Striped bass, Morone saxatilis An introduced species in California

The success of the anadromous striped bass on the west coast of North America has been called "... one of the greatest feats of acclimatization of new species of fish in the history of fishculture...." by Shebley (1917). This statement, or some variation of it, has appeared in so many articles on the striped bass that it would be breaking a precedent not to repeat it. Craig (1928) has stated that its successful introduction is probably rivaled only by the introduction of American shad into California and trout into New Zealand.

The striped bass is native to the eastern seaboard from the St. Lawrence River to Louisiana. About 135 fish from the Navesink River, New Jersey, most of them not over 3 inches long, were brought by rail and planted in the Carquinez Strait (Martinez) circa 12 July 1879. These were brought out by Livingston Stone at the request of S.R. Throckmorton, Chairman of the California Fish Commission. Originally from New Jersey, Throckmorton also suggested the place of capture.

An amusing account of how it took a poacher to make this capture appears in Seton (1974). About 11 months after this first planting in California, there was brought to Throckmorton on or about 1 July 1880 "... a very handsome striped bass taken in this harbor [San Francisco], measuring 12½ inches in length and weighing one pound." The first shad taken in California had been carefully preserved in alcohol and presented to the California Academy of Sciences through Mr. Throckmorton (Forest and Stream, 21 May 1874; California Academy of Sciences 1875), but apparently his initial scientific tendencies were later outweighed by his gustatory nature, since his report on one of the first striped bass taken in California mentions its flavor as being "... fully up to the best specimens of the fish at the East...." (Throckmorton 1882).

There were reports of other captures of striped bass in California, but the strong desire of its Fish Commissioners, especially Throckmorton, to establish it firmly led J.G. Woodbury of the Commission to secure about 300 more from the Shrewsbury River, New Jersey, and plant them close to the first stocking locality in Suisun Bay near Army Point on 25 July 1882. From this meager stock has originated the abundant supply of the Pacific Coast today. Primary sources of references for the introduction of striped bass to California are: Mason (1882); Stone (1882); Throckmorton (1882); California Fish Commission Report for 1878–79, p. 14; Ibid. 1881–82, p. 5–7; Woodbury (1890b).

As with the accounts of so many fishes introduced into California, the number of fish planted, the dates of planting, the source of the stock, and even the stocker will be found to vary in subsequent publications, even those prepared within a few years of the events. For example, the number of striped bass planted in 1879 appears to be given as 132 in most publications. Although this figure seems to be erroneous, the exact number of striped bass planted initially is not of importance. It has not been thought worthwhile to list all of the variations which have been disclosed, but among the most serious errors of fact concerning the introduction of striped bass into California are those which follow. Jordan (1915) said that it and the shad were "... both planted about 1878 from the Potomac and the Schuylkill rivers...." E.D. (1920a) said that 150 were planted in 1874 and that 400 were sent to California in 1882 by the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries. Surprisingly enough, Stone (1882) twice stated that the striped bass he brought to California came from the "Neversink" in New Jersey, as does the California Fish Commission Report for 1878–79. CFG (1922c) also credited the source of the first plant in California to the "Neversink"—which is, of course, a fabled trout stream in the Catskills. As Sir Walter Scott said in about 1820, "This is a mistake into which the Author has been led by trusting to his memory, and so confounding two places...." (Scott 1950). Or, Stone (1882) may have been "corrected" by someone. The California Fish Commission Report for 1895–96 said that only 100 striped bass were planted in 1879 and 350 in 1882. The Report for 1905–06 also stated that the initial plant was only of 100 fish. West (1944) compounded the error by saying that they were transferred from the Roanoke River, near Weldon, South Carolina. Sport Fishing Institute (1955a) stated that the California striped bass came from Delaware, but corrected this misstatement two months later (Sport Fishing Institute 1955b). But why go on?

