1. Scientific Review of Red Abalone Survey and Density Estimation Methods
Webinar Review Kickoff
Monday, September 16, 2013
2:00 pm – 5:00 pm
Alena Pribyl
Hayley Carter
Errin Kramer-Wilt

2. Meeting Agenda 2:00 Overview of the Review Scope and Process
2: Overview of Survey Design and Density Estimate Methods – Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW)
3: Opportunity for the Science Advisory Committee to ask DFW Questions
4: Public Question Period*
4: Wrap-Up and Next Steps
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

3. Review Scope
Survey design, including strengths and weaknesses of current methods for estimating red abalone density;
The application of existing methods, including analysis of existing data, and interpretation of results; and
Uncertainty associated with existing methods for estimating red abalone density in northern California and its adequacy for informing catch limits and other management controls of the recreational red abalone fishery in northern California, as outlined in the Abalone Recovery and Management Plan (ARMP).
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

4. Review Outcomes
Assessment of the current practice used to estimate red abalone density
Whether current methods could be improved; and
If so, a list of ways the methods could be improved.
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

5. Review Timeline Review Ongoing Second webinar First webinarRR
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
First webinar
Final document to DFW
Second webinar
Technical Workshop
Review Ongoing
Initial web meeting – provide background info on current practices, instructions to SAC, questions from stakeholders
Technical workshop -
Draft summary of outcomes -OST will work with the SAC to draft a summary of outcomes
Final online web meeting (open to public) – share draft findings from the review process, SAC and DFW scientists available to answer questions and receive feedback
Finalize report - OST will work with the SAC to finalize the summary of outcomes.
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

6. University of California, Santa Cruz
SAC Members
Chair, Dr. Mark H. Carr
University of California, Santa Cruz
State identified priority – CSSI
The OPC recognized they needed more information about CA fisheries to implement the program and reached out to OST and DFW
Asked OST to conduct rapid assessments as preliminary step to inform CSSI
The OPC also wanted to determine if the rapid assessments could benefit DFW in some way
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

7. Sonoma State University
SAC Members
Dr. Karina J. Nielsen
Sonoma State University
Synopsis of publicly available scientific information about a fishery using the framework of the MSC assessment tree; rapid assessments have been used as a tool in the past by MSC certifiers to quickly evaluate a large number of fisheries; our RAs provide more detail and actually fall in between MSC rapid assessments and pre-assessments.
Three core principles are: 1) Health of fish stock, 2) Impact on ecosystem, 3) Management system; 31 performance indicators evaluate the 3 core principles.
We developed a color coded rating system (green, yellow, red) to evaluate each performance indicator; no numerical scores are used. Our rating system does NOT indicate the sustainability of a fishery, rather it indicates the amount of information available about a fishery and based on the available information, preliminarily evaluates how well the goals of the PI are met.
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

8. Murdoch University, Western Australia
SAC Members
Dr. Jeremy Prince
Murdoch University, Western Australia
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

9. University of California, Santa Cruz
SAC Members
Dr. Peter Raimondi
University of California, Santa Cruz
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

10. University of California, Santa Barbara
SAC Members
Dr. Stephen C. Schroeter
University of California, Santa Barbara
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

11. Humboldt State University
SAC Members
Dr. Brian Tissot
Humboldt State University
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

12. Marine Program Manager
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Tom Barnes
Marine Program Manager
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

13. Dr. Laura Rogers-Bennett Senior Environmental Scientist
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Dr. Laura Rogers-Bennett
Senior Environmental Scientist
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

14. Environmental Scientist
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Dr. Cynthia Button
Environmental Scientist
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

15. Senior Environmental Scientist
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Dr. Ian Taniguchi
Senior Environmental Scientist
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

16. Meeting Agenda
2: Overview of the Review Scope and Process
2:30 Overview of Survey Design and Density Estimate Methods – Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW)
3: Opportunity for the Science Advisory Committee to ask DFW Questions
4: Public Question Period*
4: Wrap-Up and Next Steps
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

