EXECUTIVE SUMMARY___________________________

An alarm has been sounded in response to declines identified in a number of species of rockfishes on the West Coast, and while there is some debate over the current status of certain species of rockfishes there are others for which the evidence of serious decline is overwhelming. These declines threaten the health of the individual stocks, and continue to have an impact on the health of the marine ecosystem as a whole, commercial and sport fisheries, and the economies of coastal fishing communities.

The purpose of this report is to describe the fishery for West Coast rockfishes and identify changes necessary in their management. The overall goals are to provide information designed to promote the sustainable harvest of rockfishes, prevent overfishing, protect important rockfish habitat, decrease and monitor the bycatch of rockfishes, and educate on the importance of the rockfish fishery and the magnitude of threats facing rockfishes. Species declines and management failings are identified in this report. However, good stewardship of West Coast rockfish species is not the sole responsibility of the federal government, state agencies, the fishing fleets, conservation organizations, or consumers, it is the responsibility of all. This is a public resource and we are all to be held accountable for the current status of West Coast rockfishes, whether you operate a fishing vessel, are employed by a state or federal resource agency or just buy seafood at the local store. If you fish, your responsibility lies with choosing to operate selective fishing practices with low bycatch levels and negligible habitat impacts. Federal and state agencies must have strong enough personal and political will to make the difficult decisions in favor of the long-term health and sustainability of the resource. Consumers must demand to know how their seafood was caught, and how much bycatch and habitat damage could have resulted from its capture in order to make appropriate, educated choices.

Declines in rockfishes have been observed directly by many, either through experience as commercial or sport fishers or as scientific researchers. A quote from Phil Kline, a commercial fisherman, summarizes his fishing experience in California: "Many fishing spots no longer have enough fish to support commercial effort, and overall the size of many species has declined [Figure 1]." "Most demersal species are at very low levels. Bocaccio, yelloweye, and vermilion rockfish have gone from supporting fisheries to incidental encounters only." Skip McMaster, also a California fisherman states in a letter to Pacific Fishing in March 1998, "I believe that any informed person who does not think there is

a real stock problem has really got his/her head in the sand. Personally, I have seen a drastic decline of rockfish steadily over the past 17 years."

Love et al. in a 1998 report, describe rockfish declines in southern California in the following quote: "From at least the 1950s through the late 1970s, black-and-yellow, blue, gopher, and olive rockfishes, as well as young bocaccio, were important components of the inshore rocky reef community of the southern California Bight. In particular, blue rockfish and olive rockfish were among the dominant species over many reefs. However, since the early 1980s, most species of rockfishes have nearly disappeared from the near-shore waters of the southern California Bight. On many of the reefs that once held substantial numbers of these species, very few rockfish remain" (Love et al. 1998a).

What is the evidence for declines?

Concern for rockfish species has been voiced by fishers, managers, and scientists alike, and while the particular species, amount of decline, and areas affected can be debated, there is no debating the question that a problem does indeed exist. Serious exploitation of rockfish began in the late 1960s with removals by foreign vessels and continues to the present with removals by the domestic fleet (SAFE 1997). Significant declines have been observed in bocaccio rockfish populations, most likely as a result of variations in the marine environment, which can strongly affect the survival of young fish, as well as overexploitation (Yoklavich 1998). These factors have conspired to reduce population levels to the point that they are now listed on the IUCN's (World Conservation Union) Red List of "critically endangered" species. The criteria for this listing require an 80 percent reduction in the population over the last ten years or three generations (Baillie et al. 1996). Ralston (1998) estimates current levels of total and spawning biomass for bocaccio to be at eight percent and six percent of historic apex levels respectively (Figures 1a and 1b). The most recent stock assessment for bocaccio indicates their current level to be at two to four percent of historic levels (NMFS 1998 Triennial Survey Data). Substantial declines can be seen in the estimates of current total and spawning biomass levels for black, yellowtail, widow, Pacific ocean perch, and canary rockfish (Ralston 1998) as well as others (Figure 1a). In the 1998 National Marine Fisheries Service report to congress on the overfishing status of commercially fished species the designation of yellowtail rockfish has changed from approaching an overfished condition to a stable status. This rapid change in status for yellowtail rockfish is very indicative of the lack of data we have for many species

Rockfishes contribute significantly to coastal economies and are fished by several different gear types. Exclusive of Pacific whiting, the rockfish fishery represents the highest volume landings in the Pacific coast commercial groundfish fishery and they are caught in higher numbers than any other type of fish in the California, Oregon, and Washington sport fisheries. Rockfish catches were responsible for 40 percent of the revenue generated from groundfish landings (whiting landings not included) in 1996, totaling over 32 million dollars (SAFE 1997). Trawl gear, hook-and-line gear, and set nets are some of the gear utilized to fish for rockfishes, with the predominant gear being trawl. In 1997 trawl gear was responsible for 88 percent of the landings, hook-and-line gear for 11 percent, and set nets for approximately 1 percent.

