Cooperative and Citizen Science on Puget Sound Rockfish

Working with the recreational fishing and SCUBA diving communities to collect data and measure recovery of endangered and threatened rockfish species in Puget Sound.

West Coast

Cooperative Research With the Recreational Fishing Community

Figure 1 shows captain Jay Field with a large adult yelloweye rockfish collected during sampling for genetics research. — Figure 1. Captain Jay Field with a large adult yelloweye rockfish.

The listing of three rockfish species (Sebastes spp.) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2010 motivated the development of a cooperative research program between government agencies and the local recreational fishing and SCUBA diving communities of Puget Sound, WA.

This program examines rockfish life history characteristics, movement behavior, young-of-year recruitment, and the population responses to fishing in Puget Sound. The recreational fishing community's involvement provided valuable information about the three ESA-listed rockfish populations in Puget Sound (Fig. 1). They helped us determine if these species were genetically discrete from populations outside Puget Sound. There was considerable uncertainty about this question during the original ESA listing process due to limited data on these three species in Puget Sound.

We used the fishing community's knowledge and expert angling skills to locate these rare species and non-lethally collect tissue samples for genetic analyses. Without this collaboration (Andrews et al. 2019), sampling and collecting sufficient samples would have taken much longer and likely would have been constrained to fewer locations, particularly for yelloweye rockfish (Fig. 2).

Figure 2 show the number of ESA-listed rockfish collected at sites recommended by the local recreational fishing or scientific research communities (Andrews et al. 2019). This shows that we were able to collect twice as many bocaccio and slightly more canary rockfish at sites recommended by the scientific research community, while we were able to collect almost four times as many yelloweye rockfish at sites recommended by the recreational fishing community. — Figure 2. Number of ESA-listed rockfish collected at sites recommended by the local recreational fishing or scientific research communities (Andrews et al. 2019).

These cooperative efforts showed that yelloweye rockfish in Puget Sound were genetically different from outer coast individuals. Still, the northern boundary of the population was different than previously assumed (Fig. 3). In contrast, we found canary rockfish was genetically similar across Puget Sound and the outer coast.

Figure 6 shows a map of the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin distinct population segment for each of three ESA-listed rockfish species in the original 2010 listing which extends around all of Puget Sound and the San Juan Islands with a western boundary at the Victoria sill located at the eastern edge of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and extend into British Columbia waters to the north about half way along the coast of Vancouver Island. The map also shows the expansion of the northern boundary that occurred in 2017 fu — Figure 3. Map of the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin distinct population segment for each of three ESA-listed rockfish species in the original 2010 listing (solid line) and in the 2017 update for yelloweye rockfish (dashed line) and regions sampled (line breaks) during various research efforts (Andrews et al. 2019).

Federal managers used these results to expand the ESA-listed boundaries of yelloweye rockfish and delist canary rockfish – the first delisting of a marine fish species from the ESA. The knowledge and angling expertise of the Puget Sound recreational fishing community was directly responsible for the successful collection of data to test hypotheses that resulted in very specific management decisions.

Benefits of Fishing Together

Figure 4 shows estimated trajectories of North Puget Sound and Puget Sound Proper rockfish population abundance from 1977 to 2014. The North Puget Sound trajectory varies more than Puget Sound Proper, but overall, both regions show an approximate decline in abundance of about 3% per year and approximately 70% over the entire time period. — Figure 4. Declines in total rockfish in Puget Sound in North Puget Sound (black line) and Puget Sound Proper (red line) from 1977 to 2014 (Drake et al. 2010; Tolimieri et al. 2017).

One of the benefits of working on a small boat is listening to other people on board and being heard by those same individuals. Anglers and scientists alike love to tell stories, and that was no different during the collaborative fishing trips between NOAA biologists and Puget Sound's recreational fishing community. In addition to the local knowledge that the fishing community brought to our research, we shared stories about what fish and fishing mean to each other.

Figure 5 shows a recreational angler holding a 46-cm Yelloweye rockfish collected in Hood Canal, WA. — Figure 5. Recreational angler with a 46-cm Yelloweye rockfish collected in Hood Canal, WA.

