DOCSLIB.ORG

15 Lingcod, Ophiodon Elongatus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
15 Lingcod, Ophiodon Elongatus 15 Lingcod, Ophiodon elongatus Lingcod, Ophiodon elongatus. Photo credit: Daniel W. Gotshall. History of the Fishery Lingcod, Ophiodon elongatus, is an important commercial and recreational species of the Pacific coast of the United States. As a nearshore species, it has been fished by inhabitants along the coastline of California for thousands of years, serving an important role in the diet along with shellfish. More recently, lingcod has been a California commercial fishery since the early 1900s. The lingcod fishery showed a general upward trend ranging from 0.5 million to 2 million pounds (225 to 900 metric tons) in landings since records began in 1916 to a rapid rise during the 1970s, with the growth of the west coast trawl fishery. Commercial landings have been variable, but was greatest between 1970 and 1990 (except for a drop in the mid 1980s), with peak landings of nearly 4 million pounds (1800 metric tons) landed in 1974. Landings decreased in the last decade due to management restrictions beginning in the 1990s, with catch levels consistently under 0.5 million pounds (225 metric tons) (Figures 15-1, 15-2). During the 2000s, annual landings averaged only 145,000 pounds (65 metric tons) with an average value of $209,000 (Figure 15-3). The average price per pound increased from $0.23 in 1980 to $1.56 in 2008 ($0.50 to $3.44 per kilogram), mainly due to the increased value of the live fish market that began in the mid 1990s (Figure 15-3). From 1998 to 2008, the value of lingcod sold live has comprised a growing share of total lingcod market value; in 1993 live fish represented 1 percent of total commercial lingcod landings, increasing to a range from 32 percent in 1998 to 57 percent in 2003. Prior to the mid 1980s, trawl gear was the predominate gear used to catch lingcod. Fishing strategies changed as the live fish fishery expanded and currently trawl and hook and line gear are used equally. A minor portion of lingcod are taken with gill nets. Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 15-1 5 Commercial Recreational 4 3 2 Landings (million pounds) 1 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Year Figure 15-1. Lingcod commercial and recreational landings, 1980-2003. Data Sources: Commercial - CFIS data, all gear types combined. Recreational - MRFSS data, all fishing modes and gear types combined. Data not available for 1990-1992. CPFV data not available for central and northern California for 1993-1995. 0.70 Commercial 0.60 Recreational 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 Landings (million pounds) (million Landings 0.10 0.00 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year Figure 15-2. Lingcod commercial and recreational landings, 2004-2008. Data Sources: Commercial - CFIS data, all gear types combined. Recreational - CRFS data, all fishing modes and gear types combined. Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 15-2 $1,200 $1.80 Value Price per pound $1.60 $1,000 $1.40 $800 $1.20 $1.00 $600 $0.80 $400 $0.60 Value (thousand dollars) (thousand Value Average price per pound per price Average $0.40 $200 $0.20 $0 $0.00 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Year Figure 15-3. Lingcod ex-vessel value and average price per pound, 1980-2008. Data Source: CFIS data, all gear types combined. Lingcod have been caught recreationally in California since the 1920s, and are now a significant portion of the recreational fishery. Since 1980, there have been two different recreational sampling programs: the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistical Survey (MRFSS) (1980-2003) and the California Recreational Fisheries Survey (CRFS) (2004-2008). Due to changes in the sampling protocol and how the data are used to estimate landings these two surveys are not comparable. An analysis of MRFSS data (1980-2003) shows lingcod as the third-ranking species among all recreationally caught species in landed weight, averaging 5.6 percent of the total recreational catch for that time period. For 2004-2008, CRFS data rates lingcod as the fifth highest species by weight, at 4.7 percent of the total recreational catch. They are a large, sporting fish that are considered tasty. Most are taken using hook and line (sometimes inadvertently caught fishing for salmon), and some are caught by spearfishing. From 1980 to 2003, 95 percent of lingcod caught were taken by boat modes [commercial passenger fishing vessels (CPFV) and private/rental boats], and for 2004-2008, 97 percent of lingcod were taken by boat mode. Private boat landings were predominant over those from CPFVs, 72 percent to 28 percent from 1980-2003, and 56 percent to 44 percent from 2004- 2008. Since 1980, CPFV catch of lingcod (based on CPFV logbook data; Figure 15-4) has been on a downward trend that may be a result of recreational bag and minimum size