Data Discovery Day 03/06/2008 Rob O'Conner NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service

1. Bottomfish Habitat and Restricted
Fishing Area Analysis
Robert O’Conner, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service
Chris Kelley, Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory, University of Hawaii

2. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Definition
Congress defined EFH as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for
spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity" (16 U.S.C. 1802(10)). The EFH
guidelines under 50 CFR 600.10 further interpret the EFH definition as follows:
Waters include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and
biological properties that are used by fish and may include aquatic areas
historically used by fish where appropriate; substrate includes sediment, hard
bottom, structures underlying the waters, and associated biological communities;
necessary means the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery and the
managed species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem; and "spawning, breeding,
feeding, or growth to maturity" covers a species' full life cycle.
Current EFH Depth Range: shoreline to 400 meters within EEZ
•Adults
•Juveniles
•Larvae

3. Research Based EFH Boundaries
Species Recommended EFH
Ehu 100-400
Onaga 100-400
Gindai 100-350
YT Kale 50-350
Kale 50-350
Paka 30-300
Hapu 30-300
Lehi 50-250
Buta 50-250

4. Creation of New Reserve Assumptions and Implications
Geographic Assumptions
• There is connectivity between MHI and NWHI (complete larval transport or stepping
stone larval transport).
• There is connectivity between banks of MHI and adult movement is primarily
restricted to individual banks.
Therefore reserves should exist throughout the MHI and there should be at least
one per bank.
Species Priority Assumptions
• Onaga and Ehu are most vulnerable to overfishing (form dense schools, Ehu caught
day or night, Onaga are slow to reproduce)
• Hapu and Paka are next most vulnerable (Hapu are endemic and protogynous while
Paka form dense schools and have generally shallower habitats)
Reserves should serve the needs of Onaga, then Ehu, Hapu, and Paka. Reserves
should cover entire EFH depth range (50 - 400 meters).

5. Creation of New Reserve Assumptions and Implications
Habitat Assumptions
• Bottomfish species prefer hard/rocky substrate.
• Onaga and Ehus aggregate on top of rocky features and feed in the water column
while Hapus and Pakas remain closer to the substrate.
Pinnacles, Drowned Reefs/Shorelines, Ridges/Promontories, and Canyons should
be candidates for reserves both at deep and shallow depths within the EFH.
Connectivity and Enhancement Assumptions
• Reserve size and location should be such that it benefits surrounding fishing areas.
– Adult habitats function as natural hatcheries and are a source for eggs and larvae.
• Reserve design should take into account benefit to other reserves.
– Connectivity exists via larval transport which patterns are largely unknown.
Reserves should encompass both pinnacles and portions of slopes

6. Creation of Bottomfish Reserves
Enforcement
Assumptions
1) The smaller the number of reserves, the more enforceable
2) The larger the size of the reserves, the more enforceable
3) Reserves closer to land are more enforceable
4) Reserves near population centers or lookouts are more enforceable
5) Violators should be detectable from land
6) Relying on fishermen to report their own is in-effective
Implications
1) Reserves should be the smallest number, the largest size, the
closest to land, and the closest to population centers/lookouts as possible

7. Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) Examples
Based on Geologic Features
Canyons Promontories & Ridges
Pinnacles Inside EFH Range Pinnacles Outside EFH Range

10. Onaga (Etelis coruscans) Essential Fish Habitat Depth Range

11. High Slopes

26. Bottomfish Restricted Fishing Area (BFRA) Overview

32. Main Hawaiian Island Bottomfish Habitat Analysis
Proposed RFA Within Federal Waters EFH vs Total Federal Waters EFH

33. Main Hawaiian Island Bottomfish Habitat Analysis
Proposed RFA Within Federal Waters EFH vs Total Federal Waters EFH
u its=k 2
n m M i
au Md
id le Oh
au N a
iih u Ku
a la K a
au i B Is n
ig la d T ta
o ls
to l e
ta fh 2 5 .3
90 85.1 63
4 .9 18
5 .2 2 .9
8 27
2 .5 16 6
4 .3 5 4 .3
70
fe e
d fh 1 9 .4
69 85.1 32
1 .2 2 .2
0 1 .5
5 4 .1
7 70
1 .3 2 8 .7
89
s tee
ta fh 1 5 .9
20 0.0 31
3 .7 18
3 .1 1 .4
3 10
8 .5 96
3 .1 2 5 .6
80
fe p rc n g
d e e ta e 5 .6
7% 10 %
0 .0 4 .5
8% 1 .8
2% 5 .7
3% 2 .7
0% 4 .1
3% 5 .3
0%
s tep rce ta e
ta e n g 4 .4
2% 0%
.0 5 .5
1% 8 .2
7% 4 .3
6% 7 .3
9% 5 .9
6% 4 .7
9%

34. Commercial Bottomfish Catch Data

35. Example Current Patterns

36. Needs
• With shallower EFH ranges (to ~ 30 Meters) more bathymetry is
needed that is increasingly difficult and therefore expensive to
gather.
• In order for reserves to be effective there must be adequate
enforcement and the state lacks additional enforcement
resources.
• Reserve effectiveness could be increased with appropriate
penalties for fishing within Bottomfish Restricted Fishing Areas.

37. Acknowledgements
• Chris Kelley, Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory (HURL),
University of Hawaii
• State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources
(DLNR) & Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR)
• Ocean Currents:
http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/global_ncom/haw.html