Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

Statistical analysis seems straight forward. Ask some questions and measure the results. But that’s not quite how it works. There are a lot of things that can skew the results and make what seemed like a straight forward outcome incorrect in terms of the desired information.

This problem is playing out for recreational fishing as this is being written. Going back a number of years, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) was tasked with analyzing the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistical Survey (MRFSS) to see if the results produced could be used for managing recreational fisheries. The results of that study indicated that NOAA Fisheries had to go back to the drawing board and come up with a much better way to collect recreational fishing data, if it was going to be used in the fisheries management process. Unfortunately, some simply tried to use this as an excuse to blame NOAA Fisheries for any restrictive fishing regulations. The truth was that MRFSS was never designed for fisheries management, but due to a lack of other data it had become a sort of proxy for just that. The NAS emphatically said “No!”

NOAA Fisheries was tasked with developing a new program to get the needed recreational catch data, because recreational fishing had become a substantial impact on a number of important fisheries. Tearing apart MRFSS and rebuilding it into a useful tool took a lot longer than initially anticipated. From the layman’s standpoint, the main problem is that there are a lot of us who like to go out fishing. We do it from private boats, from charter and party boats, and from shore. There is no centralized point where the needed information can be collected, unlike the commercial industry where catch gets unloaded at dealers who have stringent reporting requirements. Yes, that system has faults and uncounted catch, but in general that data is pretty darn good.

The Marine Recreational Information Program

The outcome of the new NOAA Fisheries effort was the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). As MRIP was being built, most of the coastal states had implemented some form of saltwater fishing license. This was and is an important piece of this new process.

There are basically two major pieces to the puzzle, which admittedly is an over simplification. It is necessary to understand which fish are caught and how many of each species are caught and/or kept.

Under the old MRFSS system effort, or how many trips anglers took, was measured through a random telephone survey to coastal zip codes. That is, a survey company was employed to ring random households along the coast and inquire as to their saltwater fishing activity. Their answers were recorded, and NOAA could extrapolate the number of anglers using statistical analysis. This was extremely inefficient. With the list of license holders, that random survey could be a lot more focused with a mailed fishing effort survey (FES).

The second part is determining what species are caught and kept. This is done via port samplers who do in-personal interviews at piers, marinas, and the like to determine catch composition. Then the two parts are brought together to calculate the total catch. Is this system perfect, NO! But it does give a very good indication of what the recreational catch is and is far better than MRFSS.

An Overestimation of Angler Effort

So, what’s happening? To me the good news is that there is still an ongoing effort to fine tune the results of the MRIPs data, and it has discovered some flaws. How the questions in the mailed FES survey are asked seem to have caused some folks to “telescope” some responses. That is, when the anglers were asked how many trips that they took in a specified timeframe, they tended to include trips from the time mentioned in the inquiry as well as a period extending past the intended start and end dates. So the responses are biased, showing more angler effort than is actually occurring. While some of this can be explained by over enthusiasm, some is also inadvertent. The statistical experts are working own how the questions are asked to minimize this reporting bias. That’s a plus.

Continued investigation has determined that fishing effort has been over estimated by 35 to 40 percent. So what? Well the problem comes when the effort and the catch composition is put together. The increased effort over estimates the amount of fish being removed. Well, that should be a plus because one might think more fish are left out there.

The trouble comes from how that catch information is used in the stock assessment. Essentially, the stock numbers are “backed into.” The “catchability” of the fish, or how many are caught per unit of angler effort, is assumed to be constant. So if more fish are caught, that should mean more fish out there. When the assumed number of fish caught/kept has been over inflated, it incorrectly over estimates the whole population. So once the numbers are corrected and put into the assessment, there will likely be fewer fish estimated in the stock. That could mean that some restrictive measures will need to be put in place, however each stock will need to be looked at individually.

