Dungeness Crab/By Robert Shetterly © Blue Ocean Institute
Dungeness Crab/By Robert Shetterly © Blue Ocean Institute

Dungeness Crab

Cancer magister

Sometimes known as Market Crab or San Francisco Crab.

This species is wild-caught.

Summary

Dungeness Crabs dwell in shallow coastal waters from Alaska to Mexico and are named after the Dungeness Spit along the south shore of the Straits of Juan de Fuca. Little is known about how abundant these crabs are – abundance fluctuates with oceanic conditions and consequently populations are difficult to assess. Dungeness Crabs have some reproductive strategies that help populations withstand fishing pressure. Males will mate with numerous females, and large females can carry over two million eggs. To help protect Dungeness Crabs, state and tribal managers prohibit catches of females and require that fishers only catch males that are large enough to have mated at least twice. Most crabs are caught in low-bycatch traps, called pots.

Criterion Points
Life History 2.75
Abundance 2.25
Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts 2.25
Management 1.75
Bycatch 3.75
Final Score (average of criteria) 2.55
Color
Final Score Color
2.60 - 4.00
2.20 - 2.59
1.80 - 2.19
1.40 - 1.79
0.00 - 1.39

Last updated September 27, 2007.

Life History

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

If a value for intrinsic rate of increase (‘r’) is known, assign the score below based on this value. If no r-value is available, assign the score below for the correct age at 50% maturity for females if specified, or for the correct value of growth rate ('k'). If no estimates of r, age at 50% maturity, or k are available, assign the score below based on maximum age.

1.00
Intrinsic rate of increase <0.05; OR age at 50% maturity >10 years; OR growth rate <0.15; OR maximum age >30 years.
2.00
Intrinsic rate of increase = 0.05-0.15; OR age at 50% maturity = 5-10 years; OR a growth rate = 0.16–0.30; OR maximum age = 11-30 years.
3.00
Intrinsic rate of increase >0.16; OR age at 50% maturity = 1-5 years; OR growth rate >0.30; OR maximum age <11 years.

Intrinsic rate of increase is unknown. Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans (2002) reports age at maturity as 2 to 3 years. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (1994) reports that Dungeness Crabs may reach sexual maturity at 3 years. Dungeness Crabs generally grow to a maximum of about 9 inches in body width (Bliss 1982). Estimated maximum lifespan is between 8 and 13 years (ADFG 1994).

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25
Species has special behaviors that make it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., spawning aggregations; site fidelity; segregation by sex; migratory bottlenecks; unusual attraction to gear; etc.).
-0.25
Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity >20 years; sequential hermaphrodites; extremely low fecundity).
-0.25
Species has a small or restricted range (e.g., endemism; numerous evolutionarily significant units; restricted to one coastline; e.g., American lobster; striped bass; endemic reef fishes).

Dungeness Crabs are named after the Dungeness Spit along the south shore of the Straits of Juan de Fuca in the Pacific Northwest's Puget Sound. But they can be found in shallow, nearshore waters as far north as Cook Inlet and Prince William Sound in Alaska, and as far south as Magdalena Bay, Mexico (ADFG 1994). Fisheries for this species occur off the west coasts of the United States (California, Oregon, Washington, Alaska) and Canada. We consider this to be a small range compared to the more widely distributed King Crab and highly migratory species such as tunas and Swordfish.

-0.25
Species exhibits high natural population variability driven by broad–scale environmental change (e.g., El Nino; decadal oscillations).

Dungeness Crab populations are affected by variations in oceanic conditions. These variations are a key contributor to the large fluctuations in catches that are characteristic of Dungeness Crab fisheries (NMFS 1999). Fluctuations in catches are cyclical and occur in multi-year (4, 7, or 10 years; Barker, pers. comm., 2005) cycles. Currently, catches are on the rise due to favorable oceanic conditions (Seabourne, pers. comm., 2004).

