Squid Fishing in California

The Author makes a good point about the MSY not taking into account the Big Picture. The California Fish and Game has been as worthless as teats on a Boar concerning Ocean Management of our Fish Stocks.

I looked at the California Fisheries Atlas but it really lacks historical perspective.

Back in 1970 when the Abalone Industry was dying, the little 24’ Ab boats took to diving for Sea Urchin. These same boats would max out their hold with sea urchin and head home, if memory serves about 8,000lbs. Many overloaded 24’ former Ab boats capsized in the ever-changing waters of the Santa Barbra Channel. Divers were pulling in 80-100K+ per year and without any regulation of the catch by the CFG. Soon 44’ Down-East Lobster Boats were being trucked across the United States into California. Large profits allowed these boats to be paid for in cash. 44’ Lobster Boats allowed multiple divers to dive off one boat and over-harvest a location. Thus the Boom-Bust cycle began again; Sea Urchins today are a drop in the bucket compared to the 1970’s harvests.

Early 1990’s were the same for Squid. Light Boats came down from as far as Washington State. The net reels came off and large land based generators were dropped on deck, of 31-36 boats, along with large lights to pull the squid to the surface so the Seiners could net them. The Light Boats looked for the squid and called the Seiners in for the catch.

Large fleets of Light Boats worked between Point Dume and Mugu Rock and up the coast towards Santa Barbara.

Squid harvest has dropped today, just by the observation of how many Light Boats now work the area, it is a fraction of its former early 1990’s self.

Swordfish in 1970 would swim across the Pacific and dine on the rich squid off of Anacapa Island. These fish averaged 500lbs in weight and fetched $2.00 a pound at market. Each fish was worth $1,000.00. The fish would gorge on deep squid and then come to the surface to sleep and sun. The CFG allowed spotter Aircraft to be used in the fishery, to spot and call in a Plank Boat to harpoon the fish while it slept on the surface; many boats pulled 10 to 15 fish a day, you do the math. Coupled with the long lining of Swordfish in the 1980’s early 1990’s between Hawaii and the Mainland, the Anacapa Island Swordfish fishery is no longer.

The Story goes on and on. The California Fish and Game that has consumed $100’s of millions of Taxpayer Dollars over the last 50 years, if not billions. CFG has batted ZERO on the sustainability of any Fishery. I have to ask why do we even bother funding the bumbling Bureaucracy.

One of the reasons urchins were plentiful in the first place, as with abalone, was the eradication of their primary predator a hundred years earlier - the sea otter. Once the sea otter came back into the picture, populations of urchins and abalone began to return to pre-extinction levels, and harvesting was part of this, as well. So the question of sustainability is influenced by what was 'natural' in the first place.
On the matter of squid, Mr. McGinnis once again shows his lack of scientific credentials, more anxious, as usual, to criticize those (like DFG) who have labored to understand and manage the fishery for squid. The truth is that the state and federal resource agencies charged with fishery management have been working for a couple of decades to gather relevant data to prevent over-harvesting of this invertebrate species (not a "fish" as Mr. McGinnis refers to it). One of the difficulties of managing such a species is its short life span, about a year in length. As a NOAA website states, "Market squid is a fast-growing species with a short natural life span - they reproduce right before they die, around the age of one. Even without fishing, the entire population can replace itself annually. As a result, market squid populations can handle a relatively high amount of fishing pressure."
(http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/fishwatch/sp...)
And, the truth is, market squid HAS handled relatively high amounts of fishing, with 2009 landings of around 200,000,000 pounds.
Are there unanswered questions about the ecological impact on other species by the squid fishery due to human hunger for seafood? Most probably. The same can be said for any fishery. Should we be concerned about this? Definitely. But critics like McGinnis, unschooled in either biology or fishery management, don't advance an intelligent conversation.

And as to DFG 'wasting 100's of millions of tax dollars'? - as stated by 'howgreenwasmyvalley' - that's a real laugh. DFG has been largely funded over its history by revenues from hunters and fishers, both sport and commercial, not general fund revenues. Yes, that has begun to change over the past decade or so, but it would be nice if critics weren't so blinded by their bias to agencies like DFG that they're not interested in facts. Is fishery management difficult and expensive? Yep. Has DFG ever been funded adequately to protect the people's resources? Not even close. But the professionals there have done, and continue to do, the best they can do under the constraints and limitations placed on them. Perhaps Mr. McGinnis can start there if he wants to do readers a service.

Drove down the coast last night... counted at least 8 squid boats right off the coast- literally- from El Cap.

Can you take a reporter seriously when he doesn't even know the true definition of the word "fisher"?

Webster's New World Dictionary: Fisher n 1. the largest marten, have very dark fur 2. this fur

How can one take seriously someone who cannot use a dictionary (on line, at the click of a mouse button)

Merriam-Webster
Definition of FISHER
1: one that fishes
2 a : a dark brown North American carnivorous mammal (Martes pennanti) of the weasel family
b : the fur or pelt of this animal

Merriam-Webster/Thesaurus
Fisher noun
someone who catches fish
Synonyms fisher
Related Words fisherfolk, fisherwoman; angler, fly fisherman, giller, surf caster, trawler, trawlerman, troller; waterman

There is more - use google.

