Channel Islands marine protected areas first 5 years of monitoring: 2003-2008 [Report produced by the California Department of Fish and Game in collaboration with the Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans (PISCO), Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, and Channel Islands National Park]

The Channel Islands—sometimes called the Galapagos of North America—are known for their great beauty, rich biodiversity, cultural heritage, and recreational opportunities. In 1980, in recognition of the islands’ importance, the United States Congress established a national park encompassing 5 of California���s Channel Islands (Santa Barbara, Anacapa, Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, and San Miguel Islands) and waters within 1 nautical mile of the islands. In the same year, Congress declared a national marine sanctuary around each of these islands, including waters up to 6 nautical miles offshore. Approximately 60,000 people visit the Channel Islands each year for aquatic recreation such as fishing, sailing, kayaking, wildlife watching, surfing, and diving. Another 30,000 people visit the islands for hiking, camping, and sightseeing. Dozens of commercial fishing boats based in Santa Barbara, Ventura, Oxnard, and other ports go to the Channel Islands to catch squid, spiny lobster, sea urchin, rockfish, crab, sheephead, flatfish, and sea cucumber, among other species. In the past few decades, advances in fishing technology and the rising number of fishermen, in conjunction with changing ocean conditions and diseases, have contributed to declines in some marine fishes and invertebrates at the Channel Islands. In 1998, citizens from Santa Barbara and Ventura proposed establishment of no-take marine reserves at the Channel Islands, beginning a 4-year process of public meetings, discussions, and scientific analyses. In 2003, the California Fish and Game Commission designated a network of marine protected areas (MPAs) in state waters around the northern Channel Islands. In 2006 and 2007, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) extended the MPAs into the national marine sanctuary’s deeper, federal waters. To determine if the MPAs are protecting marine species and habitats, scientists are monitoring ecological changes. They are studying changes in habitats; abundance and size of species of interest; the ocean food web and ecosystem; and movement of fish and invertebrates from MPAs to surrounding waters. Additionally, scientists are monitoring human activities such as commercial and recreational fisheries, and compliance with MPA regulations. This booklet describes some results from the first 5 years of monitoring the Channel Islands MPAs. Although 5 years is not long enough to determine if the MPAs will accomplish all of their goals, this booklet offers a glimpse of the changes that are beginning to take place and illustrates the types of information that will eventually be used to assess the MPAs’ effectiveness. (PDF contains 24 pages.)

A Biogeographic Assessment off North/Central California: To Support the Joint Management Plan Review for Cordell Bank, Gulf of the Farallones, and Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuaries: Phase I - Marine Fishes, Birds and Mammals.

In the spring of 2001, NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) and National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), in consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), launched a 24-month effort to define and assess biogeographic patterns of selected marine species found within and adjacent to the boundaries of three west coast National Marine Sanctuaries. These sanctuaries, Monterey Bay, Gulf of the Farallones, and Cordell Bank are conducting a joint review process to update sanctuary management plans. The management plans for these sanctuaries have not been updated for over ten years and the status of the natural resources and their management issues in and around the sanctuaries may have changed. In addition, significant accomplishments in research and resource assessments have been made within the region. Thus, it is important to incorporate new and expanding knowledge into the revised management plans for these Sanctuaries.

A Biogeographic assessment off North/Central California: In support of the National Marine Sanctuaries of Cordell Bank, Gulf of the Farallones and Monterey Bay. Phase II - Environmental setting and update to marine birds and animals

NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) conducts and supports research, monitoring, assessments, and technical assistance to meet NOAA’s coastal stewardship and management responsibilities. In 2001 the Biogeography Branch of NCCOS partnered with NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) to conduct biogeographic assessments to support the management plan updates for the sanctuaries. The first biogeographic assessment conducted in this partnership focused on three sanctuaries off north/ central California: Cordell Bank, Gulf of the Farallones and Monterey Bay. Phase I of this assessment was conducted from 2001 to 2004, with the primary goal to identify and gather the best available data and information to characterize and identify important biological areas and time periods within the study area. The study area encompasses the three sanctuaries and extends along the coastal ocean off California from Pt. Arena to Pt. Sal (35°-39°N). This partnership project was lead by the NCCOS Biogeography Branch, but included over 90 contributors and 25 collaborating institutions. Phase I results include: 1) a report on the overall assessment that includes hundreds of maps, tables and analyses; 2) an ecological linkage report on the marine and estuarine ecosystems along the coast of north/central California, and 3) related geographic information system (GIS) data and other summary data files, which are available for viewing and download in several formats at the following website: http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/products/biogeography/canms_cd/welcome.html Phase II (this report) was initiated in the Fall of 2004 to complete the analyses of marine mammals and update the marine bird colony information. Phase II resulted in significant updates to the bird and mammal chapters, as well as adding an environmental settings chapter, which contains new and existing data and maps on the study area. Specifically, the following Phase II topics and items were either revised or developed new for Phase II: •environmental, ecological settings – new maps on marine physiographic features, sea surface temperature and fronts, chlorophyll and productivity •all bird colony or roost maps, including a summary of marine bird colonies •updated at-sea data CDAS data set (1980-2003) •all mammal maps and descriptions •new overall density maps for eight mammal species •new summary pinniped rookery/haulout map •new maps on at-sea richness for cetaceans and pinnipeds •most text in the mammal chapter •new summary tables for mammals on population status and spatial and temporal patterns

Ecological linkages: Marine and estuarine ecosystems of Central and Northern California

Three of California���s four National Marine Sanctuaries, Cordell Bank, Gulf of the Farallones, and Monterey Bay, are currently undergoing a comprehensive management plan review. As part of this review, NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) has collaborated with NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) to conduct a biogeographic assessment of selected marine resources using geographic information system (GIS) technology. This report complements the analyses conducted for this effort by providing an overview of the physical and biological characteristics of the region. Key ecosystems and species occurring in estuarine and marine waters are highlighted and linkages between them discussed. In addition, this report describes biogeographic processes operating to affect species’ distributional patterns. The biogeographic analyses build upon this background to further understanding of the biogeography of this region. (PDF contaons 172 pages)

A comparison of seafloor habitats and associated benthic fauna in areas open and closed to bottom trawling along the central California Continental Shelf

Executive Summary: A number of studies have shown that mobile, bottom-contact fishing gear (such as otter trawls) can alter seafloor habitats and associated biota. Considerably less is known about the recovery of these resources following such disturbances, though this information is critical for successful management. In part, this paucity of information can be attributed to the lack of access to adequate control sites – areas of the seafloor that are closed to fishing activity. Recent closures along the coast of central California provide an excellent opportunity to track the recovery of historically trawled areas and to compare recovery rates to adjacent areas that continue to be trawled. In June 2006 we initiated a multi-year study of the recovery of seafloor microhabitats and associated benthic fauna inside and outside two new Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) closures within the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuaries. Study sites inside the EFH closure at Cordell Bank were located in historically active areas of fishing effort, which had not been trawled since 2003. Sites outside the EFH closure in the Gulf of Farallones were located in an area that continues to be actively trawled. All sites were located in unconsolidated sands at equivalent water depths. Video and still photographic data collected via a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) were used to quantify the abundance, richness, and diversity of microhabitats and epifaunal macro-invertebrates at recovering and actively trawled sites, while bottom grabs and conductivity/temperature/depth (CTD) casts were used to quantify infaunal diversity and to characterize local environmental conditions. Analysis of still photos found differences in common seafloor microhabitats between the recovering and actively trawled areas, while analysis of videographic data indicated that biogenic mound and biogenic depression microhabitats were significantly less abundant at trawled sites. Each of these features provides structure with which demersal fishes, across a wide range of size classes, have been observed to associate. Epifaunal macro-invertebrates were sparsely distributed and occurred in low numbers in both treatments. However, their total abundance was significantly different between treatments, which was attributable to lower densities at trawled sites. In addition, the dominant taxa were different between the two sites. Patchily-distributed buried brittle stars dominated the recovering site, and sea whips (Halipteris cf. willemoesi) were most numerous at the trawled site though they occurred in only five of ten transects. Numerical classification (cluster analysis) of the infaunal samples also revealed a clear difference between benthic assemblages in the recovering vs. trawled areas due to differences in the relative abundances of component species. There were no major differences in infaunal species richness, H′ diversity, or J′ evenness between recovering vs. trawled site groups. However, total infaunal abundance showed a significant difference attributable to much lower densities at trawled sites. This pattern was driven largely by the small oweniid polychaete Myriochele gracilis, which was the most abundant species in the overall study region though significantly less abundant at trawled sites. Other taxa that were significantly less abundant at trawled sites included the polychaete M. olgae and the polychaete family Terebellidae. In contrast, the thyasirid bivalve Axinopsida serricata and the polychaetes Spiophanes spp. (mostly S. duplex), Prionospio spp., and Scoloplos armiger all had significantly to near significantly higher abundances at trawled sites. As a result of such contrasting species patterns, there also was a significant difference in the overall dominance structure of infaunal assemblages between the two treatments. It is suggested that the observed biological patterns were the result of trawling impacts and varying levels of recovery due to the difference in trawling status between the two areas. The EFH closure was established in June 2006, within a month of when sampling was conducted for the present study, however, the stations within this closure area are at sites that actually have experienced little trawling since 2003, based on National Marine Fishery Service trawl records. Thus, the three-year period would be sufficient time for some post-trawling changes to have occurred. Other results from this study (e.g., similarly moderate numbers of infaunal species in both areas that are lower than values recorded elsewhere in comparable habitats along the California continental shelf) also indicate that recovery within the closure area is not yet complete. Additional sampling is needed to evaluate subsequent recovery trends and persistence of effects. Furthermore, to date, the study has been limited to unconsolidated substrates. Ultimately, the goal of this project is to characterize the recovery trajectories of a wide spectrum of seafloor habitats and communities and to link that recovery to the dynamics of exploited marine fishes. (PDF has 48 pages.)