+0.25
Species does not have special behaviors that increase ease or population consequences of capture OR has special behaviors that make it less vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., species is widely dispersed during spawning).
+0.25
Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially resilient to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity <1 year; extremely high fecundity).

Dungeness Crabs have high fecundity. They mate from spring through fall, and large females have the capacity to carry up to 2.5 million eggs at a time. The fact that males are polygamous, meaning that they mate with more than one female in a season, enhances the viability of the population (ADFG 1994).

Female Dungeness Crabs brood fertilized eggs attached to their abdomen until they hatch. This process generally takes about 2 to 3 months for crabs off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington (PSMFC 1996). In comparison to other crab species such as King Crabs, which brood their eggs for approximately a year and are vulnerable during this time, Dungeness Crabs are vulnerable for a relatively short period of time.

+0.25
Species is distributed over a very wide range (e.g., throughout an entire hemisphere or ocean basin; e.g., swordfish; tuna; Patagonian toothfish).
+0.25
Species does not exhibit high natural population variability driven by broad-scale environmental change (e.g., El Nino; decadal oscillations).
2.75
Points for Life History

Abundance

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Compared to natural or un-fished level, the species population is:

1.00
Low: Abundance or biomass is <75% of BMSY or similar proxy (e.g., spawning potential ratio).
2.00
Medium: Abundance or biomass is 75–125% of BMSY or similar proxy; OR population is approaching or recovering from an overfished condition; OR adequate information on abundance or biomass is not available.

Estimates of total population sizes are not available for Dungeness Crabs. Abundance, as indicated by total catches, fluctuates greatly from year to year due to changes in oceanic conditions. Consequently, fishery management agencies do not invest resources in conducting population assessments. Population assessments have not been conducted in either Washington (Barker, pers. comm., 2004) or Oregon (Seabourne, pers. comm., 2004).

3.00
High: Abundance or biomass is >125% of BMSY or similar proxy.

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25
The population is declining over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE).

There are no data on catch trends per unit effort available to use as a proxy measure for abundance of Dungeness Crab populations. Unlike the groundfish trawl fisheries off the U.S. Pacific coast, for example, which are required to have logbooks to collect detailed information on fishing effort, the crab fisheries are not required to keep logbooks. The most recent document to provide information on total catches of Dungeness Crabs in all regions was published by the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission in 1999 (Colpo, pers. comm., 2005).

Current catches are higher than catches in recent years. Combined catches from Dungeness Crab fisheries operating in Washington, Oregon and California were slightly over 64 million pounds during the 2003/2004 season, a 16% increase from the previous season, and over 3 times the amount caught during the 2000/2001 season (IntraFish 2005). However, year-to-year fluctuations in catches due to oceanic conditions make it difficult to draw conclusions from this information about the status of Dungeness Crab populations (Colpo, pers. comm., 2005).

-0.25
Age, size or sex distribution is skewed relative to the natural condition (e.g., truncated size/age structure or anomalous sex distribution).
-0.25
Species is listed as “overfished” OR species is listed as “depleted”, “endangered”, or “threatened” by recognized national or international bodies.

There is currently no evidence that indicates that Dungeness Crab is overfished.

-0.25
Current levels of abundance are likely to jeopardize the availability of food for other species or cause substantial change in the structure of the associated food web.
+0.25
The population is increasing over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE).
+0.25
Age, size or sex distribution is functionally normal.

The size distribution of females is functionally normal, and there are not indications that other demographics of the population are skewed (Botsford, pers. comm., 2005).

+0.25
Species is close to virgin biomass.
+0.25
Current levels of abundance provide adequate food for other predators or are not known to affect the structure of the associated food web.
2.25
Points for Abundance

Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Select the option that most accurately describes the effect of the fishing method upon the habitat that it affects.

1.00
The fishing method causes great damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., cyanide; blasting; bottom trawling; dredging).
2.00
The fishing method does moderate damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., bottom gillnets; traps and pots; bottom longlines).

