NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-PIFSC-42 

November 2014 

Stock Assessment Update for the Main Hawaiian 

Islands Deep7 Bottomfish Complex through 2013 with 

Projected Annual Catch Limits through 2016

Jon Brodziak, Annie Yau, Joseph O’Malley, 

Allen Andrews, Robert Humphreys, Ed DeMartini, 

Minling Pan, Michael Parke, and Eric Fletcher

Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Department of Commerce 

doi:10.7289/V5T151M8 
About this document

The mission of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is to 

understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment and to conserve and manage 

coastal and oceanic marine resources and habitats to help meet our Nation’s economic, 

social, and environmental needs. As a branch of NOAA, the National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS) conducts or sponsors research and monitoring programs to improve the 

scientific basis for conservation and management decisions. NMFS strives to make 

information about the purpose, methods, and results of its scientific studies widely available. 

NMFS’ Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) uses the NOAA Technical 

Memorandum NMFS series to achieve timely dissemination of scientific and technical 

information that is of high quality but inappropriate for publication in the formal peerreviewed literature. The contents are of broad scope, including technical workshop 

proceedings, large data compilations, status reports and reviews, lengthy scientific or 

statistical monographs, and more. NOAA Technical Memoranda published by the PIFSC, 

although informal, are subjected to extensive review and editing and reflect sound 

professional work. Accordingly, they may be referenced in the formal scientific and 

technical literature.

A NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS issued by the PIFSC may be cited using the 

following format:

Brodziak, J. A. Yau, J. O’Malley, A. Andrews, R. Humphreys, E. DeMartini, M. 

Pan, M. Parke, and E. Fletcher. 

2014. Stock assessment update for the main Hawaiian Islands Deep 7 

bottomfish complex through 2013 with projected annual catch limits through 

2016. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo., NOAA-TM-NMFS-PIFSC42, 61 p. 

__________________________ 

For further information direct inquiries to

Chief, Scientific Information Services 

Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Department of Commerce 

1845 Wasp Blvd 

Building 176 

Honolulu, Hawaii 96818-5007 

Phone: 808-725-5386 

Fax: 808-725-5532 

___________________________________________________________ 

doi:10.7289/V5T151M8 
Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center 

National Marine Fisheries Service

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Department of Commerce

Stock Assessment Update for the Main Hawaiian Islands 

Deep 7 Bottomfish Complex through 2013 with 

Projected Annual Catch Limits through 2016

Jon Brodziak, Annie Yau, Joseph O’Malley, 

Allen Andrews, Robert Humphreys, Ed DeMartini, 

Minling Pan, Michael Parke, and Eric Fletcher

Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service

1845 Wasp Boulevard 

Building 176

Honolulu, Hawaii 96818-5007

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-PIFSC-42 

November 2014

doi:10.7289/V5T151M8 

iii

CONTENTS

Abstract............................................................................................................................................1

Introduction......................................................................................................................................2

 Previous Benchmark Stock Assessment in 2011.......................................................................2

Current Assessment Update through 2013 ................................................................................4

Materials and Methods.....................................................................................................................5

Bottomfish Fishery Economics..................................................................................................5

Bottomfish Life History Characteristics....................................................................................5

Fishing Year...............................................................................................................................6

Fishery Catch .............................................................................................................................7

Reported Commercial Catch of Bottomfish ........................................................................7

Estimates of Unreported Bottomfish Catch .........................................................................7

Standardized Commercial Fishery Catch-Per-Unit Effort...................................................8

Fishery Data Filtering for CPUE Analyses..........................................................................8

Fishery CPUE Standardization and Catchability Time Periods ..........................................9

CPUE Standardization Model Selection..............................................................................9

Assessment Model ...................................................................................................................10

Same Model as in 2011 Benchmark Assessment ..............................................................10

Biomass Dynamics Model .................................................................................................10

Observation Error Model ...................................................................................................11

Prior Distributions..............................................................................................................12

Posterior Distributions.......................................................................................................12

Convergence Diagnostics...................................................................................................13

Model Diagnostics.............................................................................................................14

Sensitivity Analyses...........................................................................................................14

Annual Catch Limit Projections for 2015-2016.......................................................................14

Stock Projections ...............................................................................................................14

Results............................................................................................................................................16

Convergence Diagnostics.........................................................................................................16