First Biennial Ocean Climate Summit: Finding Solutions for San Francisco Bay Area’s Coast and Ocean. Proceedings of the Summit: April 29, 2008, Golden Gate Club, The Presidio San Francisco, California

Executive Summary: The marine environment plays a critical role in the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) that remains within Earth’s atmosphere, but has not received as much attention as the terrestrial environment when it comes to climate change discussions, programs, and plans for action. It is now apparent that the oceans have begun to reach a state of CO2 saturation, no longer maintaining the “steady-state” carbon cycle that existed prior to the Industrial Revolution. The increasing amount of CO2 present within the oceans and the atmosphere has an effect on climate and a cascading effect on the marine environment. Potential physical effects of climate change within the marine environment, including ocean acidification, changes in wind and upwelling regimes, increasing global sea surface temperatures, and sea level rise, can lead to dramatic, fundamental changes within marine and coastal ecosystems. Altered ecosystems can result in changing coastal economies through a reduction in marine ecosystem services such as commercial fish stocks and coastal tourism. Local impacts from climate change should be a front line issue for natural resource managers, but they often feel too overwhelmed by the magnitude of this issue to begin to take action. They may not feel they have the time, funding, or staff to take on a challenge as large as climate change and continue to not act as a result. Already, natural resource managers work to balance the needs of humans and the economy with ecosystem biodiversity and resilience. Responsible decisions are made each day that consider a wide variety of stakeholders, including community members, agencies, non-profit organizations, and business/industry. The issue of climate change must be approached as a collaborative effort, one that natural resource managers can facilitate by balancing human demands with healthy ecosystem function through research and monitoring, education and outreach, and policy reform. The Scientific Expert Group on Climate Change in their 2007 report titled, “Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable” charged governments around the world with developing strategies to “adapt to ongoing and future changes in climate change by integrating the implications of climate change into resource management and infrastructure development”. Resource managers must make future management decisions within an uncertain and changing climate based on both physical and biological ecosystem response to climate change and human perception of and response to the issue. Climate change is the biggest threat facing any protected area today and resource managers must lead the charge in addressing this threat. (PDF has 59 pages.)