Dungeness Crabs are generally captured using circular steel traps, or pots, that are typically baited with clams, squid, chopped Herring, or fish heads and carcasses and submerged on the ocean bottom to “soak” (ADFG 1994; DFO 1988). Pots are fished singly in some fisheries. In other fisheries, they are attached at intervals along a groundline. Washington, however, has outlawed the use of groundlines in Dungeness Crab fisheries, and all pots must be individually attached to buoys (Barker, pers. comm., 2/17/2005). All U.S. and Canadian fisheries require that pots contain devices to allow sub-legal size crabs and female crabs to escape. Pots must also have biodegradable webbing to minimize the extent that pots continue to trap animals if they are lost (known as "ghost fishing"; WDFW 2005). Because they sit on the seafloor, we consider pots and traps to have a moderate impact on habitat.

Baited ring nets, composed of circular frames fitted with webbing, are also used by some subsistence and commercial fishermen (WDFW 2005; DFO 1988). SCUBA, dip nets (PSMFC 1996; DFO 1988), and hooked or hookless handlines (ADFG 1994) are used in recreational fisheries.

3.00
The fishing method does little damage to physical or biogenic habitats (e.g., hand picking; hand raking; hook and line; pelagic long lines; mid-water trawl or gillnet; purse seines).

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25
Habitat for this species is so compromised from non-fishery impacts that the ability of the habitat to support this species is substantially reduced (e.g., dams; pollution; coastal development).

Dungeness Crabs inhabit nearshore and coastal waters all along the western coast of North America (ADFG 1994). Potential anthropogenic threats to these ecosystems identified by fishery managers in Alaska include an increase in suspended organic or mineral material; alteration of substrate (e.g., sandy bottoms); a reduction in protective cover (e.g., seaweed beds); the obstruction of migration routes; shock waves in the aquatic environment; and changes in the temperature or chemistry of nearshore waters (ADFG 1985).

Specific anthropogenic threats to Dungeness Crab habitat reported by the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (1996) include fungicides and insecticides such as Sevin (carbaryl), which is sometimes used to control populations of ghost shrimps in Pacific oyster beds; urban contaminants such as heavy metals, PCBs, and hydrocarbons; and pesticides and herbicides entering coastal waters in runoff from suburban yards and farmlands. However, no points were deducted here, as there is no evidence suggesting that these factors are currently compromising the viability of Dungeness Crab populations.

-0.25
Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are not protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc.
-0.25
No efforts are being made to minimize damage from existing gear types OR new or modified gear is increasing habitat damage (e.g., fitting trawls with roller rigs or rockhopping gear; more robust gear for deep-sea fisheries).
-0.25
If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is very slow (e.g., deep water corals; rocky bottoms).
+0.25
Habitat for this species remains robust and viable and is capable of supporting this species.
+0.25
Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc.
+0.25
Gear innovations are being implemented over a majority of the fishing area to minimize damage from gear types OR no innovations necessary because gear effects are minimal.
+0.25
If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is fast (e.g., mud or sandy bottoms) OR gear effects are minimal.

The preferred habitats of Dungeness Crabs are sandy bottoms and eelgrass beds in intertidal areas to depths of 90 feet. They can also be found on muddy or gravel bottoms (DFO 1988). Some of these areas are high-energy zones that change daily (Barker, pers. comm., 2005). Dungeness Crab habitats are not known to be adversely affected by crab pots.

2.25
Points for Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts

Management

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Select the option that most accurately describes the current management of the fisheries of this species.

1.00
Regulations are ineffective (e.g., illegal fishing or overfishing is occurring) OR the fishery is unregulated (i.e., no control rules are in effect).
2.00
Management measures are in place over a major portion over the species’ range but implementation has not met conservation goals OR management measures are in place but have not been in place long enough to determine if they are likely to achieve conservation and sustainability goals.

In the United States, there are commercial fisheries for Dungeness Crabs in Washington, Oregon, California, and Alaska. In 2003, the majority of landings occurred in Washington (40%), followed by Oregon (28%), California (26%), and Alaska (6%; NMFS 2005a). Very small amounts of Dungeness Crab were imported from Canada in 2002 and 2003 ( NMFS 2005b).

