Bill's response to Dead Loss post, "Last year when ODFW lowered the recreational limit on bottom fish the raised the commercial limit of bottom fish. this was followed by a huge sale of rockfish filets in local markets." Oh Boy! Go ODFW!!!
From: WILLIAM LACKNER <WILLIAMLACKNER001@msn.com> NOTICE DATE SENT!!!
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 7:12 AM
To: Rep.DavidGomberg; Senator, Arnie Roblan; Rep.CaddyMcKeown; Julie Tasnady; Curt Melcher; ODFW Commission; Caren Braby; Pete Heley; Henry Miller; theworldnews; Todd Poyfair; Tracy Loew; Senator Jeff Merkley; Steve Godin; Pete Heley; Steve Card
Subject: Should Fishing For Pregnant Bottom Fish Be Allowed?
The answer to the question above is NO!!!
You may be familiar with my objections of taking pregnant surf perch and ODFW's refusal to budge an inch on our suggestions. The wholesale slaughter of pregnant surfperch when they enter Oregon's bays to give live birth is an unacceptable practice with long lasting consequences. The practice is responsible for decline in the abundance of the once thriving population of all surfperch species.
Most Bottom Fish of the Nearshore and Offshore deep water complex give live birth. Allowing retention of mature expectant mature fish by both recreational and commercial is responsible for the declining abundance of Bottom Fish species.
The current closure for the retention of Bottom Fish highlights the cause for concern on the timing of harvesting bottom fish. Should ODFW restrict the retention of all fish species that give live birth during the period when the bottom fish species are pregnant? We recommend ODFW do so based on the findings in the following informational report.
Information Report 2011-01 Maturity of female quillback (Sebastes maliger) and china rockfish (S. nebulosus) from Oregon waters based on histological evaluation of ovaries.
The following links demonstrates our commitment to Oregon's Marine Resources. ODFW Photos
From: Rep Gomberg <Rep.DavidGomberg@oregonlegislature.gov> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 5:41 PM To: WILLIAM LACKNER Subject: RE: Should Fishing For Pregnant Bottom Fish Be Allowed?
Thanks for passing along this info. Two questions come to mind: 1. How can commercial fishermen screen for pregnant rockfish cost-effectively? 2. How can fishermen know the fish in question is pregnant?
You mention closing off fishing during the period when bottom fish species are pregnant. When is that period? I couldn’t find it in the article.
Thanks again and looking forward to learning more. We also look forward to seeing you on OPB!
Tyler Janzen Chief of Staff Rep. David Gomberg Oregon House District 10
Good day Tyler, the Discussion on pages 10 and 11 from Information Report 2011-01 (click on the red colored link to view the entire Informational Report 2011--1). The Discussions offers insight into the selective harvest of the deep water complex of rockfish.
The relative inaccuracy of macroscopic staging for female quillback and china rockfish in stages 1-3 and 7 reported here is consistent with results for yelloweye rockfish, another species with weakly synchronized ovarian development (Hannah et al. 2009). This contrasts with the greater accuracy of macroscopic staging reported for Pacific ocean perch (Sebastes alutus, Hannah and Parker 2007) and aurora rockfish (Sebastes aurora, Thompson and Hannah 2010), species with more synchronous development. The difference in accuracy most likely results from greater variability in the size and color of both resting and developing ovaries at any single sampling time in species with asynchronous development. For rockfish with synchronous development that are sampled near the time of parturition, most females are in an unambiguous maturity state, either with large, well-developed ovaries or with fertilized eggs, visible larvae or an obviously spent ovary. Fish outside of these categories will then generally have a broad or possibly bimodal size distribution, some large fish in stage 7 and some smaller fish in stages 1 and 2. Under these ircumstances, differences between resting and immature ovaries, in terms of size and color will be more obvious. One other factor that may have contributed to the low accuracy of macroscopic staging for china rockfish in our study was our choice of seasonal “window” for evaluating maturity. By including July samples in our analysis despite a high proportion of stage 7 (resting) ovaries, we may have reduced the apparent accuracy of macroscopic staging.
The length at 50% maturity determined for quillback rockfish in this study, 29.2 cm, is larger than reported for central California waters (26 cm, Wyllie Echeverria 1987). The age at 50% maturity however, 5.3 y, is younger than reported for central California waters (6 y, Wyllie Echeverria 1987). Haldorson and Love (1991) report a value from Rosenthal et al. (1982) of 36 cm for length at 50% maturity for quillback rockfish from southeastern Alaska waters. Love et al. 2002 report a length and age at 50% maturity from British Columbia waters of 29 cm and 11 y of age, about the same size, but much older than values etermined for Oregon waters in our study. The length at 50% maturity of 28.5 cm determined here for china rockfish is slightly larger than the estimate for northern and central California of 27 cm from Wyllie Echeverria 1987).