There have also been a number of transplants of striped bass by the State along the coast using California stock, beginning in 1899. Possibly their dispersal was hastened by these transplants, but there were reports that they had been taken as far north as British Columbia in 1884 (California Fish Commission Report for 1883–84, p. 10) and from San Diego to the Oregon line in 1887 (U.S. Fish Commission Bulletin for 1887, p. 50). Smith and Kendall (1898) said that two striped bass were seined at Redondo Beach in September 1894, and gave its normal Pacific range to the north to be the Russian River.

Today, on the Pacific Coast, striped bass populations are centered in the San Joaquin-Sacramento Estuary with emphasis on San Francisco Bay, with a small population in Coos Bay, Oregon. Apparently, the species usually requires estuarial water for a portion of its life cycle. The fish is known to range from Vancouver Island to about 40 km below the California/Mexico border, and is also found in areas such as Tomales Bay and the Russian River (Seymour 1979). Less than 10% of the California catch is made in the ocean (White 1986 and references therein).

The early history of the striped bass fishery in California was well summarized in Smith (1896); Scofield and Bryant (1926); Craig (1928); E.C. Scofield (1931); and Skinner (1962). Ten years after the initial introduction, a commercial fishery using gill nets had started and flourished for many years. The history of this fishery up to 1927 was summarized by Craig (1928) as follows: "... in 1899 they were supplying a total annual catch of over 1,200,000 pounds. This period of large yearly catches continued until 1915, after which, with the exception of 1918, the catches were much lower. This drop in total catch upon careful analysis appears to be due to withdrawal of men and boats from the fishery [to Monterey] and restrictive legislation. During the years from 1920 to 1927, inclusive, the catch per unit of gear and effort for a constant unit of time has become greater, which strongly indicates an increased abundance or availability of bass to the fishermen." During the last 10 years of its life, the commercial fishery for striped bass in California averaged about 658,000 lb annually (Skinner 1962).

Restrictions on market fishing started at an early date and increased in severity; some of these restrictions are outlined in CFG (1922c, 1925b). Circa 1933, the sale of striped bass was prohibited except for those taken in certain restricted areas during three months of the shad season (Farley 1934). Commercial fishing for striped bass in California was entirely prohibited by law in 1935.[89] Incidentally, this final action was taken despite the opinion of fishery workers that the striped bass population in California was actually becoming more abundant, the protection given it was entirely adequate, and that it could support both a commercial and sport fishery. Since the subject was a controversial one and obscured by much ill-informed testimony, it is of especial interest to read the detailed analyses of Craig (1928, 1930), E.C. Scofield (1931), and Clark (1933).

The sport fishery, on the other hand, gained momentum slowly. In fact, the success of the first angling seemed quite disappointing according to Smith (1896). The State Board of Fish Commissioners considered that the greatest value of the striped bass lay "... unquestionably in its commercial and economic importance and not in its qualities as a game fish...." (California Fish Commission Report for 1891–92, p. 37). However, by the turn of the century, a great many striped bass clubs had been organized (California Fish Commission Report for 1903–04, p. 36), and finally, the sport fishery for striped bass surpassed the old commercial one, and ranked second in popularity only to that for trout despite its concentration in San Francisco Bay and the Delta. Serious biological study on the sport fishery for striped bass started in 1946. The striped bass became a major sport fish in California, and there were many anglers who fished exclusively for it. By 1968, striped bass fishing constituted about 60% of all angling dependent upon the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary including the ocean and river Pacific salmon fisheries (Chadwick 1968). Bait fishing, trolling, spin fishing, surf fishing, and even fly fishing are among the methods used for its capture.

Management of the striped bass in California has consisted of three measures: restrictions on capture, transfers to various coastal and inland areas, and artificial propagation. Its importance as a sport fish and as one associated with changes in water transfers and water quality in the Delta has also made it a much studied fish. Restrictions on the commercial catch have already been outlined. There have also been restrictions on the sport fishery, consisting largely of limits on size and number.