Hopeful for the Future

I continue to believe that this ongoing analysis is a plus. It recognizes that recreational fishing is an important part of the management system and an economic benefit to the country. Its impact on resources needs to be properly managed and that is what will keep this important community and industry viable into the future. We’ll be watching the outcome.

The post You Don’t Fish As Often As You Think appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

You’ve brought a nice fish to hand, and you want a photo to preserve the memory and brag on social media. How much time do you have to admire the fish before letting it go?

If you said, “10 seconds,” your information is correct. And the source of that information may well be Andy Danylchuk, Ph.D., one of the most prominent advocates for fish and their habitats in recent years. A self-described hardcore angler, Danylchuk is the science advisor to Keep Fish Wet, an organization dedicated to proper catch and release.

Danylchuk’s a busy scientist who, among other things, helped figured out where bonefish spawn while working with the Bonefish & Tarpon Trust in the 2000s. He’s also studied Atlantic tarpon, giant trevally in the Seychelles, golden dorado in South America, steelhead in the Pacific northwest, and sea-run brook trout in New England. He taught himself to fly fish and caught his first fish on a fly rod, a bonefish, on a fly he tied himself. He has had the good sense to live in the Turks and Caicos and the Bahamas, but today lives in Massachusetts, where he is a professor of fish conservation at UMass Amherst.

Danylchuk is on a “personal crusade” to get anglers to release their fish carefully and promptly to assure their survival after being returned to the water. He is also concerned with protecting aquatic ecosystems, having grown up near the Great Lakes at a time when each angler got “the equivalent of a small phone book” full of warnings about which pollutants were found in which fish.

“I loved fish and fishing so much, and I saw so many other people also loving to fish. They express how it has changed, and it keeps them out of trouble, like it did for me,” he said. “But I also saw the impacts of human activity on fish and aquatic environments.”

A Lifelong Angler

Born in Toronto, Canada, Danylchuk traces his fascination with the underwater world to a family trip to Andros, Bahamas, in 1973. “I remember walking along on the beach, and my dad putting a mask on my face and shoving me in the water, and what I saw was incredible,” he said. The experience “instilled in me an awe of nature and the aquatic environment.”

The first actual tug from a fish came a few years later, on a relative’s trout pond north of home, using a hand-me-down rod with the reel held on by rubber bands. “I was pretty naïve about how strong and powerful trout can be. I hooked a trout, and it just ripped the reel off the rod. That really started me on the path.” He hand-lined the fish. In his teens, he and his best friend, then and now, had chances to fish for bass and pike in lakes north of Toronto, and snook, redfish, and sea trout in Captiva Island, Florida.

Despite “good grades in bio and art and terrible grades in everything else,” Danylchuk was admitted to Trent University, where he turned in an honors thesis about marine fishes in Jamaica. Grad school took him back to Trent University for his masters and then to the University of Alberta in Edmonton, where he earned a doctorate and studied the impact of forestry on fish populations.

While in northern Alberta, where it was “cold and dark and nasty, remembering wonderful days when I was 5 with my head in the water in the Bahamas,” he learned of a position at The School for Field Studies in South Caicos, where he took up fly fishing after watching a friend catch a 7-pound bonefish in calf-deep water.

“I took my angler hat off and put my scientist hat on, and wondered, ‘How much do we really know about bonefish?’” he said. Only a few years later, he helped launch the Cape Eleuthera Institute in the Bahamas, and set to work studying bonefish reproduction and how they respond to being caught and released. Patagonia and Bonefish & Tarpon Trust contributed funding.

Danylchuk’s “geographical range expanded” in 2009 when he joined the faculty at UMass Amherst. “Everything I learned along the way in terms of science and education and outreach, I could apply now to many other places around the world,” he said.

The professor makes a point of translating what he and his students and collaborators learn into information anglers can use. Keep Fish Wet is the obvious example. Barbless hooks, rubber nets, awareness of water temperatures and spawning status, limiting lip grippers and boosting hook removers, and judicious picture-taking–all can make it more likely your fish survives and thrives. And with something like 47 billion fish caught worldwide (an old estimate) and more than half of them released, best practices can have a huge impact.