Typically the Pacific Fishery Management Council is responsible for managing fisheries in federal waters off the U.S. west coast. However, Dungeness Crab fisheries are managed differently than other species. The Council has given individual states the authority to manage Dungeness Crab in both state and federal waters. Thus, the following agencies manage Dungeness Crab fisheries: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Department of Fish and Game, and Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Also, in Washington, the coastal and Puget Sound crab fisheries are co-managed with federally recognized Treaty Tribes. Both state and tribal fishery managers develop annual management plans (Barker, pers. comm., 2005).

There are no federal or state Fishery Management Plans for Dungeness Crab fisheries. However, a Tri-State Commission coordinated through the Pacific States Marine Fishery Commission discusses issues related to the Dungeness Crab fisheries in Washington, Oregon, and California and makes management recommendations to the states. Yet, the Commission does not have the authority to require the states to follow its recommendations. Rather, it functions more as a working group (Colpo, pers. comm., 2004).

Although there is no comprehensive management plan for Dungeness Crab fisheries with conservation and sustainability goals, all states have had some regulations in place for decades and have mechanisms in place for controlling fishing. Because recruitment (i.e. the number of juvenile crabs in the population that survive to join the fishable population) is highly variable from year to year, managers focus on maintaining the reproductive potential of crab populations through sex, size, and season restrictions in the fishery. The basic strategy is to catch only male crabs that are big enough to have had a chance to mate prior to capture. This approach is different than some other fisheries, which aim to maintain populations above an established biological threshold level (Colpo, pers. comm., 2002).

In Washington, there is now a limit on the number of pots allowed in the fishery based on fishers' historical catches. This management tool aims to deal with how catches are divided up among fishing groups and to control the pace of the fishery. Within this framework, managers seek to allocate a larger proportion of the catch to Native American tribes on the Puget Sound and along the coast (Barker, pers. comm., 2004).

Oregon and California do not have place limitations on the number of pots allowed in the fishery or other limitations on catch. California, however, is working to develop a pot limitation program (Seabourne, pers. comm., 2004).

Other regulations in all three states include: only males can be caught to protect the female reproductive population; minimum size limit of 6.25-inch carapace width to allow males to mate at least twice; prohibition on keeping soft-shell crabs; and seasonal and area closures to reduce incidental catch of soft-shell crabs. Fishery managers test for shell hardness to determine when to open the fishery. This management approach is an effort to ensure that the majority of crabs caught are not in the process of reproducing. Fishery managers feel that these measures have helped produce good economic yields each year (Barker, pers. comm., 2004).

In addition, Dungeness Crab fisheries utilize some market-based approaches to fishery management. For example, crab processors coordinate with the Tri-State Commission to determine when to open the Dungeness Crab fishing season each year. The season is opened once the meat-picking rate--a measure of how much weight crabs have put on since molting--is high enough. In late 2004, low meat-picking rates led the Tri-State Commission to recommend that the opening of the fishery in Northern Oregon and Washington be delayed to allow the crabs to grow larger. Oregon and Washington complied (Colpo, pers. comm., 2005).

We awarded a score of 2.00 here to account for fishery managers' ability to help maintain a viable fishery. We did not award a high score of 3.00 due to the absence of specific conservation or sustainability goals.

3.00
Substantial management measures are in place over a large portion of the species range and have demonstrated success in achieving conservation and sustainability goals.

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25
There is inadequate scientific monitoring of stock status, catch or fishing effort.

Assessments have not been conducted for most Dungeness Crab populations due to the absence of fishery-independent assessment data. Although there are some exceptions such as the Alaska Department of Fish and Game's surveys of Dungeness Crabs in the Orca Inlet district of Prince William Sound (ADFG 2000), monitoring of populations is minimal among the fisheries.