We collaborated on research fishing projects with nine captains from the Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca. Most of the captains in Puget Sound had shifted to chartering fishing trips for salmon almost exclusively. This shift in effort was due to reduced rockfish levels in Puget Sound (Fig. 4) and the subsequent regulations limiting the number and species of rockfish they could target (Williams et al. 2010).

However, the anglers told us the chance to fish for rockfish was a "challenge" and a joy to "put the puzzle together, looking for certain structure and depths, a certain period in the tide." Another captain explained that he liked to fish for rockfish because "they taste really good. I'd take a rockfish over salmon any day of the week."

We asked local fishing clubs to advertise these research trips. We looked for volunteer anglers with bottom-fish fishing experience (Fig. 5). Many of the angler volunteers remember fishing for rockfish back in their youth. For example, one angler directed us to "a hole that lines up with a big rock on the shore" that he used to fish 30 years ago as a teenager. Not surprisingly, on one of the first drops of the day, we caught one of only three bocaccio that we caught during the entire research effort (Fig. 6).

While on the water together, we also spent time discussing these species' conservation and recovery. We found anglers better understood the recovery challenges faced by these long-lived, slow-to-mature species when they hear (and see) that the fish they just caught (see the size of fish in Fig. 5) has a 50% chance of being mature at the age of 19 (Fig. 7).

Figure 7 shows the age-length relationship for yelloweye rockfish with length on the y-axis and age on the x-axis. This relationship increases exponentially from approximately 280 mm and plateaus near 600 mm with ages beginning near 5 years old and attaining 50 to 60 years old near the plateau. Also highlighted is the average size-at-age for 50% maturity which occurs at approximately 46 cm or 19 years old and showing the upper range of longevity of Yelloweye rockfish at greater than 100 years old (reproduce — Figure 7. Age-length relationship for yelloweye rockfish showing the average size-at-age for 50% maturity and upper range of longevity (reproduced from A.H. Andrews et al. 2002).

Figure 8 is a two-panel figure that shows one Yelloweye Rockfish with ‘pop-eyes’ and a second Yelloweye Rockfish with its esophagus extruding from its mouth due to barotrauma. — Figure 8. Yelloweye rockfish with (left) ‘pop-eyes’ and (right) esophagus extruding from its mouth due to barotrauma.

Another example of the recreational fishing community's conservation efforts involves the bycatch of rockfish in other popular fisheries, such as lingcod or halibut. Rockfish have a gas-filled swim bladder that they use to control their buoyancy in the water column. When an angler reels up a rockfish from depth, the swim bladder's gas expands 'like a balloon' and causes their internal organs to be pushed around, damaged, and sometimes extruded from the fish's mouth (Fig. 8).

These maladies are known as barotrauma and are similar to the 'bends' that a SCUBA diver might experience when they rise to the surface too quickly. When fish experiencing barotrauma are released back to the water, many cannot overcome the extra buoyancy. They cannot swim back down to the bottom under their own power and end up dying.

During our research fishing trips, we used a descending device to return rockfish to their original depth. Doing so compresses their internal gases enough, enabling them to swim back to the bottom under their own power.

Figure 9 shows a descending device and a screen shot from a depth plotter that shows a weighted fishing rod line with a rockfish attached to the line descending to the seafloor bottom and shows the fish releasing at approximately 90 feet of depth and the fish swimming the rest of the way to the bottom. — Figure 9. Descending device and depth plotter showing fishing weight and released fish descending and then 'popping' off at depth and swimming to the bottom.

The device we used clamps onto the fish's lower lip and is attached to a fishing pole or downrigger with a heavy weight. The fish is lowered to the depth of capture. The device 'pops' open and releases the fish (Fig. 9). These devices were a hit with our volunteer anglers and captains. There are several versions of descending devices. Some local fishing clubs have received NOAA grants to purchase and distribute them at boat docks and meetings.

These one-on-one interactions with stakeholders have provided a two-way path of information among state and federal agencies. They have allowed for candid discussions about the successful management and conservation of these ESA-listed species in the Puget Sound region.