limits imposed starting in 1980 (Table 15-1) and exacerbated by the severely restricted harvest guidelines implemented when lingcod was declared overfished in 2000. The CPFV catch from 2000 to 2008 has been highly variable, ranging from 10,652 fish in 2000 to 44,198 fish in 2003. For all recreational modes, both MRFSS (2000 to 2003) and CRFS recreational catch data (2004 to 2008) have also been Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 15-3 variable. MRFSS catch ranged from a low of 357,976 pounds (162 metric tons) in 2001 to a high of 2,202,913 pounds (1000 metric tons) in 2003 (Figure 15-1), while CRFS catch ranged from a high of 662,752 pounds (301 metric tons) in 2006 to a low of 222,920 pounds (101 metric tons) in 2008 (Figure 15-2). 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Catch (thousand fish) (thousand Catch 20 10 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Year Figure 15-4. Lingcod commercial passenger fishing vessel (CPFV) catch, 1980-2008. Data source: CPFV logbook data. Table 15-1. History of changes to California recreational lingcod bag and minimum size limits. Bag Minimum size Year limit (inches) Prior to 1980 10 -- 1980 5 -- 1981 5 22 1998 3 24 1999 2 24 2000 2 26 2002 2 24 2004 1* 30* 2005 to present 2 24 * Inseason change became effective April 1. Since 1999, MRFSS and CRFS records show total recreational catch estimates exceeding commercial catch every year (Figures 15-1 and 15-2). In 2004, recreational catch accounted for 65 percent of the total coastwide lingcod catch. This shift away from the opposite pattern of greater commercial landings in the 1970s is attributable to Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 15-4 both the recent management restrictions imposed on the commercial fishery (see Management Considerations, below) and increased effort from the recreational sector. An analysis of historical recreational catch data indicates a 65 percent increase in recreational effort (primarily boat modes) between the years 1958 to 1961 and 1981 to 1986, although effort decreased by about 20 percent between 1981 to 1986. Both average weights and lengths for the lingcod recreational fishery have demonstrated similar trends since 1980, except for a spike in average weights between 1997 to 2001, and a peak in 2004 (Figure 15-5). The increase in lengths beginning in 1997 may be due to the increase in the minimum size limit from 22 to 24 inches in 1996 (Table 15-1). The peak average length of 28.3 inches (72 centimeters) in 2004 is likely due to the April 1 inseason increase of the minimum length size limit to 30 inches (76.2 centimeters), returning to the 24 inch (71.1 centimeters) size limit the following year. 30 10 Length 9 Weight 25 8 7 20 6 15 5 4 10 Average length (inches) length Average 3 Average weight (pounds) Average weight 2 5 1 0 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Year Figure 15-5. Lingcod recreational catch average yearly length and weight, 1980-2008. Data source: MRFSS (1980-2003) and CRFS (2004-2008) sampler examined data, all fishing modes and gear types combined. Data not available for 1990-1992. CPFV data not available for central and northern California for 1993-1995. The declining catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) in the commercial fishery since 1980 (Figure 15-6) reflects the decreasing biomass of the stock according to the 2005 stock assessment. The non trawl peak for years 1985-1989 may be attributable to the increased use of gill nets those years, with a relatively higher CPUE from this gear type. Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 15-5 600 Trawl Non trawl 500 400 300 200 CPUE (pounds lingcod/trip) CPUE (pounds 100 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Year Figure 15-6. Lingcod commercial catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE), 1980-2008, for trawl and non trawl gear types. Data source: CFIS data. The sharp CPUE increases in both the recreational fishery as a whole and the CPFV fishery in 2002 and 2003 (Figures 15-7 and 15-8) are due to much higher numbers of fish landed, as fishing effort remained about the same as previous years. In 2002 and 2003, CPFVs landed an estimated 58,784 and 35,269 fish, respectively, compared to 12,141 fish in 2001. Similarly, in 2002 and 2003, private boats landed 88,062 and 254,741 fish, compared to 26,719 fish in 2001.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel Off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998-2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation Robert L
