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.)

BIRD CONTROL UNDER A STATE FISH AND GAME PERMIT SYSTEM

I guess the impetus for laws in our state, really was the action of the city of Boston in 1963, when the Parks and Recreation Department felt that it was time to do something about massive populations of pigeons on the Boston Commons and in the city. The Parks Department came to our agency to find out what could be done. We immediately found as a result of a reorganization and recodification of the laws some 20 years before, that it was illegal to use or apply poisons for the purpose of killing any birds or mammals in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Property owners were given the privilege to destroy animals that were doing damage to their property, but only through mechanical means, certainly not by the use of toxicants. We helped the city of Boston draft a bill in 1963, which allowed our agency, the Division of Fisheries and Game, the agency responsible for all wildlife species in the state, the opportunity to issue certain permits for the use of poison, giving full authority to the director of Fisheries and Game with, of course, approval of my board. This allowed certain discretion on our part.

An early archaeological example of tattooing from northwestern Alaska / James W. VanStone, Curator, North American Archaeology and Ethnology, Field Museum of Natural History, and Charles V. Lucier, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game.

v.66:no.1(1974)

Annual report of the New Jersey Department of Conservation, Division of Fish and Game.

Mode of access: Internet.

Early limnological and fish population conditions of Canton Reservoir, Oklahoma, and fishery management recommendation, report to the Oklahoma Fish and Game Council.

Mode of access: Internet.

A review of California's progress in fish and game conservation.

Mode of access: Internet.

Biennial report of the Fish and Game Commission.

At head of title: State of Nevada.

Annual reports of the Fish and Game Protector to the Governor.

"The eastern oyster on the Oregon coast, by F.L. Washburn" issued as an appendix (14 p.) to reports for 1895/96.

Biennial report - Fish and Game Commission.

Mode of access: Internet.

Pamphlets on forestry. Fish and game.

Binder's title: Forestry pamphlets. Fish and game.

Biennial report of the Fish and Game Commission of the State of Oregon to the Governor and the ... Legislative Assembly.

Report year ends Nov. 30.

Report of Fish and Game Commissioners of the State of New Jersey.

Report for 1894 covers period from May 29-Dec. 1.

Annual report of the Board of Fish and Game Commissioners.

Report year irregular.

Fish and game laws of New Jersey.

Mode of access: Internet.