“What I see when I go fishing for striped bass is a large number of fish being caught and released, and a lot of those striped bass spending a lot of time on the bottom of the boat, being held up in the air for long periods of time, and being dragged across the gunnels. And if we really care about the future of striped bass, that’s got to change,” he said. “Each angler has the chance to practice conservation with each fish they release.”

(Striped bass is an especially good example. A post-covid surge in fishing, combined with the arrival of the huge 2015 class of stripers and ample bait, to create an astonishing catch rate in 2022. An emergency 28- to 31-inch slot limit was imposed in response, which means an awful lot of stripers are being released.)

A Skilled Communicator

Aaron Adams, executive director of Bonefish & Tarpon Trust, called working with Danylchuk “enjoyable and rewarding,” and credited him with influencing anglers to handle their fish with care.

“Andy is one of the rare colleagues who is not only a good scientist, but is good at communicating science in layman’s terms, which is an essential part of conservation science,” Adams said.

But while he has dedicated a big chunk of his career to promoting best C&R practices, Danylchuk doesn’t want to scold.

“Anglers don’t like to be told what to do,” he said. “They like to be shown, or they like to learn. As an angler I can understand that too: I don’t want be told what to do, I want to experience it myself. It’s a personal evolution as an angler to learn about these best practices.” If things go poorly with one fish, “What am I going to do differently for the next fish? Instead of taking a hard line, how about we work as partners and we’ll demonstrate the best ways fish can be handled and released?”

The post The Catch and Release Professor: Andy Danylchuk appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

Florida is hot in the summer months, but somehow beaches always provided a dependable respite from the cooker, especially on the Atlantic Coast. Going forward, gamefish in the shallow waters of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary might have to find their own summer refuge.

On July 24, a temperature sensor in Manatee Bay, northwest of Key Largo, measured a reading of 101.1 degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, the days of July 23 – 25 all saw water temperatures reach nearly 100 F. The station, monitored and maintained by the National Park Service, is located at the northeast corner of Barnes Sound, east of U.S. 1.

“This data was consistent with high water temps seen across Florida Bay,” said Allyson Gantt, chief of communications and public affairs for Everglades and Dry Tortugas National Parks. “It was a few degrees higher than water temperatures at nearby stations, so we had no reason to doubt the measurement.”

High Temperatures Harm Plant Life

High temperatures over long periods of time have had a detrimental impact on marine plants, corals and animals. “High heat for long periods of time, combined with high salinities, can cause seagrass die-offs which can lead to algal blooms and fish kills,” said Gantt. “For those fishing, high temperatures are not the best conditions. Much like humans when we are too hot, fish don’t eat much.”

The scorching temperature was not a record for this station, Gantt confirmed. The highest temperature recorded hit 102 F on August 15, 2017, with data available back to October 2004. During that same period in late July, Florida Keys corals also took a major blow from the scorching water temperatures.

“On July 20, teams visited Sombrero Reef, a restoration site we’ve been working at for over a decade. What we found was unimaginable — 100% coral mortality,” said Dr. Phanor Montoya-Maya, restoration program manager at Coral Restoration Foundation. “We also lost almost all the corals in the Looe Key Nursery in the Lower Keys.”

According to some estimates, Keys’ waters have lost up to 90% of their coral over the last 50 years. The foundation had to scramble to save other corals in the Upper Keys, rescuing as many corals as they could from nurseries and relocating key genotypes to land-based holding systems, safeguarding coral broodstock, said Montoya-Maya.

“This is not a partisan issue; everyone will be affected,” stressed Dr. R. Scott Winters, CEO of Coral Restoration Foundation. “Hopefully, the dire situation we face will catalyze broader awareness and stimulate aggressive action to address climate change, triggering greater investment in the restoration and conservation of our planet’s life.”