Model Diagnostics...................................................................................................................16

Stock Status..............................................................................................................................16

Sensitivity Analyses.................................................................................................................17

Stock Projections .....................................................................................................................18

Summary........................................................................................................................................18

References......................................................................................................................................19

Tables.............................................................................................................................................24

Figures............................................................................................................................................47
iv
1

ABSTRACT

A stock assessment update of the main Hawaiian Islands Deep7 bottomfish complex was 

conducted through fishing year 2013. This update used the previous benchmark assessment data 

analysis, modeling, and stock projection approaches with one major improvement in CPUE 

standardization. This update was conducted using up-to-date re-audited bottomfish catch and 

effort data from Hawaii state commercial catch reports for the years 1948-2013. Unreported 

catch was estimated and included in the model using the previous methods. Standardized catchper-unit effort (CPUE) for the Deep7 bottomfish was estimated using catch and effort data from 

the deep-water bottomfish handline fishery. Model selection techniques were applied to select 

the best structural form to standardize CPUE. An important improvement to this stock 

assessment model is the inclusion of information on individual fishermen’s skill, or license 

effect, to standardize CPUE from 1994-2013; this resulted in a significant increase in the 

explanatory power of the CPUE standardization model but did not have a substantial effect on 

the estimated trend in CPUE. CPUE in the model was split into two time series (1949-1993, and 

1994-2013) in order to accommodate the inclusion of license effect which could only be tracked 

starting in 1994 when licenses became uniquely assigned to a fisher/vessel through time. A 

Bayesian production model was used to estimate time series of Deep7 bottomfish exploitable 

biomasses and harvest rates and was also used to conduct stochastic short-term projections of 

future catches, stock status conditions, and associated risks of overfishing in 2015-2016. These 

projections explicitly included uncertainty in the distribution of estimated bottomfish biomass in 

2014 and population dynamics parameters. Results of the catch and CPUE analyses, production 

modeling, and stock projections are summarized and are used to characterize uncertainty of 

Deep7 ACLs for fishing years 2015-2016 assuming alternative commercial catch amounts in 

2014. Overall, the Deep7 complex in the main Hawaiian Islands is not currently experiencing 

overfishing and is not currently depleted relative to the best available information on biological 

reference points, but the probability of the stock being overfished in 2013 is 45%.
2

INTRODUCTION

The Hawaii Deep7 bottomfish complex is a U.S. fishery management unit comprised of six 

species of snappers and a grouper inhabiting waters of the Hawaiian Archipelago (Table 1, 

Figure 1). The federal fisheries management regime includes three fishing zones: the main

Hawaiian Islands (MHI) Zone, and two zones in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, the Mau 

Zone and the Hoomalu Zone. All Deep7 bottomfish fishing currently takes place in the MHI 

zone due to the closure of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands under Presidential Proclamation 

80311

. The Deep7 bottomfish complex includes a subset of seven species, the “Deep 7” (Table 

1), that are the focus of this assessment and that have been a focus of fishery management 

measures in the main Hawaiian Islands since the archipelagic bottomfish stock was determined 

to be experiencing overfishing on an archipelagic basis in 2005 (Moffitt et al., 2006). 

Hawaii bottomfish were targeted by native Hawaiians using deep handlines from canoes for 

hundreds of years before the advent of the modern fishery after World War II. The modern 

fishery employs similar handline gear, albeit with braided synthetic line, along with power reels 

to haul back gear, fish finders to locate schools of fish, and global positioning systems (GPS) and 

other navigational aids to find fishing grounds. Although the efficiency of the modern fishery has 

likely improved through time (Moffitt et al., 2011), the current Hawaii bottomfish fishery still 

uses traditional deep handline capture methods for commercial and recreational harvest.

Bottomfish restricted fishing areas (BRFAs) were imposed in Hawaii state waters in 1998 and 

revised in 2006 to conserve fishery resources. Current BRFAs cover potentially consequential 

areas of bottomfish habitat in comparison to areas considered to be essential fish habitat (EFH) 

and habitat areas of particular concern (HAPC), although BRFAs are on the order of several 

percent of total possible bottomfish essential fish habitat, given uncertainties in habitat 

classification (Table 2).