Channel Islands Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development Workshop Report April 26-27, 2005 University of California, Santa Barbara

In 2003, twelve marine protected areas were established in state waters (0-3 nmi) surrounding the Channel Islands. NOAA is considering extending this network (3-6 nmi) into deeper waters of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS). In order for effective long-term management of the deep water reserves to occur, a well-structured monitoring program is required to assess effectiveness. The CINMS and the National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) hosted a 2-day workshop in April 2005 to develop a monitoring plan for the proposed federal marine reserves in that sanctuary. Conducted at the University of California at Santa Barbara, participants included scientists from academic, state, federal, and private research institutions. Workshop participants developed project ideas that could answer priority questions posed by the NMSP. This workshop report will be used to develop a monitoring plan for the reserves. (PDF contains 47 pages.)

The impacts of coastal protection structures in California���s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

This report outlines the potential impacts of coastal protection structures on the resources of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. At least 15 miles of the Sanctuary’s 300-mile shoreline are currently armored with seawalls and riprap revetments. Most of these coastal protection structures are placed above the mean high tide line, the official boundary of the Sanctuary, yet some influences of armoring impinge on the marine realm and on recreational use. In addition, continued sea level rise and accompanying coastal retreat will force many of these structures below the high tide line over time. The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary staff has recognized the significance of coastal armoring, identifying it as a critical issue in the Coastal Armoring Action Plan of the draft Joint Management Plan. This summary is intended to provide general background information for Sanctuary policies on coastal armoring. The impacts discussed include: aesthetic depreciation, beach loss due to placement, access restriction, loss of sand supply from eroding cliffs, passive erosion, and active erosion. In addition, the potential biological impacts are explored. Finally, an appraisal of how differing armor types compare in relation to impacts, expense and engineering is presented. While the literature cited in this report focus predominantly on the California coast, the framework for this discussion could have implications for other actively eroding coastlines. (PDF contains 26 pages.)

A review of the ecological effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California, Part I: Synopsis of scientific investigations

Marine reserves, often referred to as no-take MPAs, are defined as areas within which human activities that can result in the removal or alteration of biotic and abiotic components of an ecosystem are prohibited or greatly restricted (NRC 2001). Activities typically curtailed within a marine reserve are extraction of organisms (e.g., commercial and recreational fishing, kelp harvesting, commercial collecting), mariculture, and those activities that can alter oceanographic or geologic attributes of the habitat (e.g., mining, shore-based industrial-related intake and discharges of seawater and effluent). Usually, marine reserves are established to conserve biodiversity or enhance nearby fishery resources. Thus, goals and objectives of marine reserves can be inferred, even if they are not specifically articulated at the time of reserve formation. In this report, we review information about the effectiveness of the three marine reserves in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (Hopkins Marine Life Refuge, Point Lobos Ecological Reserve, Big Creek Ecological Reserve), and the one in the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (the natural area on the north side of East Anacapa Island). Our efforts to objectively evaluate reserves in Central California relative to reserve theory were greatly hampered for four primary reasons; (1) few of the existing marine reserves were created with clearly articulated goals or objectives, (2) relatively few studies of the ecological consequences of existing reserves have been conducted, (3) no studies to date encompass the spatial and temporal scope needed to identify ecosystem-wide effects of reserve protection, and (4) there are almost no studies that describe the social and economic consequences of existing reserves. To overcome these obstacles, we used several methods to evaluate the effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California. We first conducted a literature review to find out what research has been conducted in all marine reserves in Central California (Appendix 1). We then reviewed the scientific literature that relates to marine reserve theory to help define criteria to use as benchmarks for evaluation. A recent National Research Council (2001) report summarized expected reserve benefits and provided the criteria we used for evaluation of effectiveness. The next step was to identify the research projects in this region that collected information in a way that enabled us to evaluate reserve theory relative to marine reserves in Central California. Chapters 1-4 in this report provide summaries of those research projects. Contained within these chapters are evaluations of reserve effectiveness for meeting specific objectives. As few studies exist that pertain to reserve theory in Central California, we reviewed studies of marine reserves in other temperate and tropical ecosystems to determine if there were lessons to be learned from other parts of the world (Chapter 5). We also included a discussion of social and economic considerations germane to the public policy decision-making processes associated with marine reserves (Chapter 6). After reviewing all of these resources, we provided a summary of the ecological benefits that could be expected from existing reserves in Central California. The summary is presented in Part II of this report. (PDF contains 133 pages.)

