20-Fathom Rockfish Conservation Area Boundary Line - Public Comment

A further consideration of limited available spatial data indicated that quillback rockfish are very rarely encountered in waters deeper than 50 fathoms (91.4 meters (m)) but that the depth ranges where they are most commonly encountered varies somewhat by latitude with more attributed catches in shallower depths (e.g., 11–30 fathoms, 20.1–54.9 m) in the more northern areas and deeper than 20 fathoms (36.6 m) in southern parts of the California coast.

Pulled the above quote from page 3 of the FR for context. If a <20 fathom fishery were opened in the northern areas, along with zero retention and mandatory descender use, would the bycatch mortality rate be reduced in the modeling to a point where a "full" season is available to anglers in 2024? Depends on how conservative they are with the modeling.

Purely anecdotal on my part, but I've caught several quillbacks in the 100-150 ft depths up here in Oregon and never had to descend one. They've all darted straight back to the bottom. The barotrauma mortality rate seems pretty low at those depths. But again, purely anecdotal with a sample size of a couple dozen fish doesn't mean much on the grand scale.

The Northern recreational fishery caught 3 mt in 2021 and, 2.9 in 2022.  Now the tricky part, what portion were caught inside 20 fathoms?  The ACT is 0.87 in the northern area, with commercials catching 0.25 this year.  So let's say there is 0.87-0.25 = 0.62 mt quota for recreational.  Let's use a 9% mortality rate, when using a descender, as documented per PFMC.  If we assume 3 mt caught and released (yes, that is out to 30 fathoms, but you get the math), with a 9% mortality rate, that is a 0.27 mt mortality, well within the 0.62 mt calculated above.  Promising.

-Allen

During the October meeting, I remember the north coast fishermen complaining about the closure because Quillback were "everywhere" and being frequently caught, while the Central Coast fishermen were complaining about the closure because they had never caught a Quillback in 10 years. Perhaps Quillback range has moved North due to climactic conditions and the low numbers in our area have nothing to do with fishing pressure.
Someone caught one in Carmel last weekend in about 250' of water outside the 50 Fathom line.

During the October meeting, I remember the north coast fishermen complaining about the closure because Quillback were "everywhere" and being frequently caught, while the Central Coast fishermen were complaining about the closure because they had never caught a Quillback in 10 years. Perhaps Quillback range has moved North due to climactic conditions and the low numbers in our area have nothing to do with fishing pressure.
Someone caught one in Carmel last weekend in about 250' of water outside the 50 Fathom line.

Consider that in the south region recreational anglers caught 7.5 mt in 2021, and 6.3 mt in 2022.  That's the biggest impact for a user group in the whole state, north and south regions.  The dividing line being  40°10′ N lat.

-Allen

During the October meeting, I remember the north coast fishermen complaining about the closure because Quillback were "everywhere" and being frequently caught, while the Central Coast fishermen were complaining about the closure because they had never caught a Quillback in 10 years. Perhaps Quillback range has moved North due to climactic conditions and the low numbers in our area have nothing to do with fishing pressure.
Someone caught one in Carmel last weekend in about 250' of water outside the 50 Fathom line.

Consider that in the south region recreational anglers caught 7.5 mt in 2021, and 6.3 mt in 2022.  That's the biggest impact for a user group in the whole state, north and south regions.  The dividing line being  40°10′ N lat.

-Allen

I wonder how many are caught south of Monterey. I guess some are based on last weekend. The guys complaining that none were caught were out of Moro Bay. There are so many studies that I could dream up for all those marine biology/fisheries biologist students out there - species-specific range maps, species-specific barotrauma survival rates at various depths, etc.. I know that some of that has been looked at.  You could do stuff with cameras and deepwater pens.

During the October meeting, I remember the north coast fishermen complaining about the closure because Quillback were "everywhere" and being frequently caught, while the Central Coast fishermen were complaining about the closure because they had never caught a Quillback in 10 years. Perhaps Quillback range has moved North due to climactic conditions and the low numbers in our area have nothing to do with fishing pressure.
Someone caught one in Carmel last weekend in about 250' of water outside the 50 Fathom line.

Consider that in the south region recreational anglers caught 7.5 mt in 2021, and 6.3 mt in 2022.  That's the biggest impact for a user group in the whole state, north and south regions.  The dividing line being  40°10′ N lat.

-Allen

I wonder how many are caught south of Monterey. I guess some are based on last weekend. The guys complaining that none were caught were out of Moro Bay. There are so many studies that I could dream up for all those marine biology/fisheries biologist students out there - species-specific range maps, species-specific barotrauma survival rates at various depths, etc.. I know that some of that has been looked at.  You could do stuff with cameras and deepwater pens.

If PFMC has the data for N an S, I'm sure they have it broken down into finer geographies.

I can totally believe that few are caught out of Morro Bay.  You can probably check the commercial landing data as a proxy.  It's all there.  I just found it.  Use this link.
 You can select species and years.  I did this quickly and see pretty much none out of Morro.  You can also see "hot spots" over time.

https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Marine/Data-Management-Research/MFDE/Landings-Block

-Allen

[/quote]

If PFMC has the data for N an S, I'm sure they have it broken down into finer geographies.

I can totally believe that few are caught out of Morro Bay.  You can probably check the commercial landing data as a proxy.  It's all there.  I just found it.  Use this link.
 You can select species and years.  I did this quickly and see pretty much none out of Morro.  You can also see "hot spots" over time.

https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Marine/Data-Management-Research/MFDE/Landings-Block

-Allen
[/quote]

It looks like that date is given to PFM from the surveyors at the launches. I have personally seen those surveyors mis identify fish. They need to step up the way they do these stock assessments as they are inaccurate. They mentioned this in the last meeting.

If PFMC has the data for N an S, I'm sure they have it broken down into finer geographies.

I can totally believe that few are caught out of Morro Bay.  You can probably check the commercial landing data as a proxy.  It's all there.  I just found it.  Use this link.
 You can select species and years.  I did this quickly and see pretty much none out of Morro.  You can also see "hot spots" over time.

https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Marine/Data-Management-Research/MFDE/Landings-Block

-Allen

It looks like that date is given to PFM from the surveyors at the launches. I have personally seen those surveyors mis identify fish. They need to step up the way they do these stock assessments as they are inaccurate. They mentioned this in the last meeting.

This data comes from the logbooks of commercial boats, not the surveyors at launches.

-Allen

I have not voted, because a lot of information that i am unfamiliar with has been brought to light with this discussion.  Greatly helpful and appreciated, from all sides.