    This article was downloaded by: [Oregon State University] On: 16 August 2011, At: 13:01 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Transactions of the American Fisheries Society Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utaf20 Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998-2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation Robert L. Emmett a & Gregory K. Krutzikowsky b a Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries, 2030 South Marine Science Drive, Newport, Oregon, 97365, USA b Cooperative Institute of Marine Resource Studies, Oregon State University, 2030 South Marine Science Drive, Newport, Oregon, 97365, USA Available online: 09 Jan 2011 To cite this article: Robert L. Emmett & Gregory K. Krutzikowsky (2008): Nocturnal Feeding of Pacific Hake and Jack Mackerel off the Mouth of the Columbia River, 1998-2004: Implications for Juvenile Salmon Predation, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 137:3, 657-676 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1577/T06-058.1 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and- conditions This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Lingcod Stock Assessment 1
    2017 Lingcod Stock Assessment 2017 Lingcod Stock Assessment Melissa A. Haltuch1, John Wallace1, Caitlin Allen Akselrud2, Josh Nowlis1, Lewis A.K. Barnett1,2, Juan L. Valero3, Tien-Shui Tsou4, Laurel Lam5 June, 2018 1Northwest Fisheries Science Center U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 2725 Montlake Blvd East Seattle, Washington 98112-2097 2School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 3Center for the Advancement of Population Assessment Methodology, La Jolla, California 4Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 5Moss Landing Marine Laboratories Moss Landing, California 95039 1 2017 Lingcod Stock Assessment This report may be cited as: Haltuch, M.A., Wallace, J., Akselrud, C.A., Nowlis, J., Barnett, L.A.K., Valero, J.L., Tsou, T., Lam, L. 2018. 2017 Lingcod Stock Assessment. Pacific Fishery Management Council, Portland, OR. Available from http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/stock-assessments/ 2 2017 Lingcod Stock Assessment Contents 1. Executive Summary .........................................................................................................4 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 30 3. Data ................................................................................................................................35 4. Model .............................................................................................................................51
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item H.2.A Supplemental CDFW Report 1 March 2020
    Agenda Item H.2.a Supplemental CDFW Report 1 March 2020 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE REPORT ON INITIAL STOCK ASSESSMENT PLAN AND TERMS OF REFERENCE The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) offers the following report in response to Appendix A of the NFMS Report on Initial Stock Assessment Plan (Agenda Item H.2, Attachment 1, March 2020). This report details current data collection efforts by CDFW and Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC), identifies some deficiencies of the commercial sampling program, and summarizes CDFW efforts to fill current data gaps. We also offer input on the stocks to be prioritized in the upcoming stock assessment cycle. California Data Collection Programs Over the last several years, CDFW has participated in various Stock Assessment Review (STAR) panel reviews, via representatives on the Groundfish Management Team and Science and Statistical Committee, specific to groundfish species of importance to California. The associated public data-sleuthing meetings and STAR panel reports have generated discussion between CDFW, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) stock assessors, and PSMFC to identify how data-gaps can be filled. As currently structured, commercial and recreational groundfish fisheries are sampled for biological data, however each are designed for different purposes and as a result, may not collect all the data needed for stock assessments. Discussion of both programs is followed by CDFW projects aimed at filling data gaps. California Cooperative Groundfish Survey The commercial groundfish sampling program is known as the California Cooperative Groundfish Survey (Cooperative Survey) which has been in place since 1980. As the program’s details are not frequently discussed in Council circles, CDFW encourages a visit to the program’s website at: https://calcom.psmfc.org/ The Cooperative Survey was originally designed with input from CDFW, NMFS and PSMFC when commercial groundfish fisheries were predominantly conducted with trawl gear, and landings were in the thousands of pounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Coast Groundfish Species and Fillet Identification Manual
