

Starr, R.M. and K.A. Johnson. 1997. Goal oriented marine reserves to enhance fisheries. p. 68-78. In : Marine Protected Areas of California: A Summary of a Conference Session. D.M. McCardle and R.M. Starr (eds.). Univ. Of California, Sea Grant Cooperative Extension, Santa Barbara, CA.

Stergiou, K.I. and D.A. Pollard. 1994. A spatial analysis of the commercial fisheries catches from the Greek Aegean Sea. Fish. Res. 20:109-135.

Stoner, A.W. and M. Ray. 1996. Queen conch (Strombus gigas) in fished and unfished locations of the Bahamas: effects of a marine fishery reserve on adults, juveniles, and larval production. Fishery Bulletin, U.S. 94:551-565.

Sullivan, K.M. and M. Chiappone. 1994. A Rapid Ecological Assessment of the Montego Bay Marine Park, Jamaica. The Nature Conservancy. Arlington, Virginia. 86 pp.