Editor’s Note: At the time of this writing, the late July period was the hottest recorded water temperatures of the year in Florida.

The post Florida’s Sweltering Summer appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

Slot limits are a fact of life for anglers in coastal states around the country, with one glaring exception. Federal and state fisheries management agencies widely use this regulatory fishery management tool to protect fish of certain sizes identified as most important to the spawning success of their species. Slot limits are designed primarily to protect smaller fish so that they can mature to become sexually reproductive and larger fish that are already the most productive. One such success story exists in Florida, where the application of a slot limit placed on red drum caused them to rebound past stated goals.

California’s Regulations

Yet there is one state in which slot limits do not exist–California. The only exception is for white sturgeon but there are no state slot regulations for popular species such as calico bass, California halibut, white sea bass, California yellowtail, lingcod or rockfish. Why not?

I put this question to John Ugoretz, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Environmental Program Manager with the Pelagic Fisheries and Ecosystem Program, who pointed to several reasons..

CDFW manages California’s marine fisheries based on specific biomass estimates determined through stock assessments, Ugoretz says. Those assessments show that reductions in bag limits are more effective at maintaining fishery mortality rates. “Slot limits provide some reduction in total ‘take,’” Ugoretz explains., “But it’s often not enough to allow for healthy fisheries.”

For example, California has one recreationally prized croaker—the white seabass—which is similar in biology to black drum, which are regulated in other states through slot limits. However, in California, the white sea bass is managed based on a stock assessment and optimum yield. White seabass stock status and management is reviewed annually to ensure continued sustainability.

Deep Water Fisheries

Another reason California doesn’t use slots is that many of its species live in deeper water, which is closer to shore in the state than in most other U.S. waters. Rockfishes, for example, suffer significant release mortality when their gas bladders expand. Descending devices can be used to release fish, but these devices are not always used properly, leaving release mortality a critical concern for the species. Ugoretz says that in cases where a fish’s biology plays a role in release mortality, the CDFW believes it is better that anglers keep the fish they catch until they reach the daily bag limit, rather than keeping some fish and releasing others that have a strong chance of dying after being released.

TIP: When fishing for deepwater species, if you have taken your bag limit in one location and continue to catch the same species in that spot, move to another spot and target a different species. This reduces the need to release fish beyond your bag limit that may have a poor chance of survival.

Pelagic Species

When it comes to pelagic species in California waters ( tunas, yellowtail), the CDFW eschews slots so that more anglers can bring trophy sized fish back to the dock. Commercial passenger fishing vessels (CPFVs or party boats) often keep anglers excited and engaged with the possibilities of jackpots for whoever catches the largest fish of the day. An end-of-the-day party boat weigh-in is an exciting part of the day’s trip—and a great way for captains to show off their catches at the wharf. Slot limits could prohibit such activities, and Ugoretz says the CDFW prefers not to limit things that support local economies and keep anglers invested in the sport.

Of course, the CDFW has considered recommendations for marine fish slot limits in California in the past. In fact, for a very brief time slot limits were implemented for lingcod. In that case, Ugoretz says, slots created far too many enforcement problems and accidental violations, and so the policy was discontinued. In addition, research indicated that while the large female lingcod protected by the slots survived release, their eggs did not always fare as well, and so the limits were dropped.

Ultimately, the CDFW considers both science and impact on local fishing cultures and economies to determine its regulatory policies. While other coastal states’ fisheries management agencies do the same, California remains somewhat anomalous in its approach to slot limits. What’s your take on California’s approach?

The post Why Doesn’t California Use Slot Limits? appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

While commonly taken by anglers in some regions, many are unfamiliar with the John Dory (Zeus faber). But the distinctive appearance of this strange fish make it tough to confuse with other species.