    Central Coast Groundfish Species and Fillet Identification Manual An Introduction to Saltwater Fishing in San Luis Obispo County A Senior Project presented to the Faculty of the Agricultural Education and Communication Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science by Robbie Milla February, 2014 © 2014 Robbie Milla Abstract The purpose of this project was to create a manual that would aid fishermen and fish consumers in the successful identification of various groundfish species and their fillets. The manual was crafted with quality photographs to give the viewer a vivid depiction of the targeted groundfish species. The images were taken to specifically target the identification characteristics of each fish species. It was the hope of the author to educate anyone who was interested in the groundfish fishery. The manual includes: basic groundfish regulations, groundfish species identification, and groundfish fillet identification. i Table of Contents Chapter 1: The Introduction...........................................................................................................1 Statement of the Problem ..............................................................................................................2 Importance of the Project ..............................................................................................................2 Purpose of the Project ...................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt Bay Fishes
    Humboldt Bay Fishes ><((((º>`·._ .·´¯`·. _ .·´¯`·. ><((((º> ·´¯`·._.·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·._ .·´¯`·. _ .·´¯`·. ><((((º> Acknowledgements The Humboldt Bay Harbor District would like to offer our sincere thanks and appreciation to the authors and photographers who have allowed us to use their work in this report. Photography and Illustrations We would like to thank the photographers and illustrators who have so graciously donated the use of their images for this publication. Andrey Dolgor Dan Gotshall Polar Research Institute of Marine Sea Challengers, Inc. Fisheries And Oceanography [email protected] [email protected] Michael Lanboeuf Milton Love [email protected] Marine Science Institute [email protected] Stephen Metherell Jacques Moreau [email protected] [email protected] Bernd Ueberschaer Clinton Bauder [email protected] [email protected] Fish descriptions contained in this report are from: Froese, R. and Pauly, D. Editors. 2003 FishBase. Worldwide Web electronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org/ 13 August 2003 Photographer Fish Photographer Bauder, Clinton wolf-eel Gotshall, Daniel W scalyhead sculpin Bauder, Clinton blackeye goby Gotshall, Daniel W speckled sanddab Bauder, Clinton spotted cusk-eel Gotshall, Daniel W. bocaccio Bauder, Clinton tube-snout Gotshall, Daniel W. brown rockfish Gotshall, Daniel W. yellowtail rockfish Flescher, Don american shad Gotshall, Daniel W. dover sole Flescher, Don stripped bass Gotshall, Daniel W. pacific sanddab Gotshall, Daniel W. kelp greenling Garcia-Franco, Mauricio louvar
    [Show full text]
  • 1 CWU Comparative Osteology Collection, List of Specimens
    CWU Comparative Osteology Collection, List of Specimens List updated June 2016 0-CWU-Collection-List.docx Specimens collected primarily from North American mid-continent and coastal Alaska for zooarchaeological research and teaching purposes. Curated at the Zooarchaeology Laboratory, Department of Anthropology, under the direction of Dr. Pat Lubinski, [email protected]. Numbers on right margin provide a count of complete or near-complete specimens. There may also be a listing of mount (commercially mounted articulated skeletons), part (partial skeletons), skull (skulls), or * (in freezer but not yet processed). Vertebrate specimens in taxonomic order, then invertebrates. Taxonomy follows the Integrated Taxonomic Information System online (www.itis.gov) as of June 2016 unless otherwise noted. VERTEBRATES: Phylum Chordata, Class Petromyzontida (lampreys) Order Petromyzontiformes Family Petromyzontidae: Pacific lamprey ............................................................. Entosphenus tridentatus.................................... 1 Phylum Chordata, Class Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous fishes) unidentified shark teeth Order Squaliformes Family Squalidae Spiny dogfish ......................................................... Squalus acanthias ............................................. 1 Order Rajiformes Family Rajidae Aleutian skate ........................................................ Bathyraja aleutica ............................................. 1 Alaska skate ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes-Of-The-Salish-Sea-Pp18.Pdf
