Posted by Eric Frasco on June 21, 2002 at 14:16:01:
In Reply to: Rockfish closure posted by Ken Kurtis on June 21, 2002 at 11:00:32:
The article completely neglected what is going on at the state level.
California DFG has been enacting changes based on the actions of the Pacific Fishery Management Council (http://www.pcouncil.org/) so as to avoid conflicts between regulations in federal waters and regulations in state waters. For example, if PFMC raises the length requirement of one species from 14" to 15", CA DFG does likewise. Makes it easier to enforce regulations because you don't have to distinguish whether or not the fish was taken inside or outside of the 3 mile limit.
But thats beside the point. What's important is that they finally are recognizing that some of these species take a long time to reach maturity. Some of the species of rockfish become mature and spawn within a few years, whereas some species do not spawn until almost 10 years. When you see numbers like "this fish is not mature until 4 to 9 years," this means that not all of the fish are mature at 4 years, but more than likely only 10% are mature at 4 years, with the remaining 90% taking up to 9 years to mature.
Add to this the fact that successful recruitment does not occur every year, and now you have even longer than 9 years before that species of fish successfully produces sufficient numbers of young to replace the older fish that die off, get eaten by other animals, or are caught by humans.
PFMC finally acknowledged this (http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/gfnewinfo.html).
Locally (at the state level), this was recognized by the MLMA three years ago, when landings of certain species plummeted. Consequently, 19 species of nearshore rockfish are slated for protection and the process was suppossed to have been completed last August, but the plan was found to be lacking and DFG had to rewrite it (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/nfmp/index.html).
Next week, the Nearshore Fishery Management Plan (NFMP) Advisory Committee is being re-convened by DFG to review the rewritten plan. This announcement by the PFMC will definitely come into play at the meeting, as the 60 depth limit is most certainly within the 3 mile limit.
The NFMP Advisory Committee was formed under similar guidelines as the MPA Regional Working Groups (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/mlpa/regional_working_groups.html), and there are some members serving on both the MPA Regional Working Groups and the NMFP Advisory Committee as well. Joe Geever is one (non-consumptive representative).
It will be interesting to see how the meeting next week will turn out. I recommend that anyone interested in the MPA process should attend the DFG meeting on the rewritten NFMP next Thursday (27th) at the DFG Office in Los Alamitos, as many of the members of the NFMP Advisory Committee were also selected to serve on the MPA Working Groups. It will be a great opportunity to see your public representatives in action. It will also be interesting to see what comments the Commercial Fishing representatives say in light of the recent recommendations from the PFMC.
-Eric Frasco-