There are only a few species of dories in the world, by far the most common and important species being the John Dory (and, no, I could find no credible attribution for the odd name). It’s found around the coasts of Africa, Southeast Asia, Australia and New Zealand, and areas of Europe. John Dorys are laterally compressed — in shape rather like a lookdown — with deep bodies and large heads. Generally brownish, a very large black “eye spot” at the center of each side is a unique characteristic.

Particularly striking is the mouth, at least when fully extended. Then one realizes how huge it is — an oversized, long protrusible tube. That allows it to fin slowly near a fish and vacuum it in, as seen this video — but don’t blink at the wrong times or you’ll miss the moves.

Its super-narrow profile bring its eyes close enough together to give the John Dory the binocular vision that many fish (with broader heads) lack, allowing it to track and judge distance to prey just in front of it.

John Dory can be found from 15 or 20 feet out to several hundred, and while they do hang out at times over smooth bottoms, they tend to prefer the structure of reefs and rocky areas. Here, anglers can target them with small live baits or soft plastics. Just avoid rearing back to set hooks (if not using circle hooks) since their soft mouths tear rather easily.

Why do anglers target these fish? Simply, they’re prized as topnotch table fare. They’re important commercially in areas, as well. A good one is a few pounds; the IGFA all-tackle world record stands at 9 pounds, 1 ounce, from Mercury Bay, New Zealand, in 2016.

The post Fish Facts: A Hoover Vacuum With Fins appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

Three non-profit major marine conservation organizations are now urging the California Fish and Game Commission to find alternative commercial fishing methods to replace set gillnets in waters off the state’s southern coast. Lending impetus to this issue is a report just released by Oceana and Turtle Island Restoration Network (TIRN) finding that the commercial set gillnet fishery targeting California halibut and white seabass off Southern California is threatening the health and diversity of the ocean ecosystem. The topic is set for consideration by Commission’s Marine Resources Committee (MRC) meeting on July 20, 2023.

“The set gillnet fishery targeting California halibut and white seabass is clearly a risk to the health and resilience of California’s oceans,” said Caitlynn Birch, Pacific marine scientist with Oceana, which is based in Monterey, California. “These nets injure and kill a myriad of ocean animals, including rare and vulnerable species. Despite a history of wildlife impacts and action by California voters, the fishery remains largely unmonitored as these nets continue to hurt wildlife off Southern California.”

64 Percent Bycatch

This fishery throws overboard 64 percent of the animals caught, which is among the highest bycatch rates of any fishery in the country, according to the report. These nets set along the ocean floor can be as long as a mile, and they indiscriminately catch more than 125 different species of ocean animals, including marine mammals, seabirds, sharks, rays, skates, and other fish that migrate, feed, and reproduce in the ocean waters off Southern California, the report states. It goes on to say that more than half of the animals thrown overboard are already dead or dying when they hit the water — raising significant concerns over the fishery’s impact on marine biodiversity.

“We are asking the state of California to walk the talk regarding being a global leader in the biodiversity crisis,” said Scott Webb, advocacy and policy director with TIRN based in Olema, California. “As climate change continues to create a harsher environment for many of these vulnerable marine species, specifically sharks and whales, stronger protections are needed.”

Alternate Gear

The Coastal Conservation Association of California (CCA Cal) is also asking the California Fish and Game Commission to consider alternatives to set gillnets used by commercial fishermen. “California halibut and white sea bass can be targeted with more selective gear, including hook-and-line gear, greatly reducing bycatch and eliminating harm to marine mammals and sea turtles, as well as non-target fish species,” said Mark Smith, lobbyist for CCA Cal, in recent public testimony before the Commission asking for elimination of set gill nets in all waters off the coast of California.

Read Next: Biden Bans Swordfish Drift Gillnets in US

Chance to Speak Out

The next opportunity for the public to speak out (both in person and via virtual conferencing) regarding California’s commercial set gillnet fishery will be July 20, 2023, when the Commission’s MRC will convene in Petaluma, California, to discuss a number of agenda items including evaluation of bycatch in the commercial set gillnet fishery. In addition to public comments, the MRC will hear the California Department of Fish and Wildlife evaluation of fisheries bycatch and provide the MRC with recommended next steps for developing recommendations. To learn more, visit fgc.ca.gov/Meetings/2023.

