Are Southern California Fisheries in Good Shape?

Sportfisherman Jim Donlan and his friends had fished California’s Channel Islands since the 1950s.  The steep declines in fish populations they witnessed prompted them to propose marine reserves around the islands in 1999.  Abundance of fish and lobsters in those reserves is now on the upswing, but what’s happened with fish across the south coast of California?  Is conventional fishery management working now? 

The fact is, a number of south coast fisheries are in decline or stuck at diminished levels.  Assessed species like bocaccio and canary rockfish, cowcod and California sheephead are depleted, and the latter two show little sign of recovery. 

And that’s only part of the story:  only 30% of California’s fisheries have been assessed.  Unassessed species like bronze spotted rockfish and broom tailed grouper have disappeared from sight and may never come back.  Scientists consider quillback and China rockfish at high risk of being overfished.   

It’s important to use the information we have to identify species of concern and take steps to reverse declines, as well as to avoid reaching the point of no return.  

Kelp bass and barred sand bass—popular targets of southern California sportfishing—are other examples of unassessed species in serious trouble.  Yet their management measures have not been changed since the 1970's.   

Barred sand bass aggregate (group together) to spawn, which makes them particularly vulnerable to overfishing.  Charter boat logbooks showed ups and downs in catches from the early 1980s to 1996, but dramatic declines after that point.  On average, in the 1990s, catches were about 40% lower than in the 1980s, and the decline accelerated from there, finally reaching a 90% decline. 

One would expect this dramatic decline to produce a major management response. Yet no changes in regulations have occurred in the past 30 years (See California Code of Regulation Title 14 Section 28.30).  Barred sand bass, which spawn in well defined areas, are the very type of species that would benefit from marine protected areas, if those areas encompass parts of their spawning grounds.                                                                             

Kelp bass is another popular recreationally caught species—among the top six species targeted by charter boats for many years.  Its catches declined steeply over the past three decades. These fish also aggregate to spawn, so protected areas are likely to be a useful tool in reversing their decline.  As with barred sand bass, regulations governing minimum size and catch limits for this species have not changed in at least 30 years despite a 90% drop in landings.  

What should we do?  Kelp bass and barred sand bass show undeniable and drastic declines in landings:  stronger management measures are urgently needed.  Scientists recommend changes in conventional management, such as   reducing the number that can be caught from 10 fish to 5 and increasing the minimum size of fish that can be kept, plus more targeted measures like closing aggregation sites to fishing during spawning season or year-round.   

California fishery management plans such as the Nearshore Finfish Fishery Management Plan and the Abalone Recovery and Management Plan call for creation of protected areas under the Marine Life Protection Act to help marine species recover.  Recent scientific studies acknowledge that conventional management for maximum sustainable yield (MSY) is not likely to be sufficient to keep oceans healthy and that additional measures are needed (see Worm, Boris, Ray Hilborn et al. Rebuilding Global Fisheries, Science Magazine, Vol 325, July 31, 2009).  Federal and regional fishery managers have used reduced catches and closed areas to put depleted species like bocaccio rockfish on the road to recovery.  But the examples above underscore that serious gaps exist in our state fishery management system:  well designed networks of protected areas and other area-based measures, combined with catch reductions, can help conserve at-risk populations and improve fishery yield for the future.

Comments