Previous Benchmark Stock Assessment in 2011

The previous assessment of Hawaii Deep7 bottomfish complex stocks in the main Hawaiian 

Islands through 2010 used similar commercial fishery data as in the 2008 update but included a 

modified treatment of unreported catch and a revised CPUE standardization. The baseline model 

was a biomass production model with model structure similar to the 2008 update. The treatment 

of the assessment data and the production model was modified to improve the approximation of 

bottomfish population dynamics based on recommendations from the Western Pacific Stock 

Assessment Review [WPSAR] report (Stokes, 2009) as well as new research information on the 

expected life span of opakapaka, a key bottomfish species (Andrews et al. 2011, Andrews et al. 

2012).

The WPSAR recommendations for immediate consideration in the bottomfish stock assessment 

were (Stokes, 2009, see pp. 17-18):
3

1. Comprehensively explore MHI CPUE data and qualitative information in close 

collaboration with HDAR and fishers throughout the process. Develop credible CPUE 

standardization, including if appropriate alternative indices.

2. Attempt to reconstruct noncommercial catch histories, possibly in the same 

collaborative process used for (1).

3. Consider using meta-data to develop informative prior on Rmax. Develop prior for 

Binit in collaborative process above (1).

4. Assess MHI as single stock to develop population benchmarks and management 

parameters. Ensure appropriate sensitivity testing to CPUE uncertainty.

The 2011 bottomfish stock assessment was developed to address each of the WPSAR review 

recommendations within the constraints of available data and the time required to generate the 

assessment for subsequent fishery management purposes.

The first WPSAR recommendation was addressed by modifying the treatment of CPUE 

standardization. In particular, three alternative scenarios of changes in fishing power of 

bottomfish fishing vessels were developed. These alternatives included: (i) the baseline scenario 

(also labeled CPUE Scenario I) which assumed that there was a negligible change in bottomfish 

fishing power through time as was assumed in the WPRFMC SSC’s production model analysis 

of the 2008 bottomfish assessment data (WPRFMC SSC 2009, unpubl.); (ii) a scenario that 

assumed a moderate change in fishing power, on the order of a 10% increase over roughly 60 

years, had occurred (CPUE Scenario II); and (iii) a scenario that assumed a substantial change in 

fishing power, on the order of a 70% increase over 60 years, had occurred (CPUE Scenario III) 

as was assumed in both the 2005 bottomfish assessment (Moffitt et al., 2006) and the 2008 

bottomfish assessment update (Brodziak et al., 2009). 

In addition to the three primary CPUE scenarios, two alternative modeling approaches were also 

investigated to estimate standardized CPUE in order to address concerns about the potential 

influence of model structure and the treatment of zero-reported catch trips in the HDAR reports 

database. In particular, we evaluated whether using different statistical models to standardize 

CPUE would produce results that differed substantially from the baseline scenario. Details of the 

alternative scenarios and analyses were provided in the 2011 assessment section on CPUE 

standardization (Brodziak et al. 2011). 

The second WPSAR recommendation was addressed by developing estimates of unreported 

Hawaii bottomfish catch. One baseline scenario of estimates of unreported catch used for the 

stock status determination assumed the ratio of unreported to reported catch was 1.08 on average, 

and three alternative scenarios of unreported catch were also developed to characterize the 

uncertainty in the available information about unreported catch. These estimates were based, in 

part, on published information about estimates of unreported bottomfish catch from Zeller et al. 

(2008) and Hamm and Lum (1992), as well as using other sources of data (Martell et al., 2011; 

Lamson et al., 2007; Courtney and Brodziak, 2011). Details of these analyses and the baseline 

and three alternative scenarios were provided in the 2011 assessment section on fishery catch and 

the estimation of unreported catch (Brodziak et al. 2011).
4

The third WPSAR recommendation was addressed by applying the assessment model to estimate 

the biomass and harvest rates of the set of Deep7 bottomfish species rather than all of the 

primary bottomfish species as in the 2005 assessment. In this context, the Deep7 bottomfish were 

a subset of the primary bottomfish, which were also a subset of the full set of all bottomfish 

management unit species (BMUS) included in the fishery management plan 

http://www.wpcouncil.org/bottomfish/Bottomfish%20FMP.html). The changes to assess only the 