Dungeness Crab catches in the U.S., are monitored using fish tickets, supplemented by shoreside sampling (Kaiser, pers. comm., 2002). However, not enough information on effort is collected (e.g. the specific location and duration of fishing activity) to enable managers to generate catch-per-unit-effort data and use this information as a proxy measure for population abundance (Colpo, pers. comm., 2005).

-0.25
Management does not explicitly address fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems.
-0.25
This species is overfished and no recovery plan or an ineffective recovery plan is in place.
-0.25
Management has failed to reduce excess capacity in this fishery or implements subsidies that result in excess capacity in this fishery.

There are risks of over-capacity in the Dungeness Crab fishery. The 2004 – 2005 season was a year of record catches; however, the volume of Dungeness Crabs caught and brought to the market at the beginning of the season was too much for seafood processors in California to handle. Although illegal, there were reports of vessels dumping their catches overboard, after unsuccessfully waiting for days to unload them live at the processing plants (Chea 2004).

Fishers in California, Oregon, and Washington are required to obtain existing licenses to participate in the Dungeness Crab fishery. Only Washington fishery managers, however, limit the number of pots allowed in the fishery. Restricting fishing effort through pot limitations is critical, because it can stretch the fishing season out, preventing gluts of crabs to the market (Chea 2004). There is also over-capacity within the tribal fisheries (i.e., too many fishers). This sector is limited to a set percentage (50%) of the annual catch, however, which prevents there from being excess capacity throughout the Washington fishery (Barker, pers. comm., 2005).

Some fishers who have been excluded from Alaska's other fisheries due to regulations aimed to cut fishing effort have entered the West Coast Dungeness Crab fishery. In addition, some former groundfish fishers who participated in the boat buyback program have opted to buy crab-fishing boats (IntraFish 2005).

Limited-entry licenses and pot limit regulations have largely prevented over-expansion of the Dungeness Crab fishery. However, because Washington is the only state to limit the number of pots allowed in the fishery, we chose to subtract here.

+0.25
There is adequate scientific monitoring, analysis and interpretation of stock status, catch and fishing effort.
+0.25
Management explicitly and effectively addresses fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems.
+0.25
This species is overfished and there is a recovery plan (including benchmarks, timetables and methods to evaluate success) in place that is showing signs of success OR recovery plan is not needed.

Dungeness Crabs have not formally been declared overfished in any area, and, consequently, a recovery plan is not required.

+0.25
Management has taken action to control excess capacity or reduce subsidies that result in excess capacity OR no measures are necessary because fishery is not overcapitalized.
1.75
Points for Management

Bycatch

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Select the option that most accurately describes the current level of bycatch and the consequences that result from fishing this species.

The term, "bycatch” used in this document excludes incidental catch of a species for which an adequate management framework exists.

The terms, “endangered, threatened, or protected,” used in this document refer to species status that is determined by national legislation such as the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (or another nation's equivalent), the IUCN Red List, or a credible scientific body such as the American Fisheries Society.

1.00
Bycatch in this fishery is high (>100% of targeted landings), OR regularly includes a “threatened, endangered or protected species.”
2.00
Bycatch in this fishery is moderate (10-99% of targeted landings) AND does not regularly include “threatened, endangered or protected species” OR level of bycatch is unknown.
3.00
Bycatch in this fishery is low (<10% of targeted landings) and does not regularly include "threatened, endangered or protected species."

There is no formal monitoring of bycatch in Dungeness Crab fisheries. However, fishery observers, who test the crabs’ shell hardness to determine when to open the fishery, have noted that the level of bycatch is very low. Dungeness Crabs are caught in traps that have escape rings to allow undersized crabs to escape. There is some bycatch of flatfish and roundfish in traps, but that level is also low. Some octopus are caught in Dungeness Crab traps and are generally sold (Colpo, pers. comm., 2005).