    NOAA Professional Paper NMFS 18 Fishes of the Salish Sea: a compilation and distributional analysis Theodore W. Pietsch James W. Orr September 2015 U.S. Department of Commerce NOAA Professional Penny Pritzker Secretary of Commerce Papers NMFS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Kathryn D. Sullivan Scientifi c Editor Administrator Richard Langton National Marine Fisheries Service National Marine Northeast Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Service Maine Field Station Eileen Sobeck 17 Godfrey Drive, Suite 1 Assistant Administrator Orono, Maine 04473 for Fisheries Associate Editor Kathryn Dennis National Marine Fisheries Service Offi ce of Science and Technology Fisheries Research and Monitoring Division 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg. 178 Honolulu, Hawaii 96818 Managing Editor Shelley Arenas National Marine Fisheries Service Scientifi c Publications Offi ce 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, Washington 98115 Editorial Committee Ann C. Matarese National Marine Fisheries Service James W. Orr National Marine Fisheries Service - The NOAA Professional Paper NMFS (ISSN 1931-4590) series is published by the Scientifi c Publications Offi ce, National Marine Fisheries Service, The NOAA Professional Paper NMFS series carries peer-reviewed, lengthy original NOAA, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, research reports, taxonomic keys, species synopses, fl ora and fauna studies, and data- Seattle, WA 98115. intensive reports on investigations in fi shery science, engineering, and economics. The Secretary of Commerce has Copies of the NOAA Professional Paper NMFS series are available free in limited determined that the publication of numbers to government agencies, both federal and state. They are also available in this series is necessary in the transac- exchange for other scientifi c and technical publications in the marine sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Selected Repl'ints on Angling · for Puget Sound Bottom Fishes
    Selected_ Repl'ints on Angling · for Puget Sound Bottom Fishes Edited by Percy M. Washington, Fishery Research Biologist ---- �--:- -----&E:z::.--·� NATIONAL OCEANIC ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center 2725 Montlake Boulevard East Seattle, Washington 98112 NORTHWEST AND ALASKA FISHERIES CENTER PROCESSED REPORT* Selected Reprints on Angling for Puget Sound Bottomfishes Edited by Percy M. Washington U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center Resource Ecology and Fisheries Management Division *This report does not constitute a publication and is for information only. All data herein are to be considered provisional. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Introduction . 1 Olander, D.R. 1973. Bottomfish: overlooked gems in Puget Sound. Fishing and Hunting News (Western Wash. Ed.), Aug. 4, 1973:6, 11 . • • • • • 2 Olander, D. R. 1973. Go light for bottomfish. Fishing and Hunting News (Western Wash. Ed.), Sept. 1, 1973, pp. 12-13. • 3 Washington, P. M. Pacific Cod: Prime angler, gourmet target. Fishing and Hunting News (Western Wash. Ed.), Nov. 24, 29(45):4 ••••• Bargmann, G. G. 1974. Often-Ignored Black Rockfish: Fiesty Snapper, Fine Eating! Fishing and Hunting News (Western Wash. Ed.), Nov. 30, 1974:6,7 • 6 Washington, P. M. 1975. What About Dogfish. Pacific Northwest Sea, 8(2): 12-15 •••••••••. ... • 7 Washington, P. M. 1976. Ling Cod: Unlikely Saltwater Prize. Fishing and Hunting News (Western Wash. Ed.), 32(9):12-14. • • • • .11 Washington, P. M. 1976. How to Use Artificial Lures. in (Marjorie Day, ed.) Bottom Sport Fisheries of Puget Sound, pp. 64-69 ••� ••••••••••• 15 Western Washington Fishing Holes.
    [Show full text]
  • Prey Preference of Lingcod {Ophiodon Elongatus), a Top Marine Predator
    193 Abstract—Many highly exploited eco- Prey preference of lingcod systems are managed on the basis of single-species demograpbic informa- {Ophiodon elongatus), a top marine predator: tion. This management approach can exacerbate tensions among stakebold- implications for ecosystem-based ers with competing interests who in fisheries management turn rely on data witb notoriously bigh variance. In this case study, an application of diet and dive survey Craig A. Tinus data was used to describe the prey preference of lingcod (Ophiodon elon- Email address for contact autbor: [email protected] gatus) in a predictive framework on Oregon State University nearshore reefs off Oregon. The ling- Department of Fisberies and Wildlife cod is a large, fast-growing generalist 104 Nasb Hall predator of invertebrates and fishes. Corvallis, Oregon 97331-3803 In response to concerns that lingcod Present address: Oregon Department of Fisb and Wildlife may significantly reduce diminished Corvallis Researcb tab populations of rockfisbes (Sebastes 28655 Hwy 34 spp.), tbe diets of 375 lingcod on near- Corvallis, Oregon 97330 sbore reefs along the Oregon Coast were compared with estimates of relative prey availability from dive surveys. In contrast to tbe transient pelagic fisbes tbat comprised 46% of lingcod diet by number, rockfishes comprised at most 4.7% of prey items. Ecosystem-based fisheries manage- both useful and efficient as an exten- Rockfisbes were tbe most abundant ment (EBFM) has generated consider- sion of food web models to aid man- potential prey observed in dive sur- able interest over the last decade as agement of exploited stocks (Gaichas veys, yet tbey were the least preferred.
