Pendleton Artificial Reef: annual progress report presented to Southern California Edison Company

(PDF contains 82 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.)

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.)

Cruise Report 65-S-4, Trawl, California Halibut

(PDF contains 1 page.)

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.)

The status of shark and ray fishery resources in the Gulf of California: applied research to improve management and conservation

Seasonal surveys were conducted during 1998–1999 in Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, and Sinaloa to determine the extent and activities of artisanal elasmobranch fisheries in the Gulf of California. One hundred and forty–seven fishing sites, or camps, were documented, the majority of which (n = 83) were located in Baja California Sur. Among camps with adequate fisheries information, the great majority (85.7%) targeted elasmobranchs during some part of the year. Most small, demersal sharks and rays were landed in mixed species fisheries that also targeted demersal teleosts, but large sharks were usually targeted in directed drift gillnet or, to a lesser extent, surface longline fisheries. Artisanal fishermen were highly opportunistic, and temporally switched targets depending on the local productivity of teleost, invertebrate, and elasmobranch fishery resources. Major fisheries for small sharks (< 1.5 m, “cazón”) were documented in Baja California during spring, in Sonora during autumn–spring, and in Sinaloa during winter and spring. Triakid sharks (Mustelus spp.) dominated cazón landings in the northern states, whereas juvenile scalloped hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini) primarily supported the fishery in Sinaloa. Large sharks (> 1.5 m, “tiburón”) were minor components of artisanal elasmobranch fisheries in Sonora and Sinaloa, but were commonly targeted during summer and early autumn in Baja California and Baja California Sur. The pelagic thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus) and silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis) were most commonly landed in Baja California, whereas a diverse assemblage of pelagic and large coastal sharks was noted among Baja California Sur landings. Rays dominated summer landings in Baja California and Sinaloa, when elevated catch rates of the shovelnose guitarfish (Rhinobatos productus, 13.2 individuals/vessel/trip) and golden cownose ray (Rhinoptera steindachneri, 11.1 individuals/vesse/trip) primarily supported the respective fisheries. The Sonoran artisanal elasmobranch fishery was the most expansive recorded during this study, and rays (especially R. productus) dominated spring and summer landings in this state. Seasonal catch rates of small demersal sharks and rays were considerably greater in Sonora than in other surveyed states. Many tiburón populations (e.g., C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. obscurus, Galeocerdo cuvier) have likely been overfished, possibly shifting effort towards coastal populations of cazón and rays. Management recommendations, including conducting demographic analyses using available life history data, determining and protecting nursery areas, and enacting seasonal closures in areas of elasmobranch aggregation (e.g., reproduction, feeding), are proposed. Without effective, enforceable management to sustain or rebuild targeted elasmobranch populations in the Gulf of California, collapse of many fisheries is a likely outcome. (PDF contains 243 pages)

El estado actual de los tiburones y rayas sujectos a explotación comercial en el Golfo de California: una investigación aplicada al mejoramiento de su manejo pesquero y conservación