The data presented here on the seasonal timing of ovarian development show that older or larger female quillback rockfish develop and release larvae earlier in the season than younger or smaller females (Figure 3). This is consistent with the findings of Sogard et al. (2008) that parturition date in black rockfish (Sebastes melanops, Bobko and Berkeley 2004), blue rockfish (S. mystinus), kelp rockfish (S. atrovirens) and yellowtail rockfish (S. flavidus) is earlier in larger females. It is also consistent with the findings of Nichol and Pikitch (1994) that larger darkblotched rockfish (S. crameri) females spawn earlier in the season than smaller fish. Conversely, a maternal size effect on the seasonal timing of parturition was not demonstrated for china rockfish in this study, consistent with findings for Pacific ocean perch (Hannah and Parker 2007), and gopher rockfish and olive rockfish (Sogard et al. 2008).
The newly published NOAA paper offers additional encouragement into developing a harvest strategy to minimize the impact on pregnant rockfish. Click on the following link.
www.afsc.noaa.gov AFSC News May 22, 2017 New information on how long some rockfish live and how often they spawn will help ensure healthy populations. By: Christine Baier
The answer to your first question is found the Discussions of Informational Report 2011-01. The gestation period if I remember correctly is species specific and lengthy. Commercial fishermen can tell if rockfish are pregnant during the last stages of their pregnancy. Fecundity is an important aspect of pregnant rockfish. Older mature rockfish are larger than younger mature rockfish. Generally larger mature rockfish give birth to a higher number of baby rockfish than the younger mature rockfish. The increase in the number of baby rockfish makes it easier for Commercial fishermen to actually see that the rockfish is pregnant.
The ODFW Mission Statement states: "Provide proactive and solution-based fish and wildlife management based on sound science." Managing the harvest of rockfish to minimize the catch of pregnant rockfish to the benefit of rockfish species offers ODFW the opportunity to fulfill their commitment to the tenements of their mission Statement.
The cost of the feasibility study could be funded through increased landing fees.
In recent seasons ODFW has closed retention of specific rockfish species and limited take on others. Anglers would have to rely on ODFW rockfish retention guidelines to comply with harvest guidelines.
Thanks for re-sending the report. The testing windows where samples were taken seem to be from March – July, depending on the species in question.
Your idea of a feasibility study through increased landing fees is novel. We’ll keep an eye out on rockfish populations and continue checking in with ODFW to see if such a project makes sense. It seems that ODFW closely monitors the populations since retention of some species sometimes gets closed, as you mention.
Thanks again for the information- it’s very appreciated. I hope you enjoy your Independence Day!
Tyler Janzen Chief of Staff Rep. David Gomberg Oregon House District 10
ODFW INDUSTRY NOTICE TO COMMERCIAL GROUNDFISH FISHERS AND PROCESSORS
September 27, 2018
Commercial Nearshore Cabezon Trip Limit Reductions for Periods 5 & 6
Effective October 5, 2018
This notice details in-season decreases to Cabezon trip limits for Periods 5 & 6 in 2018. Landings of Cabezon in the commercial nearshore fishery are running very high. As of September 21st, or 72% of the season, the fleet has attained 89% of the commercial state Harvest Guideline. Trip limit reductions are necessary to increase the chances Cabezon remains open to some retention all year. These trip limit changes apply only to Cabezon landed after 10/4. Trip limits for other species groups are not affected by this in-season action and will remain at levels specified in the 9/1/2018 industry notice. ODFW will continue to track landings in-season and make additional adjustments as needed.
Revised Trip Limits for Periods 5 & 6 – No vessel may land more than the following amounts: For vessels with a Black Rockfish and Blue Rockfish Permit WITHOUT a Nearshore Endorsement* All Nearshore Species INCLUDING CABEZON: 15 pounds per day, not to exceed 25% of total landing by weight or cumulative trip limits for permits with a Nearshore Endorsement (below).
For vessels with a Black Rockfish and Blue Rockfish Permit WITH a Nearshore Endorsement*
Cabezon - Period 1, January-February: 2,000 pounds - Period 2, March-April: 2,000 pounds - Period 3, May-June: 1,500 pounds - Period 4, July-August: 500 pounds - Period 5, September-October: 500 pounds per period and 15 pounds per day – this implements a daily trip limit effective 10/5. - Period 6, November-December: 15 pounds per day and 45 pounds per period - this implements a daily trip limit and reduces this bi-monthly trip limit by 455 pounds
*Fixed gear vessels without a limited entry Black and Blue Rockfish permit may retain only 15 pounds of nearshore species per day. See the back side for the nearshore species list.
Complete current Oregon Administrative Rules can be found at www.dfw.state.or.us/OARs. Click COMMERCIAL FISHERIES OTHER THAN SALMON OR SHELLFISH for OAR 635-004-0270 through 635-004-0365. For more information contact: Newport Marine Resources Program (MRP) office (541) 867-0300 Brett Rodomsky ext. 291 or Troy Buell ext. 225