17. Abalone Density Review
The goal and purpose of today’s presentation is to:
Refresh the Commission and public about the history of, and requirements in, the Abalone Recovery Management Plan (ARMP)
Explain the sampling protocol and address concerns about our surveys/data analyses
Explain other activities taking place under the ARMP
Prepare the Commission and the public for subsequent discussions on SMI and north coast fishery
Photo: R. Tavernetti
Presentation to OST, SAC and Public
Dr. Laura Rogers-Bennett, CDFW
Sept. 16, 2013

18. Welcome Thank Ocean Science Trust Thank Science Advisory Committee
Facilitation of the review
Thank Science Advisory Committee
Time and expertise for this review
Thank members of the public
Ongoing interest in abalone assessment methods

19. Overview California Abalone Fishery Density and Abalone Management
Density Survey Methods
Results of Density Surveys
Summary
We will cover these five bullets that describe our abalone management approach
first I’ll provide a brief history of the past abalone fishery that lead up to the moratorium and the development of the ARMP
Next I’ll go over key aspects of the abalone recovery management plan that forms the base of our approach and vision for abalone management
Next we will discuss the northern California fishery and the fishery data that goes into managing that fishery and the current status (Introduce LRB)
I will also discuss all of the projects we are doing in managing abalone under the ARMP and explain our priorities
Finally I will go over some of the partnerships we have forged to help us carry out our management duties

20. California Abalone 7 species in California
Red abalone largest in the world
Abalone fishing important natural heritage in California
2 spp endangered abalone in Ca
Recreational fishery larger than most of the worlds commercial abalone fisheries.
Haliotis rufescens

21. Abalone Fishery: North
Largest recreational abalone fishery in the world
Important for coastal economy in the north
35,000-40,000 fishers/year
260,000 abalone/year
310 mt/year
71% of fishers get daily bag limit – successful fishery
We do have one remaining abalone fishery in the state which is the N. Cal. recreational red abalone fishery
It is a very robust fishery where:
Most participants get their daily bag limits
On avg. 35k to 40k people participate in the fishery annually
on avg. 264,000 abalone per year are harvested which equates to 450 metric tons (almost million lbs. annually)
This is a big fishery in comparison to other abalone fisheries around the world (including commercial)
Fishery is important to north coast economy (e.g. dive shops, restaurants, camping, abalone cook-off Mendocino)
part of our natural heritage

22. Recreational Abalone Catch22

23. Abalone Catch by County (2002-2010)
More than 96% of catch from Sonoma and Mendocino Co.
*total number of red abalone harvested = 1,352,353

24. Abalone Recovery and Management Plan
Combine Traditional Abalone Management
Size limit
Daily and yearly bag limits
Season Closures
No Scuba allowed
Network of MPAs
Adaptive management based on Density
The failure of the past fishery was the impetus for the legislation that created the moratorium and the ARMP
The development of the ARMP was a comprehensive and rigorous process with constituent input, peer review and much revision that took 5 years to complete culminating in the Commission endorsing and adopting the plan in 2005
The plan, covers both recovery efforts for abalone stocks in central and southern California and fishery management of the northern California recreational abalone fishery and future fisheries
The fishery management plan is two tiered with an interim management plan and the long term plan
interim plan maintains the current fishery under limited data and current resources and is less precise and adaptable and thus more precautionary
The northern fishery is currently managed under the interim plan
Long term plan operates under area management and more resources which allows greater precision and greater adaptability in management (made steps to transition)
The plan is designed to be adaptive to respond to environmental and/or population changes and is based upon density criteria used in both fishery management and recovery

25. Overall Concept Density Estimates Index Sites Management Triggers
Adaptive Management Strategy
(Maintain Sustainable Fishery) 25

26. Purpose of Density Monitoring
Density data feeds back into management
Determine if density changes over time and to what degree
If density declines 25% from baseline then fishery is reduced by 25%
Index sites we expect to be sensitive to changes

27. Goals: Density Methods
Key Goal:
Assess densities at index sites relative to previous levels
H0 (Expectation):
No change in average density through time (= sustainability)
Time periods assessed:
Most recent time period ( )
Earliest time period ( )
Null Hypothesis: is another way to say our “expectations are…” that there will not be density changes over time and that we will be fishing the surplus.
If there are changes in density over time then we want to respond to this with management
We are choosing these two time periods because the represent the most recent and the earliest time periods in the data set for a completed surveys cycle of all 8 index sites.