Deep7 species was made because the Deep7 species have similar life histories and distributions, 

and were the focus of management efforts by the WPRFMC, using TAC regulation and closed 

seasons (WPRFMC, 2007). In contrast, in the bottomfish assessments prior to 2011, several 

productive shallow-water bottomfish species were included in the set of species modeled. In this 

context, it was judged that modeling Deep7 species as a biologically and ecologically related 

complex would provide a much better approximation of their population dynamics, would be 

more consistent with the fishery management approach being applied to the Hawaii bottomfish, 

and would provide a more accurate estimate of the probable levels of intrinsic growth rate and 

associated levels of sustainable harvest. As a result, prior distributions of parameters in the stock 

assessment model were revised to incorporate new research information on the life span of 

opakapaka, a primary Deep7 bottomfish, based on bomb radiocarbon and lead radium dating 

(Andrews et al. 2011, Andrews et al. 2012). These modifications and analyses were described in 

sections of the 2011 assessment (Brodziak et al. 2011) on fishery catch, CPUE standardization, 

and production modeling.

The fourth WPSAR recommendation was addressed by assessing the Deep7 bottomfish in the 

main Hawaiian Islands as a single unit stock. As a result, the putative archipelagic stock, which 

is comprised of all bottomfish in the MHI and Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, is not assessed in 

this document. To do this, the assessment data and production model were revised to focus solely 

on the status and management parameters of the Deep7 complex in the MHI in the current 

assessment, including explicit treatment of uncertainty about the CPUE estimates. In the 2011 

assessment, both parametric and model uncertainty in the assessment results under the alternative 

fishing power and unreported catch scenarios were characterized to the extent practicable with 

the available data and resources (Brodziak et al. 2011).

Current Assessment Update through 2013

The current Deep7 bottomfish stock assessment update through 2013 uses the same analytical 

approaches and assessment methodology as in the 2011 assessment. The 2014 update includes an 

improved CPUE standardization analysis of data from 1994 to 2013 when Hawaii state 

commercial logbooks included consistent commercial marine license information to estimate 

fishery license/vessel effects. The inclusion of the license effect improved the explanatory power 

of the CPUE standardization by over 200% since 1994 and the resulting standardized CPUE was 

included in the updated production model analysis of the Deep7 bottomfish complex. Overall, 

results of the assessment update through 2013, and the stock projections produced using the 

assessment update were similar to the 2011 stock assessment.
5

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Here we provide basic information on the Deep7 bottomfish fishery system, including 

information on bottomfish fishery economics, bottomfish life history characteristics, bottomfish 

fishery-dependent data, commercial fishery CPUE standardization and results, and production 

model assumptions and structure that were used to estimate biomass and fishing mortality for the 

Deep7 bottomfish 2010 stock assessment in the main Hawaiian Islands.

Bottomfish Fishery Economics

Economic information on the Deep7 bottomfish fishery was collected from the Hawaii state 

fishery reporting system. Information on the number of commercial marine license holders 

participating in the MHI Deep7 bottomfish fishery indicates an increase in participation since 

2002 (Table 3.1). Inflation-adjusted ex-vessel revenues have fluctuated around $1.5 million USD 

since 2002 (Table 3.1). Average prices for Deep7 bottomfish commercial catches have fluctuated 

around $6.80/pound (Table 3.2). Total bottomfish revenues in 2012 increased by about 1⁄2 million 

USD since 2002, primarily due to increased revenues from non-Deep7 bottomfish landings 

(Table 3.2). This shift to non-Deep7 landings and revenues is apparent in the percent of total 

revenues derived from the sale of Deep7 bottomfish which decreased from about 92% in 2002 to 

about 65% in 2012 (Table 3.3). The Gini coefficient for bottomfish revenue by vessel indicates 

there is a relatively high concentration of revenues for the top-revenue generating vessels (Table 

3.3) and this is consistent with survey-based information on the higher frequency of highliner 

vessels relative to part-time fishery participants (Hospital and Beavers 2013). The season length 

for the Deep7 fishery was reduced during the period 2008-2010 to achieve reductions in fishing 

mortality and this reduction affected realized fishery catches and revenues (Table 3.3).