During the MRC meeting, Oceana and TIRN are expect summarize their set gillnet bycatch report, which has found that 75 percent of sharks, skates, and rays that are caught are tossed overboard; gillnets are the primary threat to juvenile great white sharks in their nursery grounds off California; California gray whales and humpback whales are susceptible to entanglement in set gillnets; set gillnet fishermen throw back as waste damaged and undersized California halibut, rock crab, sand bass, and lingcod. To download the full report, visit oceana.org/reports/the-net-consequence-impacts-of-set-gillnets-on-california-ocean-biodiversity.

Set Gillnet History

California set gillnets were originally banned in Northern California waters back in 1915. In 1990, after Southern Californian sport fishermen noticed major declines in fish populations over the previous decade, anglers, conservation organizations, and elected officials worked together to pass Proposition 132, which prohibited the use of set gillnets within state waters off Southern California (within 3 nautical miles of the coast). However, set gillnets are still being used in federal waters, offshore banks, and in certain areas around Southern California’s Channel Islands.

The post Set Gillnets in California Ocean Waters Threaten Biodiversity appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

“We jigged up this fish from around 270 feet of water,” wrote Capt. Fernando Almada (Catch 22 Fishing), based in San Carlos, Mexico, at the upper end of the Sea of Cortez. “We had been jigging up smaller fish, mostly snappers, and suddenly hooked this grouper. It fought hard at first, then became dead weight.”

Almada said they do encounter these fish, which are called baqueta locally, “but we usually see them smaller than this, often brown, not with the deep red color.”

“What species is it?” Almada asked Salt Water Sportsman.

So we consulted an expert on fishes of California and Baja, Dr. Milton Love.

He said: “That looks like a very large gulf coney (Epinephelus acanthistius), which, as you noted, are usually called baqueta in the Gulf of California and points south. ‘Acanthistius,’ by the way, means ‘sail spine’ in Greek, an apt name for that big dorsal fin.”

They’re seldom caught north of Baja, but are fairly common on both sides of the peninsula. “These are solitary, rocky reef dwellers,” Love said, which probably don’t travel over a large area. “Unfortunately, gulf coneys are very heavily fished wherever they are found and are clearly overfished in the Gulf of California.”

Almada said that they did not weigh the fish, but figured it topped 40 pounds, closer to 45. That, Capt. Alamada, means your anglers ate a likely IGFA all-tackle world record. For the gulf coney, the record stands at 32 pounds, 5 ounces, taken off Huatulco, Mexico, in October, 2012.

The post Fish Facts: A Red Grouper from the Sea of Cortez appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

The life history of most game fishes is pretty amazing. Although some species may grow to more than 1,000 pounds, all begin life as one of millions of eggs the size of a small grain of sand floating about an ocean full of tiny predators, following a full-moon spawning session. Of those millions, thousands may be fertilized, but of those thousands fewer than 100 will survive past the larval stage. 

They feed on tiny plankton, but are also fed upon by slightly larger planktonic predators. It is indeed a jungle out there in the open ocean. Growth, for the few that live, is rapid. Most larval forms of game and food fishes bear little or no resemblance initially to adults, often very different in shape and color, recognizable only to experts. They may resemble elaborate insects as much as fish.

As they grow into small juveniles, often characterized by oversized eyes, the babies begin to gradually take on more of the characteristics of larger, older fish. Few anglers ever get the chance for a close-up and personal look at game fish not much longer than a cherry tomato, so in this ongoing gallery of “microscopic monsters,” we’ll offer a rare look at a mini version of species most of us see as only adult fish.