Transplants of striped bass into California coastal waters began at an early time. At least as early as 1899 and up to 1933, the State made a number of plants, using netted fish, along the entire California coast. It was the feeling of some of the California Fish Commissioners that such plants would overcome the difficulty of the striped bass to make the long voyage through salt water to reach other freshwater streams (California Fish Commission Report for 1903–04, p. 37). Records of these transplants (varying of course as to details) will be found in: CFG (1917a); Scofield (1919); Scofield and Bryant (1926); California Fish Commission Report for 1903–04, p. 38; Ibid. 1905–06, p. 42–43; California Fish and Game Commission Report for 1909–10, p. 25–26; Ibid. 1916–18, p. 75; Ibid. 1918–20, p. 125; Ibid. 1932–34, p. 82–83-G.

For example, seining in San Pablo Bay in 1916 resulted in shipments of small striped bass to various points in San Luis Obispo County. Other shipments of seined striped bass were sent to Newport Bay, Anaheim Bay, Bolsa Chica River, and Sunset Beach in Orange County, and to Mission Bay, San Diego County.

In noting that several small striped bass had been taken in the San Diego River near its outlet to Mission Bay in 1919, N.B. Scofield (1919) said that striped bass had never before been reported south of Monterey Bay, and in discussing a reported catch of striped bass at San Diego in 1931, he (N.B. Scofield 1931) said that it was "... the first verified record of striped bass being taken south of Monterey." His statements are contrary to much earlier reports that by 1887 this species had been recorded south as far as San Diego, but it is, of course, possible that these early reports were erroneous. Radovich (1963) was also a subscriber to this belief. He believed that striped bass on the Pacific Coast were confined mainly between Monterey and the Russian River until about 1900 and that unlike their Atlantic coast relatives they did not make extensive coastal migrations. Walford (1932) pointed out that fish caught at San Clemente (between Los Angeles and San Diego) in 1931 and identified as striped bass were actually the young of the native salema or big-eyed bass (Xenistius californiensis) . W.L. Scofield (1939) stated that a striped bass of 30–31 lb was taken at Oceanside (between San Clemente and San Diego) in 1938, and that this was an authentic record. He also said that there were several records of true stripers caught in Newport Bay, and reiterated that the 1919 records near Mission Bay were authentic. CC (1940a) also said that only two authentic records existed of striped bass caught in the southern region of the California coast.

In view of these records (both planting and capture or lack of capture), it seems a bit strange that the Department of Fish and Game should again attempt to transfer striped bass to southern California coastal waters in the mid-1970s. In saying that the Department of Fish and Game wished to improve ocean sport fishing, Hubbard (1973) credited the then Director of Fish and Game (G.R. Arnett) as saying, "We looked at a number of species of fish before choosing stripers for this program. We decided to go ahead with this fish because it already occurs naturally, although in very small numbers, as far south as San Diego Bay. This means that the habitat offers a reasonable chance of survival for stocked stripers, and we won't be faced with problems that might arise through introduction of a species entirely new to the southland."

Horn et al. (1984) said that each April from 1974 to 1977, the Department of Fish and Game stocked 10,000 to 14,000 juvenile striped bass (100–150 mm standard length) into the upper Newport Bay Estuary. These plants were obviously quite costly (the first plant from the Central Valleys Hatchery involved the use of both truck and ship), and, since the Newport plants were labeled as "initial," it does demonstrate that "history" is quickly forgotten (Young 1974). Horn et al. (1984) said that some striped bass survived in Newport Bay, circa 1978–79, but suggested that they constituted a nonbreeding population. In a popular account, Whitaker (1993) said that striped bass were planted during the 1980s in Long Beach Harbor and are now caught in fair numbers.

Transplants of striped bass have also been made into the Salton Sea on various occasions. The records in Table 2, derived from the official records of the Division of Fish and Game, differ in some respects from those recorded elsewhere. The differences are not considered of importance, however, as none of the plants succeeded in establishing a population of striped bass here.[90] (See Coleman 1929; CFG 1930f; CFG 1931a; CFG 1932e; California Department of Fish and Game Report for 1928–30, p. 18; Neale 1931b; Shebley 1931, p. 65).