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25
Bycatch in this fishery is a contributing factor to the decline of “threatened, endangered, or protected species" and no effective measures are being taken to reduce it.
-0.25
Bycatch of targeted or non-targeted species (e.g., undersize individuals) in this fishery is high and no measures are being taken to reduce it.
-0.25
Bycatch of this species (e.g., undersize individuals) in other fisheries is high OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, and no measures are being taken to reduce it.
-0.25
The continued removal of the bycatch species contributes to its decline.
+0.25
Measures taken over a major portion of the species range have been shown to reduce bycatch of “threatened, endangered, or protected species” or bycatch rates are no longer deemed to affect the abundance of the “protected” bycatch species OR no measures needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).

The Dungeness Crab fishery is highly selective and does not capture threatened, endangered, or protected species.

+0.25
There is bycatch of targeted (e.g., undersize individuals) or non-targeted species in this fishery and measures (e.g., gear modifications) have been implemented that have been shown to reduce bycatch over a large portion of the species range OR no measures are needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).

The Dungeness Crab fishery is highly selective.

+0.25
Bycatch of this species in other fisheries is low OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, but effective measures are being taken to reduce it over a large portion of the range.
+0.25
The continued removal of the bycatch species in the targeted fishery has had or will likely have little or no impact on populations of the bycatch species OR there are no significant bycatch concerns because the fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).

The Dungeness Crab fishery is highly selective.

3.75
Points for Bycatch

References

Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG). 2000. Subsistence Dungeness Fishery. 3 January. Available at: http://www.cf.adfg.state.ak.us/region2/shellfsh/pws_dng.php.

ADFG. 1994. ADF&G Wildlife Notebook Series: Dungeness Crab. Available at: http://www.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/notebook/shellfsh/dungie.php.

ADFG. 1985. Dungeness Crab, Cancer magister. In Alaska Habitat Management Guide, Southcentral Region, Volume 1: Life Histories and Habitat Requirements of Fish and Wildlife. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK.

Barker, M. 2005. Personal Communication. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Barker, M. 2004. Personal Communication. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Bliss, D.E. 1982. Shrimps, Lobsters and Crabs. New Century Publishers Inc., Piscataway, NJ.

Botsford, L. 2005. Personal Communication. University of California, Davis. Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Conservation Biology.

Chea, T. 2004. Big Crab Catch Sparks Overfishing Worries. Associated Press. December 17, 2004.

Colpo, D. 2005. Personal Communication. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission.

Colpo, D. 2004. Personal Communication. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission.

Colpo, D. 2002. Personal Communication. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2004. Pacific Region Integrated Fisheries Management Plan Halibut February 29, 2004 to February 28, 2005. Available at: http://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/xnet/content/MPLANS/plans04/Halibut2004.pdf.

DFO. 2002. Crab Fishery – Pacific Region. Available at: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ops/fm/shellfish/crab/default_e.htm.

IntraFish. January 2005. Species Focus. Dungeness Crab Crawls Its Way Onto Plates. Available at: http://www.intrafish.com/.

Kaiser, R. 2002. Personal Communication. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2005a. NMFS Landings Query Results. Available at: http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/commercial/landings/annual_landings.html.

NMFS. 2005b. Fisheries Statistics and Economics Division. Imports. Available at: http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/trade/index.html.

NMFS. 2004. Pacific halibut fisheries; catch sharing plan. Final rule; annual management measures for Pacific halibut fisheries. Federal Register 69(39): 9231-41.

NMFS. 1999. Fisheries of the United States, 1998. Current Fishery Statistics No. 9800. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC). 1996. Dungeness crab. Available at: http://www.psmfc.org/habitat/edu_crab_fact.html.

Seabourne, J. 2004. Personal Communication. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2005. Chapter 220-52 WAC Shellfish. Available at: http://www.leg.wa.gov/wac/index.cfm?fuseaction=chapterdigest&chapter=220-52.

BLUE OCEAN INSTITUTE

34 Muttontown Lane, PO Box 250, East Norwich, NY 11732 • 1-877-BOI-SEAS • seafood@blueocean.org