This moray eel larva (top image) was photographed by Steven Kovacs during an open-ocean blackwater drift in the Philippines. (The little silvery “bug” is a marine isopod, a hitchhiker.) Identifying the species is a bit problematic, with 200 or so species of moray eel in the world and quite a few of those found in Philippine waters. In fact, by its looks, this larva could almost be a tarpon as well as a moray. Here’s how that works.

Morays are broadcast spawners. When the infinitesimal fraction of eggs spewed into the ocean are successfully fertilized, like many species, they float pelagically about the ocean for months as larvae. But these are unlike most fishes’ larvae; when new to the world, morays take the form known as a leptocephalus. You’re right: They look nothing like you’d expect a fish to resemble. Surprisingly, some other fishes also have very similar leptocephalus larval forms, notably tarpon and bonefishes.

These larvae take the form of long, otherworldly transparent ribbons, flattened side to side, with a ridiculously tiny head. (The length of the leptocephalus in the photo is hard to appreciate, with it coiled rather tightly.) A clear glucosamine gel compound fills their clear bodies; this gel transforms into adult tissue during metamorphosis. See how these remarkable moray leptocephali swim here.

Clearly, these larvae bear almost no resemblance to adult moray eels.

The post Microscopic Monsters of the Ocean: Moray Eel appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

On May 25, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a ruling with significant implications for countless species of fresh and saltwater fish and wildlife. The decision in Sackett v. EPA strips federal protections from wetlands that lack a “continuous surface connection” with adjacent water bodies. Out of the 118 million acres of wetlands in our country, this ruling removes protections from more than half.

Wetlands, be they mountain fens or coastal marshes, are critical and productive habitats that help the fish we love to catch survive. They filter out sediment and pollution, provide refuge for spawning fish, recharge groundwater, and help maintain water temperatures. When it rains or snows, wetlands become natural sponges, absorbing excess water and reducing flood risk. And when there’s drought, they can do the reverse and replenish depleted water supplies.

Debate: What are Waters of the United States?

The Clean Water Act is our most powerful tool for safeguarding water quality, wetlands, and riparian habitat. Passed in 1972, the Act has been wildly successful in significantly increasing the percentage of fishable and swimmable waterways. The geographic scope of federal protections is applied to “waters of the United States” — and the definition of that designation has been under debate for years.

For wetlands, the most notable distinction came in 2006 when the Supreme Court ruled that the connection between bodies of water didn’t have to be visible, but could be measured in other ways. The far more important question was whether the water had a “significant nexus” with another, already-protected body of water (for example, through groundwater connections). If yes, both bodies of water deserved protection.

Under the new Sackett ruling, it’s likely that wetlands that lack a continuous surface connection, and only have a significant nexus, to a federally protected body of water are now vulnerable.

This means construction and development projects that impact wetlands that are not within the flood plain of a flowing river or stream may no longer be required to minimize their impacts, including restoring other wetland areas or creating new ones. The negative effects, such as the loss of pollution-filtering vegetation and floodwater absorption capabilities, flow downstream.

Exactly how many square miles of wetlands will be excluded based on this decision remains to be seen; however, it’s already apparent that certain types of wetland features that provide important wildlife habitat, such as mountain fens, peatland pocosins in coastal areas, prairie potholes, and isolated, intermittent wetlands are all at immediate risk.

What’s Next for Wetlands?

The EPA and U.S Army Corps of Engineers, the two agencies responsible for implementing federal protections under the Clean Water Act, will need to interpret the Supreme Court’s decision and develop a new rule to implement these changes. This rule-making process will provide an opportunity for hunters and anglers to weigh in.

Perhaps the most straightforward solution would be for Congress to, once and for all, amend the Clean Water Act to clarify the scope of federal protections for a broader range of aquatic ecosystems. Congress could also take steps to increase funding for existing, voluntary wetland conservation programs, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wetland Reserve Easement program, which allows landowners to conserve and restore wetlands in exchange for compensation. Other federal programs, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s North American Wetlands Conservation Act Grants and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, also provide critical financial and technical support for voluntary wetland conservation.