Transplants of striped bass, with the concurrence of Arizona and Nevada, have also been made into the lower Colorado River. The first plant was made on 15 April 1959 near Blythe, Riverside County. The 938 small stripers which were planted had been seined from the San Joaquin River (St. Amant 1959). For some inexplicable reason, Minckley (1973, p. 211) indicated quite erroneously that the source of this plant was the Santee-Cooper Reservoir of South Carolina.

Plants in the River made by the State totalled 95,414 individuals between 15 April 1959 and August 1964. Fishing for this species has been good throughout the California section of the Colorado River. The first verified catch here of a legal-size striped bass was made in March 1960 (OC 1960b). In May 1966, young striped bass that had to be offspring of the transplants were found in the city water plant in Brawley, and in 1968 there was positive proof that striped bass had spawned in the River itself as well as in the Imperial Valley canal system (OC 1968a). Swift et al. (1993) stated that striped bass migrate from Lake Havasu into the Imperial Valley and the Colorado River delta in Mexico, back up through the Alamo and New rivers, and are considered to be self-sustaining. They also said that a small number have strayed into Lake Cahuilla near Indio at the end of the Coachella Canal.

The striped bass has also been transplanted into a number of freshwater reservoirs where it has created some trophy fishing, and into some reservoirs too warm to support trout. The reasons for planting it in one reservoir (Lake Mendocino) in 1967 were not only to create a new trophy fishery but to improve fishing for largemouth bass by reducing a population of stunted bluegills (OC 1967c). Attempts to establish naturally reproducing stocks in fresh water have had limited success in California, as is true elsewhere in the United States. Nevertheless, the striped bass has become established in Millerton Lake, a reservoir on the San Joaquin River. First stocked there during the 1955–57 period, it was not until September 1959 that it was certain that it had reproduced (OC 1960c; Wilson and Christenson 1965).

California has also served as a source of striped bass sent to other states such as Nevada (OC 1965) and Hawaii (E.D. 1920a), and even to Japan (CFG 1929c). Surprisingly enough—considering the beliefs of early fish culturists—inquiries by the U.S. Fish Commission in 1896 indicated that there was no need to initiate artificial propagation of striped bass (U.S. Fish Commission Report for 1897, p. XXI), although Smith (1898, p. CXLII) felt that "When the conditions change, as they probably will in time, the artificial propagation of striped bass in California will become desirable." By 1907, this early sanguinity had lapsed and the first attempt in California was made. Convinced of the advisability of attempting to increase the supply of striped bass through artificial propagation, the California Fish and Game Commissioners constructed a hatchery building at Bouldin Island on the San Joaquin River. With but few funds available, they cooperated with the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries with the result that Capt. G.H. Lambson, in charge of Federal salmon-hatching work in California, together with three Federal workers from Baird and a representative of the California Commission, ran the hatchery. With ripe eggs supplied by commercial fishermen, the hatchery functioned until 1910. It was then abandoned after a series of unsuccessful years (Scofield and Coleman 1910; Scofield and Bryant 1926; Leitritz 1970).

Shebley (1913b) recommended that artificial propagation of striped bass be taken up again because "... it is of great economic value to the people." (The reader will recall that the striped bass in California was primarily a commercial fish at the time.) Shebley (1913b) asked the State Legislature to appropriate a special fund for this purpose, but no action was taken. It was not until 1981 that any stocking of artificially propagated striped bass was carried out in California.

Meanwhile, the sport fishery (as has been related) gained dominance. In a popular article, Calhoun (1950) wrote that roughly 200,000 individuals fished 2 million days for striped bass in California and caught about 2 million fish averaging about 4 lb each. He estimated the value of the striped bass fishery in California at $10 million annually. Although the fishery for striped bass in California was then in its "golden" days, he also pointed out the dangers to this resource from water pollution and water diversion through pumps, and the necessity for continued research. About 20 years later, the Stanford Research Institute estimated the net annual benefit to the State of the sport fishery for striped bass at about $7 million (Altouney et al. 1966). Projections by the Institute for the striped bass fishery in the San Francisco Bay and Delta areas yielded estimates of $13.14 million annually for 1970 and $36.78 million for 2020. These estimates, especially the latter figure, were based on the assumption that striped bass fishing effort would increase in direct proportion to the projected increase in human population. For a variety of reasons, some of which are detailed below, the assumption proved incorrect.