Se realizaron prospecciones estacionales durante 1998–1999 en Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora y Sinaloa para determinar la dimensión y las actividades de las pesquerías artesanales de elasmobranquios dentro del Golfo de California. Ciento cuarenta y siete campamentos o sitios pesqueros fueron documentados, la mayoría de los cuales (n= 83) fueron localizados en Baja California Sur. Entre los campamentos con información pesquera adecuada, la gran mayoría (85.7%) pescaron elasmobranquios en algún momento del año. La mayoría de los pequeños tiburones y rayas demersales fueron capturados en pesquerías multiespecíficas, las cuales también tienen como objetivo teleósteos, pero los grandes tiburones fueron capturados generalmente por pesquerías de redes agalleras a la deriva dirigidas a ellos, o en menor grado, por pesquerías de palangre de superficie. Los pescadores artesanales presentaron un comportamiento altamente oportunístico y temporalmente cambiaban de especie objetivo dependiendo de la productividad de los recursos pesqueros locales de especies de escama, invertebrados y elasmobranquios. Las mayores pesquerías de pequeños tiburones (≤1.5 m, “cazón”) se documentaron en Baja California, Sonora, y Sinaloa durante la primavera y adicionalmente durante otoño e invierno en Sonora. Los tiburones del genero Mustelus (Mustelus spp) dominaron los desembarques de cazón en los estados norteños, mientras que los tiburones martillo juveniles (Sphyrna lewini) sostuvieron la pesquería en Sinaloa. Los grandes tiburones (> 1.5 m, “tiburón”) fueron componente menor de las pesquerías artesanales de elasmobranquios en Sonora y Sinaloa, pero comúnmente fueron capturados en verano y principios de otoño en Baja California y Baja California Sur. El tiburón zorro pelágico (Alopias pelagicus) y el tiburón piloto (Carcharhinus falciformis) fueron comúnmente desembarcados en Baja California, mientras que un diverso ensamble de tiburones pelágicos y grandes costeros fueron observados en los desembarques de Baja California Sur. Las rayas dominaron los desembarques en verano en Baja California y Sinaloa, sostenidas principalmente por elevadas tasas de captura de la guitarra común (Rhinobatos productus, 13.2 individuos/embarcación/viaje) y del tecolote (Rhinoptera steindachneri, 11.1 individuos/embarcación/viaje). La pesquería de rayas de Sonora fue la más extensamente documentada durante este estudio y las rayas (especialmente R. productus) dominaron los desembarques en primavera y verano en este estado. Las tasas de captura estacionales de pequeños tiburones demersales y rayas fueron considerablemente mayores en Sonora que en los otros estados prospectados. Numerosas poblaciones de tiburón (p. ej. C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. obscurus, Galeocerdo cuvier) han sido probablemente sobreexplotados, lo que posiblemente este causando un cambio en el esfuerzo hacia las poblaciones de cazón y rayas costeros. Se proponen recomendaciones de manejo, incluyendo conducir análisis demográficos empleando la información de historias de vida disponible, localizando y protegiendo áreas de crianza e implementando temporadas de veda estacional en las áreas de mayor concentración de elasmobranquios (p. ej. alimentación, reproducción). Sin un manejo pesquero efectivo, vigilado, para sostener o reconstruir las poblaciones de elasmobranquios sujetas a explotación comercial dentro del Golfo de California, el colapso de las pesquerías es un evento probable. (PDF contains 261 pages)

Southern California Baseline Studies and Analysis: 1975-1978. Master Table of Contents

This is only the table of contents for a series of technical reports done from 1975-1978. The papers were done on contract for BLM by a number of universities and consulting firms such as Science Applications, Inc., University of Southern California, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, and various campuses of University of California and California State University. (PDF contains 36 pages)

Cruise Report 62-S-2 - California Halibut

(PDF contains 2 pages.)

Final Supplemental Environmental Document Pacific herring commercial fishing regulations (Sections 163, 163.1, and 164, Title 14, California Code of Regulations)

(PDF contains 63 pages.)

Environmental Studies of Monterey Bay and Central California Coastal Zone. First half-year of operation, July 1970-February 1971

(PDF contains 141 pages)

Some aspects of the temperature, oxygen and nutrient distributions in Monterey Bay, California. Annual Report, Part 1, 1973

Seasonal variations in temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nutrients in the nearshore areas and in the canyon area of Monterey Bay, California during 1971-1972 were similar~ During upwelling periods, however, water in the nearshore areas was higher in temperature and oxygen and lower in nutrients than water in the canyon area~ This was caused by upwelled water moving north and south of the canyon into counterclockwise and clockwise flow in the northern and southern ends of the bay respectively. The water was heated by insolation and depleted of its nutrients by photosynthesis during this movement. The residence time of water in the nearshore northern and southern bay during upwelling is estimated to be 3 to 8 days, and this fits well into the above circulation pattern and average measured current velocities of 10 to 15 cm/sec~ There is sorne evidence that this circulation pattern and the estimated residence time may be also valid for on-upwelling periods. Upwelling apparently occurred in Monterey Submarine Canyon at rates of 0.4 to 2.9 m/day and was stronger in 1971 than 1972. (PDF contains 107 pages)