102 
Fishery Bulletin 115(1) 
2014). Fins of longfin makos are of desirable quality 
and have been reported in the Hong Kong (Clarke et 
al., 2006), Chilean (Sebastian et ah, 2008), and Indone- 
sian fin trades (Sembiring et ah, 2015). Consequently, 
in some fisheries but not in the Cuban fishery, this spe- 
cies may be finned and discarded at sea; hence, land- 
ings of longfin makos may be underreported (Reardon 
et ah, 2006). Given the apparent declines in some 
populations of the shortfin mako (Baum et ah, 2003; 
Dulvy et ah, 2008), it is likely that populations of the 
longfin mako have been affected by intensive pelagic 
longline fisheries (Reardon et ah, 2006). Because of its 
rarity, low reproductive potential, and bycatch-induced 
mortality, the longfin mako is listed as vulnerable in 
the lUCN Red List of Threatened Species (Reardon et 
ah, 2006) and in 2008 was added to Appendix II of the 
Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of 
Wild Animals (Kyne et ah, 2012). In U.S. waters, reten- 
tion of longfin makos has been prohibited for both com- 
mercial and recreational fishermen since 2000 under 
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) fishery 
management plan for sharks that inhabit the Atlantic 
Ocean and adjacent waters (NMFS^). In an ecological 
risk assessment of shark species caught in Atlantic 
pelagic longline fisheries, Cortes et ah (2015) ranked 
the vulnerability of the longfin mako among species at 
highest risk and highlighted the need for better basic 
biological information for this shark. 
Satellite-linked tagging technologies have provided 
researchers with effective tools for revealing home 
ranges, movement and migration routes, and habitat- 
use patterns of marine predators (Hammerschlag et ah, 
2011). Most lamnid species have been studied by using 
satellite tracking. These species include the shortfin 
mako (Loefer et ah, 2005; Stevens et ah, 2010; Rog- 
ers et ah, 2015), white shark {Carcharodon carcharias) 
(Bruce et ah, 2006; Weng et ah, 2007; Nasby-Lucas et 
ah, 2009), porbeagle (Lamna nasus) (Fade et ah, 2009; 
Saunders et ah, 2011; Francis et ah, 2015), and salmon 
shark (L. ditropis) (Weng et ah, 2005, 2008). However, 
there are no detailed reports of satellite-tracked long- 
fin makos from any part of the global range of this 
species. Conventional tagging results in U.S. waters, 
although sparse, indicate movement of longfin makos 
from the eastern GOM into the western North Atlantic 
Ocean, likely through the Straits of Florida (Kohler et 
ah, 1998). We are the first to use satellite tracking as 
a means of assessing the behavior, ecology, and vulner- 
ability to fisheries of this species. 
Materials and methods 
Two specimens of the longfin mako, one from the 
northeastern GOM and one from the southeastern 
^ NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1999. Fi- 
nal fishery management plan for Atlantic tuna, swordfish, 
and sharks, 97 p. Nath Mar. Fish. Serv., Silver Spring, 
MD. [Available from website.] 
GOM, were captured and tagged with pop-up satel- 
lite archival tags to track their horizontal and vertical 
movements. In 2012, a male longfin mako (LFMl) was . 
captured during an overnight pelagic longline set de- 
ployed on 27 April in the northeastern GOM (28.40°N, 
85.84°W) from the RV Weatherbird II of the Florida 
Institute of Oceanography. In 2015, a second male long- 
fin mako (LFM2) was captured during an overnight 
pelagic longline set deployed from an artisanal Cuban 
fishing vessel on 13 February off Cojimar in northwest 
Cuba (23.26°N, 81.98°W). 
When LFMl was captured in 2012, the sea-surface 
temperature (SST) was 25.3°C and depth to the bot- , 
tom was approximately 334 m. The gear targeted pe- 
lagic fish species and consisted of 26 km of mainline 
with 30-m gangions composed of 136-kg monofilament 
connected through a 9/0 nickel-plated swivel to 1 m of 
0.8-mm stainless steel cable. The 202 hooks deployed 
were 18/0 circle hooks with zero offset and were baited 
with Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculatus) 
or little tunny {Euthynnus alletteratus) and were sus- 
pended at depths 30-60 m below the surface. Chemical 
glow sticks (Chemilures,^ World Plastics, San Carlos, 
CA) were attached to the gangions approximately 2 
m above each baited hook as a fish attractant. Upon 
haulback of the gear the following morning on 28 April, ; 
one longfin mako was among the catch. The captured 
shark was lifted out of the water and brought on deck 
with a specially designed cradle to support the shark’s 
body weight (Grace et al., 2007). The animal remained 
within this cradle for measuring and tagging proce- 
dures, during which time its gills were irrigated with | 
seawater from a hose inserted into its mouth. 
The shark was tagged with a pop-up satellite ar- 
chival tag (MklO; Wildlife Computers, Redmond, WA). - 
The tag archived measurements of ambient tempera- 
ture, pressure, and light level at 3-s intervals and 
summarized these data into 8-h periods to facilitate 
data transmission. The tag was programmed to detach 
after 90 d on the shark, float to the sea surface, and 
transmit a summary of its archived data by way of the 
Argos satellite system with time-at-depth and time-at- 
temperature histograms in 14 user-defined bins. Black 
antifouling paint (EP-2000; ePaint Company, East Fal- 
mouth, MA) before deployment had been applied to the 
tag, excluding its sensors and label. At deployment, 
the tag was inserted into the shark’s dorsal muscula- 
ture just below the first dorsal fin by using a stainless 
steel dart (Type SSD; 34.0 x 8.5 mm; Hallprint Pty. 
Ltd., Hindmarsh Valley, Australia) attached to a 15-cm 
tether composed of 55-kg coated, braided wire (Berkley, ' 
Spirit Lake, lA). To avoid tag destruction from extreme | 
depth, a mechanical release device (RD1800; Wildlife 
Computers), designed to release at a depth of 1800 m, 
was threaded inline at the midpoint of the tether. The 
tether, excluding the portion with the RD1800 device, 
2 Mention of trade names or commercial companies is for iden- 
tification purposes only and does not imply endorsement by 
the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. 
