Schroeder and Love.: Recreational Fishing and Marine Fish Populations

We present and review information regarding recreational angling and exploited marine fish populations in California. A comparison of rockfish assemblages among three differently fished areas (one open to all fishing, another open only to recreational fishing, and a de facto marine protected area) revealed large differences in fish density, size structure, and species composition. The area open to all fishing harbored the highest density of rockfishes (7,212 fish/ha), although the size structure and species composition were dominated by small fishes. The area open only to recreational fishing had the lowest rockfish density (423 fish/ha) and a size structure also dominated by small fishes. The de facto protected area possessed high fish density (5,635 fish/ha), but here the size structure and species composition shifted toward larger fishes compared with the two fished areas. Two species federally listed as overfished, cowcod and bocaccio, had 32-fold and 408-fold higher densities, respectively, in the de facto reserve than observed inside the recreational fishing area, and 8-fold and 18-fold higher densities, respectively, than observed in the area open to all fishing. For 17 nearshore fish species, we compared landings by recreational anglers and commercial harvesters and found that, for 16 species, recreational angling was the primary source of fishing mortality. We illustrate the potential damaging effects of mortality associated with catch-and-release programs on long-lived fish populations. Based on this information, we recommend that legislators and natural resource managers reject the assumption that recreational fishing is a low or no impact activity until specific studies can demonstrate otherwise. INTRODUCTION The history of fisheries management on the West Coast of the United States records a steady allocation battle between recreational and commercial fishers (e.g., Clark and Croker 1933). This battle recently intensified with the formation of federal and state policies giving marine protected areas (MPAs) a leading role in managing and rebuilding fisheries. Since the extent of protection provided by MPAs varies greatly and often generates semantic confusion, we use the term MPA in this report to mean areas of “no take,” that is, where all extraction activities are prohibited. One response to the increasing popularity of federal and state MPA policies is the proposed Freedom to Fish Act. This act would critically modify the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act by allowing areas to be closed to recreational fishing only when there is clear demonstration that recreational anglers contribute to overfishing and all other management options, such as seasonal closures and bag and size limits, have been exhausted. Implicit in this type of legislation are the assumptions that overfishing is caused primarily by commercial harvesting and that recreational fishing does not interfere with other common goals of spatial closures, including (1) creating sustainable fisheries, (2) protecting essential fish habitat, (3) protecting marine ecosystem structure (biodiversity, trophic structure), (4) establishing scientific control areas necessary to distinguish between changes in marine populations caused by anthropogenic or natural sources, (5) creating marine wilderness areas, and (6) enhancing enjoyment of nonconsumptive activities, including educational activities. A null hypothesis of no impact to marine populations and habitats from recreational fishing places a logistical and legal hardship on resource managers and consequently must undergo careful examination before any agency endorsement. The dynamics of fish populations and fisheries are complex, and predicting the dynamics of complex systems usually contains a measure of scientific uncertainty. Fisheries management decisions must therefore allocate risk, with allocations often reflecting various social values (Ludwig et al. 1993). By seeking to maximize fishery yields, traditional fisheries management places most of this risk burden onto fish populations (Dayton 1998). Such a tendency has been injudicious because (1) fisheries can be overexploited before managers and scientists have sufficient data to indisputably document declining population trends, and (2) overexploited fisheries rarely recover after collapse (Hutchings 2000). In contrast to the history of commercial fisheries, there is little information on the need for management or its effectiveness in recreational fisheries. Thus, it is unclear