Bottomfish Life History Characteristics

The Hawaii bottomfish complex is comprised of shallow-water jacks and snappers, and 

deepwater snappers and a grouper (i.e., the Deep7 bottomfish, Table 1). A separate subunit of 

seamount groundfish (armorheads and alfonsins) is not found in the main Hawaiian Islands. The 

ecological niches occupied by the shallow-water and deepwater components of the bottomfish 

complex differ substantially. In assessments of this complex prior to 2011, several of the 

shallow-water and all of the deepwater bottomfish were combined for production model 

analyses; these are the primary bottomfish species (Table 1). In the 2011 assessment and this 

2014 update, production model analyses are used to assess the status of the set of deepwater 

bottomfish species because these species are the focus of management regulations, which have 

included seasonal fishery closures and annual total allowable catch limits.

There is limited quantitative information on the life history parameters of the Deep7 bottomfish, 

and in particular, the early life stages and juvenile characteristics of Hawaii bottomfish are not 
6

yet well-described. Adult’s essential fish habitat includes deep-water habitats of roughly 100-400 

m depth in the main Hawaiian Islands, although some species (e.g., opakapaka) shoal to midwater depths to feed. 

Age determination for the Hawaiian snapper, or opakapaka (Pristipomoides filamentosus), has 

been challenging because their otoliths lack well-developed annual growth zones. Early growth 

has been well documented, and validated otolith growth rates were successfully developed for 

the first few years of growth using daily increments (Ralston and Miyamoto, 1983; Radtke, 

1987). However, recent research on ageing of opakapaka (Table 1), based on bomb C-14 

radiocarbon and lead radium dating of archival otolith samples shows that this species has a life 

span on the order of 40 years (Andrews et al. 2011, Andrews et al. 2012). Recent ageing research 

conducted since the 2011 assessment using bomb C-14 ageing of three Deep7 species indicates 

that potential lifespans are on the order of 50 years at 91 cm fork length (FL) for hapuupuu, 49 

years at 79 cm FL for onaga, and 39 years at 43 cm FL for gindai (Table 1). Overall, the new 

information on maximal observed ages of Deep7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands is very 

consistent with biological assumptions about the prior mean value of intrinsic growth rate for the 

bottomfish complex. As a result, the same prior assumptions about the intrinsic growth 

parameter from the 2011 assessment were used in this assessment update.

Information on the expected natural mortality rate of opakapaka from the research thesis of 

Martinez-Andrade (2003) was used for the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main Hawaiian 

Islands. The natural mortality rate estimate of M=0.25 for opakapa was assumed to be 

representative of the Deep7 bottomfish complex, noting that opakapaka is the most numerically 

abundant species in the complex and has historically accounted for the highest proportion of 

reported landings. This natural mortality estimate was about 15% lower than the value of M=0.30 

used in the 2011 benchmark assessment. In particular, for the purposes of determining a 

minimum stock size threshold (BMSST) of (1 ) B MB MSST =− ⋅ MSY , which is part of the bottomfish 

complex fishery management plan (FMP), the natural mortality rate value of M=0.25 was 

considered to be the best available scientific information for this stock assessment update in light 

of the new information on potential bottomfish lifespan and this value was used for calculating 

the BMSST =0.75*BMSY of the complex. 

Fishing Year

The 2014 assessment update uses the same annual time period for reporting bottomfish catch as 

in the 2011 assessment. Catch and CPUE information is based on the fishing year from July 1st

of the previous year through June 30th of the current year, i.e. the 2014 fishing year occurs from 

July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2014. This fishing year time period coincides with the State of Hawaii’s 

fiscal year and commercial marine license period but differs somewhat from the definition of 

fishing year in the bottomfish FMP (which extends from September 1st of the previous year 

through August 31st of the current year). The fishing year time period also closely corresponds to 

the annual biological cycle of the Deep7 snapper and grouper bottomfish complex which spawn 

in late spring to early summer. Estimates of annual production biomass starting in July coincide 

with the settlement of juvenile bottomfish through midsummer. More importantly, the 
7

commercial fishery catch of Deep7 bottomfish is typically highest during the winter months 

when there is strong market demand for red snapper during New Year holidays. 

Fishery Catch

Reported Commercial Catch of Bottomfish

Reported fishery catch data for the 2014 assessment update included commercial bottomfish 

catch and effort data extracted from about 4.6 million HDAR commercial trip catch reports 

submitted by commercial fishermen during 1948-2014 (K. Lowe, PIFSC, pers. comm.). 