Fishers have been speaking out about the problems. The declines have made some species harder to find, causing people to have to search longer and harder to locate the fish. They point out huge amounts of regulatory-induced discard resulting from the current management system, declines in species that are not being monitored and have never been assessed, and the need for more research, funding, and cooperation between industry, science and management. They also speak of overcapitalization of the fishing fleet and the need to decrease capacity. This excess capacity in the West Coast groundfish fleet has led to a situation where our ability to catch fish greatly exceeds the amount of fish that can be caught on a sustainable basis. Too much fishing power and too many people are trying to catch too few fish.

Some of the problem lies with the way rockfish are managed. Fishery managers commonly focus on managing one species at a time, making the default assumption that this species lives in isolation from other species in the system (Speer et al. 1997). However, many rockfish species commonly occur in mixed-stock assemblages, which are a combination of different species that can be caught together. The mathematical models used to describe rockfish stocks were developed to describe a single species, not a mixed-stock assemblage. This inability to manage multi-species assemblages has been a contributing factor in rockfish declines, which in some instances have led to serial depletion of species found in those assemblages. An example of this serial depletion can be seen in the gradual sequential declines of Pacific ocean perch, yellowtail and canary rockfish, widow rockfish, and now potentially several species managed within the "remaining rockfish" category of the larger Sebastes complex (D. Gunderson UW pers. comm.). Of additional concern is the existence of a loophole in the Sustainable Fisheries Act allowing for the overexploitation of a weak stock to facilitate full exploitation of a healthy stock for the purpose of economic gain. The only protection that can currently be awarded to the weaker species involves achieving an endangered species status.

The uncertainty factor goes further than the mathematical models; the overfishing status of many rockfish species is virtually unknown. In a 1998 report to congress listing the overfishing status of 52 species of rockfishes and 2 species of thornyheads, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NFMS) listed 83 percent (45 species) as having an unknown status. Three rockfish species; bocaccio, canary rockfish, and Pacific ocean perch, and one species of thornyhead, the shortspine thornyhead, were labeled as "approaching an overfished condition", while four other species; chilipepper rockfish, shortbelly rockfish, yellowtail rockfish, widow rockfish, and longspine thornyheads were labeled as "not approaching an overfished condition."

It is generally accepted that more research and better science are needed for rockfish, however, we will never be able to answer all of the questions or address all of the uncertainties. For these reasons rockfish need be managed in a precautionary manner. Taking a precautionary approach means erring on the side of caution and interpreting hints of trouble as warnings that the resource needs protection (Speer et al. 1997). Uncertainty in fisheries science and comes from many different areas. Little information on the status of many species, unpredictable environmental variables, unknowns regarding relationships within the marine ecosystem, and natural population fluctuations are just a few. These unknowns will never be completely solved. Precautionary management must become the rule, not the exception.

The following quote from a 1998 NOAA technical memorandum on utilizing the precautionary approach in the implementation of national standard one defines the concept and puts its use into the context of fisheries management. "The precautionary approach implements conservation measures even in the absence of scientific certainty that fish stocks are being overexploited. In a fisheries context, the precautionary approach is receiving considerable attention throughout the world primarily because the collapse of many fisheries resources is perceived to be due to the inability to implement timely conservation measures without scientific proof of overfishing. Thus, the precautionary approach is essentially a reversal of the "burden of proof" (NOAA 1998).

The problems of declining fish stocks are not limited to the Eastern Pacific; they are global in scale. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization warned recently that the demand for fish could exceed the world oceans supply by 2010 if management of the resource does not improve. The number of fishers and fish farmers has more than doubled in the past 25 years, increasing from 13 million in 1970 to 30 million in 1995 (FAO 1996). Eleven of the world is 15 most important fishing areas and 60 percent of the major fish species are either fully utilized or in decline (FAO 1996).