28. Focus of Density Review
Density estimation methods
Random depth stratified sampling design
Sample size
Power of sampling program
Comparison of densities between time periods

29. Index Site Map 8 Index Sites Sonoma & Mendocino Counties
Sites encompass 48% of the catch
ARMP – key fished sites
Purpose – index sites if we monitor these they will tell us when what is going on with the fishery at these popular fishing sites
These are the pressure points in the fishery and they will show fishing stress first. This is the check on our management measures.

30. Size of Index Sites
Area estimates are generated from 0 to 18m depth contour

31. Surveyed Sites Monitored 14 sites
Monitoring Reserves will show non-fishery related population impacts
Harmful Algal Blooms (Red Tides)
Disease (Withering Syndrome)
Ocean Climate impacts

32. Random Stratified Design
Transects that might fall on >50% sand are moved to nearby rocky substrate in the same depth startum.
Index sites: nearly 100% rocky reef subtidal habitats known to support red abalone

33. Why Random Transects?
Random transects ensure average is representative of the overall site
Fixed transects are used to look at changes over time, at that transect, not at the site overall
Random transects ensure average density is representative of the site regardless of the size of the site.

34. Why Depth Stratified?
Transects are randomly located and equally distributed in the following depth strata:
Depth Strata
Strata Depth Range
Shallow A
5 – 15 ft
Shallow B
16 – 30 ft
Deep C
31 – 45 ft
Deep D
46 – 60 ft
Red abalone density for recreational abalone fishery management according to ARMP guidelines are determined by averaging abalone density in randomly located transects. The transects are stratified by depth because research indicated increased fishing pressure in shallower waters create a refuge from fishing in deeper water. The depth of 28 ft was selected to divide the shallow, heavily fished waters from the deeper refuge waters. The shallow and deep strata are further divided into two sub-strata to examine the effects of depth on fishing pressure in more detail. Target depths for Shallow A transects range from 5 to 15 ft in depth; depths for Shallow B transects range from 16 to 25 ft; Deep C transects range from 30 to 45 ft; and Deep D transects range from 46 to 60 ft. For ARMP management purposes, the density of all transects are averaged together.
Abalone density varies by depth 34

35. Sample Size and Cycle Sample Size Survey Cycle
Goal: 36 transects per site
9 transects per depth stratum
Transects are 30 x 2m
Survey Cycle
3 to 5 years to complete 8 index sites
Sites surveyed when wave ht. <6 feet
Approx 576 UW diver hours (14.4 diver weeks) per cycle
Actual is N= transects per site

36. Data Sheet Diver training
Species ID for abalone and sea urchins and associated species
AAUS certified
Trained in transect survey work
Pair them with experienced divers for the first year.

37. Data Processing (QAQC)
Verification of data with divers on the boat
Two people enter data into database
Third person independently double checks the data entry
Data are graphed to look for outliers
Raw data sheets are maintained

38. Power of the Sampling Program
All five are interrelated:
Alpha level (set significance p < 0.05)
Power level (set 1-beta > 0.80)
Size of the effect (percent change)
Variance sample
Sample size

39. Use of Statistics Use statistics to support management
Use statistics to detect strong patterns in the data
Determine if the average densities are statistically significantly different over time
Statistical tools  ANOVA (MatLab)
Note: describe ANOVA t-tests as common statistical tools used

40. Abalone Density
As a reminder these time periods were chosen since they are the most recent compared with the earliest survey cycles with all 8 index sites.
Averages are significantly different (ANOVA p<0.001)
– 35% change in overall density. 40

41. Abalone Density 60% decline
If we look more closely we can see that the declines are in Sonoma Co and not in Mendocino Co.
Sonoma Co has dropped 60% from the initial density estimate.
County as one of the factors in the ANOVA analysis
Mendocino Co – sustainable fishing and we see no significant decline in density.
Fsihing between these two time periods in Mendocino Co WAS sustainable and was not impacting abalone density at the fished index sites.
Averages are significantly different across time periods by county (ANOVA p<0.001) 41

42. Harmful Algal Bloom (Red Tide)
Aug Abalone mortality
Impacted half of the fishing grounds
Sonoma County
Microalgae Gonyaulax membranacea
Ongoing monitoring of both the abalone and algae
Photo: Nate Buck Fort Ross 2011