During the early 1960s, the adult striped bass population was estimated at 2.3 to 3 million fish. By 1975 it was considered that the adult striped bass population in California was relatively stable, between 1.5 and 2 million fish. Approximately 15% of the adult bass were caught by anglers each year while 15 to 30% of them died of natural causes (Heubach 1975). Since then the striped bass population in California has suffered a decline. Studies have shown that the adult striped bass population was only about 1 million fish in the early 1980s, and then declined to about 600,000 adults in the early 1990s. The abundance of young also has declined substantially. It is considered that the fishery is in danger of becoming an inconsequential fraction of the state's sport fishery.

Stevens et al. (1985) and Delisle et al. (1989) provided a history of efforts to determine the causes of the striped bass decline. The causes, as cited in the latter publication, are as follows: i) Delta water diversions; ii) reduced Delta outflows; iii) low San Joaquin River flows; iv) water pollution, toxic chemicals, tracemetals; v) dredging and spoil disposal; vi) bay-fill projects; vii) illegal take and poaching; viii) diseases and parasites; ix) annual die-off of adult bass; and x) commercial bay shrimp fishery. It is generally conceded that the single major problem is the loss of young fish to water diversions from the Delta over the past 35 years. Since 1961 the Department's Bay-Delta Project has been studying the ecology of the Delta with emphasis on factors responsible for decline of the striped bass. The results have appeared in numerous technical publications. More recently, the Department and other State and Federal agencies have formed the Interagency Ecological Studies Program for the Sacramento—San Joaquin Estuary to guide the many investigations. Findings are published as technical reports.

A major attempt to restore the population was stocking of hatchery-reared striped bass (Delisle 1986; Delisle and Coey 1994). This started in Bay-Delta waters in 1981 by the State with subsequent aid by private aquaculturists. About 11 million hatchery-reared striped bass fingerlings and yearlings were released in the Delta and San Pablo Bay from 1981 through 1991, almost all of them reared by private aquaculturists. Over half of these fish were marked or tagged to evaluate the program. The fraction of legal-size hatchery-produced stripers in the sport fishery ranged from 1% in 1984 to over 12% in 1991. Estimated returns were 1.04% for yearlings, 0.38% for advanced fingerlings, and 0.07% for fingerlings. On a cost basis, to put a legal-size hatchery striper in the creel averaged $106/fish for yearlings, $237/fish for advanced fingerlings, and $1071/fish for fingerlings. It is apparent that striped bass stocking is expensive.

Large-scale stocking of privately-produced hatchery striped bass was terminated in 1992 because of possible predation by stripers on native fishes (e.g. winter-run chinook salmon smolts, delta smelt, and splittail [Pogonichthys macrolepidotus]) listed by the State and Federal governments as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. However, stocking continued at a much lower level in 1993 (28,000 yearlings), 1994 (37,000 yearlings), 1995 (100,000 yearlings), and 1996 (100,000 yearlings and two-year olds) using striped bass salvaged at the Delta fish screens and reared in net pens before release. The future of this program is uncertain, but it is likely to continue.

The stocking of striped bass in some reservoirs has been quite successful, although the resulting fishery is, of course, an artificial one.

Although many features of the life history of the striped bass have been studied in California, most of them have not been discussed here. It is of interest historically, however, to record that with respect to this species in California, the first life history study was made by E.C. Scofield (1931), one of the first food studies showing that salmonids might form a part of its diet was made by Shapovalov (1936), its larvae were first found in 1939 and its free eggs in 1940 (Hatton 1940b), and its actual spawning was first observed by Woodhull (1947).

In summary, we subscribe to the belief that ecological conditions have so changed in the Delta and San Francisco Bay that the future of the more "natural" striped bass fishery in California rests primarily on restoration of the original habitat. Extreme losses at water diversions and changes in water quality seem to be the main factors in altering the once abundant striped bass resource of California.[91]