A review of the ecological effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California, Part II: Summary of existing marine reserves in Central California and their potential benefits

In Central California, and elsewhere around the world, a great deal of discussion is occurring about the use of marine protected areas (MPAs) as a tool to help manage marine resources. This discussion is taking place because there is growing evidence that humans have depleted marine resources in many parts of the world, often despite strong regulatory efforts. Moreover, there is also mounting evidence that the degradation of marine resources began long ago, and we do not fully realize how much humans have altered “natural” environments. This uncertainty has led people to discuss the use of MPAs as a precautionary tool to prevent depletion or extinction of marine resources, and as a means of redressing past damages. The discussion about the use of marine reserves is increasing in intensity in California because several resource management agencies are considering reserves as they create or revise management plans. Often, the discussions surrounding this important public policy debate lead to questions about the biological or ecological value of existing marine protected areas. More than 100 MPAs exist along the coast of California. Many of these were established arbitrarily and lack specific purposes. Some California marine protected areas also have co-occurring or overlapping boundaries, have conflicting designations for use, and have conflicting rules and regulations. Because few of the existing marine protected areas have clearly articulated goals or objectives, however, it is difficult or impossible to evaluate their ecological effectiveness. (PDF contains 18 pages.)

A review of marine zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

This report reviews marine zoning in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). The 72 zoned areas in the MBNMS are of 13 different zone types. Each marine zone type has associated regulations that restrict or promote specific activities. For example, recreational activities such as boating, fishing, tidepooling, snorkeling, and SCUBA diving are limited in some zones. Scientific research is allowed at all sites, with appropriate permits, and is specifically promoted in a few sites. In addition, motorized personal watercraft use, dredge material disposal, large vessel traffic, jade collection, and aircraft overflight are allowed only in specific zones. The effectiveness of the marine zoning in the MBNMS is difficult to determine for two reasons. Firstly, many of the zones lack a clearly stated purpose or have confusing regulations. Secondly, the majority of the zones have not been evaluated formally by the managing agencies. Of the zones that have been evaluated, such as Dredge Material Disposal zones, Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve, and Pt. Lobos State/Ecological Reserve, the majority appear to be achieving their mandated purpose to some extent. Many of the zones in the MBNMS fall under the title "marine reserve." Marine reserves have recently received significant attention internationally, nationally, and in California due to their potential for: improving the status of exploited species; protecting marine habitats and ecosystems from degradation; facilitating scientific research and fisheries management; and increasing ecotourism. However, reserves must be well designed and managed to reach this potential. A well designed and managed reserve will have clearly defined goals, scientifically-based design, proper enforcement of regulations, rigorous evaluation of the reserve's effectiveness, and adaptive management. Based on these criteria, the majority of the marine reserves in California are not well designed or managed. However, the State of California has recognized this problem and is in the process of re-evaluating the California system of marine managed areas. (PDF contains 137 pages.)

The economic contribution of whalewatching to regional economies: Perspectives from two National Marine Sanctuaries

Whenever human beings have looked out on the sea, they have seen whales. First from the shore and later from ships when humanity entered the ocean realm as seafarers, we have responded to seeing these creatures with awe and wonder. Even when we hunted whales, a period well chronicled both in history and in literature, the sight of a whale brought an adrenaline rush that was not totally linked to potential economic gain. The first trips on boats specifically to watch, rather than hunt, whales began around 45 years ago in Southern California where the migrating gray whales, seen in the distance from land, drew vessels out for a closer look. Since that time whalewatching has boomed, currently conducted in over 40 countries around the world, including Antarctica, and estimated by economists at the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society to have a 1999 worldwide economic value of around $800 million USD. The economic contribution to local coastal communities is particularly significant in developing countries and those where declining fish populations (and in some cases like the Japanese, international bans on whaling) have driven harvesters to look for viable alternatives. Clearly, whalewatching is now, in many places around the world, a small but thriving part of the regional economy. Like in the days of whaling, we still get the rush, but for some, money is back contributing to the physiological response. (PDF contains 90 pages.)