43. Density Results
Power analysis results indicate we can detect changes in density >15%
Fishery overall declined by 35%
Decline statistically significant
Overall decline driven by Sonoma Co. which declined by 60%

44. Summary
Surveys provide a Relative measure of current density compared with previous densities to inform management
Surveys of fished index sites were sensitive to changes in density over time
Survey results allowed detection of significant changes across time at the scale of the index sites as well as by county
Key Concepts in the Density Methodology

45. AAUS divers
UC Davis Jason Herum, Henry Fastenau, Anthony Disbrow , David Dann, Greg Holzer, Olivia Rhoades, Sam Briggs, Tammer Barkouki, , Brian Sullivan, Ashley McDonough, Rietta Hohman, John Harreld, Angee Doerr, Brad Carter, Kristin Aquilino, May Roberts, Jonathan Clark, Joel Sharbrough, Bill Wagman, Athena Maguire, Scott Neifert, Nick Modisette
Humboldt State University Carl Anderson, Kristin Hubbard, Reed Gatton, Ryan Anderson, James Hansmeier, Lisa Nugent, Dan Cooke, Rachel Carlton, Kris Chamberlin, Mark Davis, Michael Tobin, Melissa Erkel, Nicole Lawrence, Simona Augyte, Sam Parker  
San Francisco State University CA State University, Monterey Bay
Chris Raleigh, Sophie Archambeault Ben Walker
UC Santa Cruz Stanford University
Katharine Magana, John Harriman, Shelby Kawana Jennifer O’Leary, Kersten Schnurle
UC San Diego San Diego State Divers
Christina Bonsell, Cynthia Catton Julia Coates

46. Partnerships/Collaborations
Enforcement Branch CDFW
CDFW Dive Program
Academic Partners
UCD
UCSC
Humboldt State
Bodega Marine Lab Dive Program
To carry out all of the projects that we are involved in to manage abalone resources we rely on external help from all sorts of organizations.

47. Thank You Dr. Laura Rogers-Bennett - lrogersbennett@dfg.ca.gov
Cal. Department of Fish and Wildlife
OST:

48. Meeting Agenda
2: Overview of the Review Scope and Process
2: Overview of Survey Design and Density Estimate Methods – Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW)
3:15 Opportunity for the Science Advisory Committee to ask DFW Questions
4: Public Question Period*
4: Wrap-Up and Next Steps
*For the public: OST will keep a running queue of public commenter names and call each name in the order received. To enter the queue, please submit your first and last name at any time during the meeting by:
ing OST at:
Send OST your name using the “chat” feature on WebEx

49. Abalone Fishery by Species
METRIC TONS
500
1,000
1,500
100
1942
1996
YEAR

50. Abalone Density 2011
*Averages are significantly different (ANOVA p=0.0006)
- 27% change in overall density.

51. Why is density important?
Close together = high fertilization success
Far apart = low fertilization success
High density = reproductive population
Babcock and Keesing 1999
Babcock and Keesing 1999

52. Distance and Density
Button and Rogers-Bennett in prep

53. Fishery Closure at Low Density
Santa Rosa Island
0.15
0.1
0.05
Density (/m2)
Year
National Park Service surveys Channel Is.
Johnson’s Lee North
< 2,000 red ab/ha
Density is important thus ARMP based on it

54. Case Study: Abalone Density
Digichrome 2007

55. Density Decline Density (# / m2) Survey Year 2 2.5 1 0.5
Density (# / m2)
Here is an example of the density methods used to detect changes over time in a non-index site called Stornetta.
In 2010 density in the subtidal is 0.33 ab/m2 comparable to today’s Sonoma Co.
Survey Year
Rogers-Bennett et al. 2013 56

56. Fishing: Report Card Survey Years opened closed
Figure 7 Estimates of abalone number taken per year
>30,000 red abalone taken from one site in 2005 and 2006
Stornetta = Sea Lion Cove 57

57. Density Impact by Size Density (# /m2) Size (mm) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1
Cryptic Sizes
Sublegal Sizes
Legal Sizes
2004
2007
2010
Density (# /m2)
Size (mm) 58