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury Testing of Sport/Food Fishes from Nearshore Ocean Waters of Humboldt County, California
    Mercury Testing of Sport/Food Fishes from Nearshore Ocean Waters of Humboldt County, California Final Report June 2021 Ross Taylor, Ross Taylor & Associates, McKinleyville, CA Jennifer Kalt, Humboldt Baykeeper, Arcata, CA Prepared for Humboldt Baykeeper 600 F Street, Suite 3 #810 Arcata, CA 95521 Funded by California Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Justice Small Grant - State of California with additional support from Cereus Fund of the Trees Foundation Humboldt Area Saltwater Anglers Disclaimer: The statements and conclusions of this report are those of the Grantee and not necessarily those of the California Environmental Protection Agency, its employees, or the State of California. The State makes no warranty, express or implied, and assumes no liability for the information contained in the succeeding text. Acknowledgements Humboldt Baykeeper would like to thank all who were essential to the success of the Humboldt Bay Mercury Assessment: Ross Taylor of Ross Taylor and Associates: Consulting fisheries biologist and avid fisherman, Ross contributed to all aspects of the project, including study design, processing samples, data analysis, report writing, and outreach to sport anglers; Jeffery Stackhouse, Captain, Stackhouse Guide Service and Livestock and Natural Resources Advisor, University of California Cooperative Extension; Lenya Quinn-Davidson, Area Fire Advisor, University of California Cooperative Extension; Jasmin Segura, Humboldt Baykeeper: Spanish translation and interpretation; Mike Buettner: Graphic design. Mercury and Selenium Testing of Sport/Food Fishes from Nearshore Ocean Waters of Humboldt County, California Project Purpose and Need Mercury advisories have been issued for many major waterbodies in California, including coastal areas of Northern California. In 2012, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board determined that Humboldt Bay did not warrant listing for mercury impairment under Clean Water Act Section 303(d) based on mussel testing done in the 1980s (NCRWQCB 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • What Can I Keep and How Many? Go Fishing
    Effective as of June 1, 2021. Regulations can change in the middle of the season, so be sure to check SPORT GROUNDFISH myodfw.com/fishing/marine-zone for the most up-to-date regulations before you What can I keep and how many? go fishing. Any vessel fishing for or possessing bottomfish, Pacific halibut, or flatfish in the ocean must have a functional descending device onboard, regardless of depth. You are required to use it on any rockfish released outside of 30 fathoms. GENERAL MARINE SPECIES NO RETENTION Restricted to inside of the NO RETENTION 40 fathom line June 1 - Aug 31 ALLOWED in Aggregate5 ALLOWED Daily NO RETENTION* Yelloweye Rockfish China, Copper, & Quillback Rockfish Black Rockfish Canary Rockfish beginnning June 1 Juvenile Yelloweye Deacon Rockfish Blue Rockfish China Rockfish Cabezon** Sub-bag limit of 1 Copper Rockfish Vermilion Rockfish Adult Yelloweye LINGCOD Min. size = 16 inches Restricted to inside Opens July 1, 2021 Quillback Rockfish 2 of the 40 fathom line Daily June 1 - Aug 31 * for anglers fishing from a boat. Shorebased anglers may continue with the 1-fish sub-bag limit of these three species. ** out of the 5 fish daily bag limit, no more than 1 may be Kelp Greenling cabezon • Includes all rockfish, sculpins, greenlings, skates, spiny dogfish, leopard shark, soupfin shark, sablefish, Pacific cod, cabezon, and any other marine fish species not listed on page 81 of the 2021 Oregon Sport Fishing Regulations book. • Does not include species with separate limits such as: lingcod, flatfish, tuna and other offshore pelagic species, salmon, Pacific halibut, surfperch, herring, sardines, and anchovies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biology and Assessment of Rockfishes in Puget Sound
    STATE OF WASHINGTON September 2009 The Biology and Assessment of Rockfishes in Puget Sound by Wayne A. Palsson, Tien-Shui Tsou, Greg G. Bargmann, Raymond M. Buckley, Jim E. West, Mary Lou Mills, Yuk Wing Cheng, and Robert E. Pacunski Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Fish Program Fish Management FPT 09-04 The Biology and Assessment of Rockfishes in Puget Sound By Wayne A. Palsson, Tien-Shui Tsou, Greg G. Bargmann, Raymond M. Buckley, Jim E. West, Mary Lou Mills, Yuk Wing Cheng, and Robert E. Pacunski Fish Management Division, Fish Program Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife September 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This technical review supports and is a source document for the Puget Sound Rockfish Conservation Plan. It summarizes the current knowledge of rockfish biology in Puget Sound (life history, habitat usage, and ecosystem linkages), provides an overview of the exploitation history of rockfishes, and examines their current stock status. The review also includes a series of recommendations to improve the understanding and management of rockfishes in Puget Sound. Puget Sound includes all the inland marine waters of Washington including the U.S. portions of the Straits of Juan de Fuca and Georgia, the San Juan Islands, Puget Sound proper, and Hood Canal. Rockfishes are bottomfishes managed under the auspices of the Puget Sound Groundfish Management Plan and are co-managed with the Treaty Tribes of Washington. The present management plan by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife implements a precautionary policy for groundfish management. However, previous management efforts have ranged from targeting recreational and commercial fisheries on rockfish to passive management.
    [Show full text]