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Area to be Avoided (ATBA) Education and Monitoring Program

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431, as amended) gives the Secretary of Commerce the authority to designate discrete areas of the marine environment as National Marine Sanctuaries and provides the authority to promulgate regulations to provide for the conservation and management of these marine areas. The waters of the Outer Washington Coast were recognized for their high natural resource and human use values and placed on the National Marine Sanctuary Program Site Evaluation List in 1983. In 1988, Congress directed NOAA to designate the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (Pub. L. 100-627). The Sanctuary, designated in May 1994, worked with the U.S. Coast Guard to request the International Maritime Organization designate an Area to be Avoided (ATBA) on the Olympic Coast. The IMO defines an ATBA as "a routeing measure comprising an area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and which should be avoided by all ships, or certain classes of ships" (IMO, 1991). This ATBA was adopted in December 1994 by the Maritime Safety Committee of the IMO, “in order to reduce the risk of marine casualty and resulting pollution and damage to the environment of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary”, (IMO, 1994). The ATBA went into effect in June 1995 and advises operators of vessels carrying petroleum and/or hazardous materials to maintain a 25-mile buffer from the coast. Since that time, Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS) has created an education and monitoring program with the goal of ensuring the successful implementation of the ATBA. The Sanctuary enlisted the aid of the U.S. and Canadian coast guards, and the marine industry to educate mariners about the ATBA and to use existing radar data to monitor compliance. Sanctuary monitoring efforts have targeted education on tank vessels observed transiting the ATBA. OCNMS's monitoring efforts allow quantitative evaluation of this voluntary measure. Finally, the tools developed to monitor the ATBA are also used for the more general purpose of monitoring vessel traffic within the Sanctuary. While the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary does not currently regulate vessel traffic, such regulations are within the scope of the Sanctuary’s Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan. Sanctuary staff participate in ongoing maritime and environmental safety initiatives and continually seek opportunities to mitigate risks from marine shipping.(PDF contains 44 pages.)

Multi-species and multi-interest management: An ecosystem approach to market squid (Loligo opalescens) harvest in California

Market squid (Loligo opalescens) plays a vital role in the California ecosystem and serves as a major link in the food chain as both a predator and prey species. For over a century, market squid has also been harvested off the California coast from Monterey to San Pedro. Expanding global markets, coupled with a decline in squid product from other parts of the world, in recent years has fueled rapid expansion of the virtually unregulated California fishery. Lack of regulatory management, in combination with dramatic increases in fishing effort and landings, has raised numerous concerns from the scientific, fishing, and regulatory communities. In an effort to address these concerns, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS) hosted a panel discussion at the October 1997 California Cooperative Oceanic and Fisheries Investigations (CalCOFI) Conference; it focused on ecosystem management implications for the burgeoning market squid fishery. Both panel and audience members addressed issues such as: the direct and indirect effects of commercial harvesting upon squid biomass; the effects of harvest and the role of squid in the broader marine community; the effects of environmental variation on squid population dynamics; the sustainability of the fishery from the point of view of both scientists and the fishers themselves; and the conservation management options for what is currently an open access and unregulated fishery. Herein are the key points of the ecosystem management panel discussion in the form of a preface, an executive summary, and transcript. (PDF contains 33 pages.)

California Cooperative Fisheries Investigations. Hydrographic data report, Monterey Bay, January to December 1977

The data contained in this report were obtained as a continuance of the nearly bi-weekly hydrographic observations initiated by personnel at Hopkins Marine Station over two decades ago. These observations have been supported through the years by the State of California Marine Research Committee, California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations. Since July 1974, the hydrographic sampling program has been carried out by the investigators at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories. From July 1974 to June 1976, this work was done in conjunction with an interdisciplinary study of the squid, Loligo opalescens, supported by the National Office of Sea Grant 'via the University of California Sea Grant College Project Number R/F-15. Five of the original CalCOFI stations (2201, 2202, 2203, 2204 and 2205) have been-retained in our sampling routine and additional inner-bay stations have been added (1154 and 1121) Sampling was conducted on a monthly basis for the entire year. All observations were made ab9ard R/V OCONOSTOTA. (PDF contains 93 pages)