State-Level Programs for Wetlands

Some states, including California, New York, and Minnesota, already have robust, comprehensive wetland protection programs in place, which require permits and mitigation for activities taking place in and around state waters. Many of these state-level programs were established to serve as a backstop to shifting federal laws. However, only about a quarter of states have an active wetland permitting program established, as others typically have relied on the federal protections. This means immediate efforts are focused on working with states to bolster existing wetland protection programs or create new ones. These efforts are vital, but challenging. Many states don’t have the capacity to stand up and administer such programs, requiring additional funding, perhaps through the EPA. 

These various policy efforts present an opportunity for both freshwater and saltwater anglers; hunters who appreciate hidden patches of marshland; and anyone who enjoys healthy, clean water to become more engaged with their federal and state representatives. No matter if you enjoy fishing for walleye, steelhead, or red snapper, or hunting wood ducks and dark-antlered bucks in October lowland pockets, the wetlands that support these species are at risk, and the time for action is now.

About the Author: Alex Funk is the Director of Water Resources and Senior Counsel for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.

The post How Recent Weakened Wetlands Protections Affect Anglers appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.

Limited-time offer: Subscribe and save with our Labor Day sale! One-year subscriptions to Boating, Cruising World, Marlin, Sailing World, Salt Water Sportsman, and Yachting available for $10 each through Monday, September 4.

A bipartisan group of U.S. representatives and senators has introduced the Youth Coastal Fishing Program Act of 2023, a bill that would create a grant program within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for projects that take kids fishing in the ocean or Great Lakes, with priority given to projects that serve underserved communities. It would become the first such program within NOAA Fisheries, which manages federal marine fisheries.

Sponsors of the bill include Representatives Maria Salazar (R-Fla.) and Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.), and Senators Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.). This legislation is in line with the American Sportfishing Association’s (ASA’s) goal of introducing new anglers – particularly young people – to recreational fishing.

“Recreational fishing provides substantial physical and mental health benefits, but unfortunately many young people – particularly in underserved communities – face significant barriers in accessing the outdoors,” says Mike Leonard, the American Sportfishing Association’s Vice President of Government Affairs. “The grants provided through this bill will go a long way to remove those barriers and help children develop a love of fishing.

“We thank Representatives Salazar and Kamlager-Dove and Senators Wicker and Cantwell for their work on the Youth Coastal Fishing Program Act and are excited about the generations of new anglers it will help create,” Leonard said.

Rep. Salazar believes strongly in the benefits of creating angling opportunities for today’s youth. “It is critical to provide younger generations of Americans across the country, especially minority Americans, the opportunity to learn firsthand about our seas, oceans, lakes, and outdoors, as well as provide them with the tools to enjoy them,” she said.

Rep. Kamlager-Dove echoed those sentiments. “It is especially important that historically disadvantaged youth have opportunities to learn about aquatic life and marine sciences to harbor their curiosity in these fields,” she said.

Sen. Wicker indicated that the best way to develop an appreciation for the marine environment is to go fishing. “We should be encouraging young Americans to get involved in fishing,” he said. “Our legislation will help remove barriers to accessing the outdoors and ensure that more young anglers, especially those in underserved communities, have the opportunity to enjoy this beloved pastime.”

The bill will also help inspire younger generations, Sen. Cantwell believes. “This bill will help more kids get the tools, gear, and support they need to experience the outdoors and the benefits that come with it,” she said.

The bill provides $2 million in grants over each of the next five years for projects that include a recreational fishing experience for youth, offer education about marine science and conservation, and provide information on where or how to fish. ASA encourages anglers and others to visit its Keep America Fishing action alert, which makes it easy to contact their members of Congress to ask them to support the bill. A handout on the bill can be found here. In addition, a letter of support signed by 21 organizations can be found here.

The post New Federal Legislation Introduced to Take Kids Fishing in Coastal Waters appeared first on Salt Water Sportsman.