Bottomfish catch data from these trip reports were assigned to the main Hawaiian Islands and the 

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands fishing zones, based on the reported HDAR fishing area in the 

trip reports (Figure 1). Only data for the main Hawaiian Islands are used in this assessment. 

Some bottomfish trip reports reported an unknown fishing area, and the minor catch amounts 

from these trip reports were prorated to fishing areas based on the Deep7 catch proportion by 

zone in each fishing year. The reported catch of Deep7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands 

was tabulated by fishing year during 1949-2013 for use in the current stock assessment (Table 4).

Estimates of Unreported Bottomfish Catch

Estimates of unreported Deep7 bottomfish catch were based on estimated ratios of unreported to 

reported catch summarized by Courtney and Brodziak (2011) and Brodziak et al. (2011). These 

estimates of unreported catch were included in the current stock assessment to account for the 

effects of total fishery removals on the complex, as recommended by Stokes (2009). The general 

approach for estimating unreported catch (CU) was the same as in the 2011 benchmark 

assessment. We used all available relevant information to estimate the ratio of unreported to 

reported bottomfish catch (U) in the main Hawaiian Islands, noting that there is no directed longterm monitoring program in place for quantifying the amount of unreported catches of 

bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands. In general, unreported bottomfish catch was estimated 

from reported catch (CR) and annual estimates of the ratio of unreported to reported catch U as 

CU = U* CR.

As in the 2011 assessment, the magnitude of the unreported catch ratio U was estimated for each 

Deep7 species by fishing year to account for annual variation in the species composition of the 

reported Deep7 bottomfish catch (Courtney and Brodziak, 2011, Brodziak et al 2011). The 

unreported catch ratios by species were estimated based on information in Hamm and Lum 

(1992), Martell et al. (2011), and Lamson et al. (2007). The resulting estimates of the unreported 

catch ratio U (Table 5) indicated that unreported catch was slightly larger in magnitude to the 

reported commercial catch (Tables 4 and 5). The recent survey of bottomfish fishers conducted 

by Hospital and Beavers (2013) confirmed this magnitude of unreported bottomfish catch. 

Overall, the average unreported to reported catch ratio during 2008-2013 used in the 2011 and 
8

2014 assessments was U = 1.08 and the magnitude of the recent average unreported catch was on 

the order of about 240 thousand pounds. The model included a +/- 20% range of uncertainty 

around the estimated unreported catch values (Brodziak et al. 2011). 

The total catch of Deep7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands was comprised of the 

combined reported and unreported catch data (Table 6). Reported catches of Deep7 bottomfish in 

the main Hawaiian Islands were also apportioned to summary island groups based on the fishing 

area reported in the trip catch reports (Tables 7.1 and 7.2). In this summary, any minor catches 

with unknown fishing area were prorated to island group based on the annual proportions of 

reported catch by known area (Table 7.2).

Standardized Commercial Fishery Catch-Per-Unit Effort

Estimation of standardized commercial fishery CPUE for Deep7 bottomfish was revised in this 

assessment update from the 2011 assessment to include information about commercial marine 

license effects and individual fishermen’s skill during 1994-2013 when such information was 

recorded in the Hawaii state logbook information. Otherwise, the CPUE standardization 

approach was the same as the analytical approach used in the 2011 assessment.

Fishery Data Filtering for CPUE Analyses

The same fishery logbook data filtering procedures from the previous 2011 stock assessment 

(Brodziak et al. 2011) were used in the 2014 update to calculate standardized CPUE. In brief, 

Deep7 bottomfish catch per single-day trip reports were summarized for directed deep handline 

trips in the MHI. Commercial trip reports were audited to remove duplicate records and also 

records that were missing fishing date, CML number, or fishing area. Only commercial trip 

reports that reported using deep handline fishing gear were selected for Deep7 bottomfish CPUE 

analyses because this gear was the predominant fishing gear used to capture Deep7 bottomfish, 

accounting for over 97% of commercial Deep7 bottomfish landings by weight during 1949-2013.