Pagurus,

Gee Squid Fishing is just fine. Why then are not the Light Boats coming down from Oregon and Washington like they did in 1990? Observation - less catch and no one is willing to pay for the Light Boats to sit Idle. The economics have changed with less catch.

Looked at the cost of a Salt Water Fishing License lately? I thought purchasers of Fishing Licenses qualified as Tax Payers.

Who paid for the fleet of CFG Catamaran Patrol Boats, Tax Payers?

Just in my Life Time, local to the Santa Barbara Channel, the following species have been wiped out, abalone, dinner plate sized rock scallops, blue shark, mako spark, thresher shark, black sea bass, swordfish, bull sheepshead, red rockfish, cabazone, lingcod, pacific salmon, bonita, barracuda, etc.

Sorry Fail is simply that Fail. I have nothing against the CFG, it has just not been effective, a fishery stops only after it BUSTS, not a good way to manage sustainability.

Seems like MVM's point is we are working our way down the food chain which seem correct. I think a 500 lb swordfish has a much longer lifespan than a year, so they get over here from their journey and there aren't any squid? Just a matter of time before they are gone. It all seems very interconnected. I wonder if these new MPA's will actually do anything to remedy the situation? None of this has ever been undertaken before, so there will be a learning curve, and it might be expensive. But hey, you got to start somewhere! It seems the sea is very resilient if we just leave well enough alone. Hey I like to go fishing and use squid as bait at times. Some fish don't show up unless it is very warm, and it has been cold now for awhile, but the other points about rock fish and the dwindling numbers are very true.

maybeso, I think 8 may be low and they've been in that same area for a month or more. I'm really concerned about what they are doing to that concentrated area, what the bycatch is, and how many (if any) squid will be left to be part of the local food chain?

If the catch is being exported and feeding some overseas country, then it seems they are possibly raping our local waters without concern (probably zero knowledge of the impact). Scary!

Facts are stubborn things; always good to check 'em before publishing. After reading the squid piece, I went factfinding. Here's facts...impartial, objective scientific study, not newspaper articles. Different than the squid article.
Fact 1: (re: hi-vol. low value fisheries replace low-vol. hi-value fisheries) "Fishing down the food chain" rhetoric common in today's lay journals has been discredited in the scientific literature; average trophic level in world fisheries has increased, not decreased; larger fish are not necessarily more valuable than smaller; large-fish fisheries didn't precede others (remember sardines?), and they aren't more prone to collapse. Google: Branch, T. et al. 2010. The trophic fingerprint of marine fisheries; Sethi, S. et al. 2010. Global fishery development patterns are driven by profit but not trophic level; Pinsky, M. et al. 2011. Unexpected patterns of fisheries collapse in the world's oceans.There are more like these.

Fact 2: (re: declining landings of finfish and shellfish). Contrary to the article, declines in CA landings have been due almost exclusively to catch-restricting regulations, as objective review of fish stock assessments by the Pac. Fisheries Mgmt Council shows. Such review is in press by Hilborn, R. et al, and appears soon in the journal Conservation Biology. It supports three findings: 1) bottom fish abundance today is roughly the same as in the '80's when landings peaked; 2) total annual bottomfish production never declined during this period, i.e., the ecosystem, not individual stocks, was never overfished; and 3) even in fish stocks deemed overfished, annual surplus production didn't decline during these years.

Preliminary study of the carbon footprint of prominent fisheries indicates that squid seining has one of the lowest carbon footprints. And seining for pelagics takes less energy than other forms of food production, notably land-based agriculture. For relative costs of various food production modes, Google: Pelletier, N. et al. 2011. Energy Intensity of Agriculture and Food Systems. Holistic, critical thinking is required to see the big picture.

A couple of other facts selectively unmentioned by the article:
Fact 3: DFG declared the squid fishing season over as of Friday, 11/18 at noon, due to an abundance of squid, reaching quota earlier in the season than usual.
Fact 4: The DFG squid management plan (read it!) accounts for ecosystem services of squid as food for fish, seabirds and marine mammals when quota-setting. The zealous concern for "protecting the ocean" is actually shared by the management agency.

So, summing up: facts are stubborn things, and it would be well for folk who like to "educate the public" on ocean resource management to check a few prior to hitting the "send" button. And remember: support local fisheries!

Link to the CA DFG site of statistics, the first glaring problem is the total lack of information from the 1970's and seeming good data from the 1980's and then poor data again. Our Government at work. TOTAL DISGRACE

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/stati...

I would like to see data from the 1970's on Swordfish.

1980 410 Swordfish permits - 1989 88 Swordfish permits

Then the Swordfish Permits get skewed with gill nets and sharks.

Squid, only very recent data (2005) and nothing from 1990's, so "oblio" how would the DFG know if they cannot compare the trend line of the last 20 years?

Talk About Junk Science.

Perfect Example why a Fishery goes BUST, the People entrusted with the management of the Fishery don't have a clue, they are just guessing and they have always guessed wrong.