Commercial fishery CPUE data were filtered to remove uninformative trip reports, based on the 

recommendations of the bottomfish CPUE standardization workshop held in 2008 (Moffitt et al., 

2011). In particular, CPUE data for trip reports that reported catches of over 1500 pounds of 

primary bottomfish per day were excluded because these reports were multiday trip reports and 

were extremely unlikely to represent single-day trip operations. In addition, all CPUE data 

reported during FY 1958-1960 were excluded from the CPUE standardization analyses because 

nominal CPUE was anomalously low during these years as determined by the WPSAR panel 

(Stokes, 2009). Further examination suggested that these 3 years contained substantially more 

aggregated catch records than other years in which catches from several single-day trips were 

aggregated and reported in a combined trip report record (Brodziak et al. 2011). Last, the cutoff 

fraction of percent Deep7 bottomfish catch per trip report was set to the value (17%) used in the 

2011 benchmark stock assessment (Brodziak et al. 2011).
9

Fishery CPUE Standardization and Catchability Time Periods

In the 2014 assessment update, two time periods for CPUE standardization were used to include 

the best available information on fishery effective effort. These time periods were: 1949-1993 

and 1994-2013. The latter time period was used to include license/vessel effects in the CPUE 

standardization and also to represent probable changes in the effective effort of the fishing fleet 

that targets Deep7 bottomfish with the advent of GPS and other high-accuracy location-reporting 

technology. This split of the CPUE data analyses was also done to address the WPSAR 

recommendation that the assessment include appropriate testing of CPUE uncertainty (Stokes, 

2009). For the 1949-1993 time period, the CPUE standardization model from the 2011 

assessment was compared to an alternative similar model using AIC for model selection. For the 

1994-2013 time period, four alternative CPUE standardization models were considered and AIC 

was used to select among these alternatives. , CPUE standardization analyses with two time 

periods (1949-1993 and 1994-2013) were used in the 2014 assessment update. 

CPUE Standardization Model Selection

In the 2011 assessment, Deep7 bottomfish CPUE in the main Hawaiian Islands was standardized 

using a multiplicative loglinear model (Gavaris, 1980; Kimura, 1981) with fixed effects of year, 

fishing area (Figure 2), and season, as well as area by season interactions (Brodziak et al. 2011). 

In this assessment update, the same analysis approach was applied for the 1949-1993 time period 

and this analysis produced nearly identical results (Tables 8 and 9.1) as the 2011 analysis and 

explained the same amount of CPUE variation (R2 = 24%). Several other factors were explored 

in the 2011 assessment and not included in the CPUE standardization because of poor CPUE fits 

as measured by AIC values; such factors were also not included in this assessment update. For 

1994-2013, we applied model selection techniques to evaluate four alternative models that were 

variants of the 2011 standardization model that either included or did not include commercial 

marine license and interaction effects (Table 8). The results of the comparisons of CPUE 

standardization models for 1994-2013 indicate that the best fitting model by far included year, 

area, season, and commercial marine license effects (Tables 8 and 9.2). This model explained 

more than twice the amount of CPUE variation (R2 = 53%) as the alternative models, which 

indicated that the commercial marine license effect provided a substantial amount of explanatory 

power for the magnitude of Deep7 bottomfish CPUE. This was consistent with the findings of 

the fishery survey conducted by Hospital and Beavers (2013) as well as other information 

sources that the fisher skill effect is very important for explaining catch rates in the main

Hawaiian Islands bottomfish fishery.

As a result, two time series of standardized CPUE data for Deep7 bottomfish in the main

Hawaiian Islands are used in the 2014 assessment update (Table 10); one for 1949-1993 using 

the same analytic approach as in the 2011 assessment and one for 1994-2013 using an improved 

analytic approach that incorporates fishing license/vessel effects. For comparison, we also 

calculated standardized CPUE using a single 1949-2013 time period and the same model as in 

the 2011 assessment (Table 10). In this comparison, we found that the two-period and single 
10

period CPUE values were highly significantly correlated (P<0.01) for 1949-1993 (ρ>0.99) and 

for 1994-2013 (ρ=0.87). 

Assessment Model

Same Model as in 2011 Benchmark Assessment

As noted above, the 2011 stock assessment modeling approach is also used in the current 

assessment. In particular, a Bayesian generalized surplus production model was fit to the catch 

and standardized CPUE time series. The 2014 model differs from the 2011 model only in that it 

includes two time periods for the CPUE observation fitting with both of these time periods fitted 

separately with different catchability coefficients and observation error variances. The model 

linked the two CPUE time series through continuous estimates of biomass and harvest rate, and 

the estimate of a single set of reference points. In brief, the production model structure and 

assumptions from the 2011 assessment are reviewed below. Further details can be found in 

Brodziak et al. (2011).

Biomass Dynamics Model

The biomass dynamics model for the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the MHI is formulated as a 

Bayesian-state space production model. This model includes explicit observation and process 

error terms that have been commonly used for fitting production models with relative abundance 

indices (Meyer and Millar, 1999; Brodziak 2001; McAllister et al., 2001; Punt, 2003; Brodziak 

and Ishimura, 2011). The exploitable biomass time series comprise the unobserved state 

variables and these annual biomasses are estimated by fitting model predictions to the observed 

relative abundance indices (i.e., CPUE) and catches using the observation error likelihood 

function and prior distributions for the model parameters (θ). In particular, the observation error 

likelihood measures the discrepancy between observed and predicted CPUE, while the prior 

distributions represent the relative degree of belief about the probable values of model 

parameters. 

The process dynamics represent the temporal fluctuations in exploitable bottomfish biomass due 

to density-dependent population processes (e.g., growth) and fishery catches. The generalized 

production model is a power function model with an annual time step. Under this 3-parameter 

model, exploitable biomass in time period T (BT) depends only on previous values of exploitable 

biomass (BT-1), catch (CT-1), intrinsic growth rate (R), carrying capacity (K), and production 

shape parameter (M) for T = 2,..., N.

(1) 1

1 1 1 1

M

T

TT T T

B B B RB C

K

−

− − −

    = +⋅ − −        
11

The production model shape parameter M determines where surplus production peaks as biomass 

varies as a fraction of carrying capacity (Figure 3). If the shape parameter is less than unity (0 < 

M < 1), then surplus production peaks when biomass is below 1⁄2 of K (i.e., a right-skewed 

production curve). If the shape parameter M is greater than unity (M > 1), then biomass 

production is highest when biomass is above 1⁄2 of K (i.e., a left-skewed production curve). If the 

shape parameter is identically unity (M = 1), then the production model is identical to a discretetime Schaefer production model where maximum surplus production occurs when biomass is 

equal to 1⁄2 of K. In practice, estimates of the shape parameter M for Deep7 biomass production in 

the MHI tend to be around M = 2 indicating a relatively lower productivity stock. 

For computations, the production model is expressed in terms of the proportion (P) of carrying 

capacity (i.e., setting P = B/K) to improve the efficiency of the Markov Chain Monte Carlo 

algorithm to estimate parameters (e.g., Meyer and Millar, 1999). Given this, the process 

dynamics for the temporal changes in the proportion of carrying capacity with lognormal errors 

are

(2) ( )

1 1

1

1 11 1 ,1 M T

TT T T T

P

C P P R P P forT K

η

η −

− −−

=

  = +⋅ − − ⋅ >    

These coupled equations set the prior distribution for the proportion of carrying capacity, p(PT), 

in each time period T, conditioned on the proportion in the previous period.

Observation Error Model

The observation error model relates the observed fishery CPUE to the exploitable biomass of the 

bottomfish complex for each CPUE standardization time period, i.e. 1949-1993 and 1994-2013. 

It is assumed that the standardized fishery CPUE index (I) in each time period is proportional to 

biomass with time period specific catchability coefficient q

(3) TT T I qB qKP = =

The observed CPUE dynamics are subject to natural sampling variation which is assumed to be 

lognormally distributed. The observation errors are distributed as T

T e

e ν = where the εT are 

independent and identically distributed normal random variables with zero mean and weighted 

variance (WT·τ)

2 with standard deviation τ and weighting factor WT. The weighting factors (WT) 

of the annual CPUE variance terms reflect the relative uncertainty of the value of the CPUE 

index in year T and are scaled using the coefficient of variation (CV) of the difference between 

the observed and predicted log-transformed biomass indices (Brodziak and Ishimura, 2011). In 

particular, the annual weighting factors are calculated from the relative coefficients of variation 

of each annual CPUE index and the minimum observed CV of CPUE (min(CV[CPUE])) as WT = 
12

CV[CPUET]/min(CV[CPUE]). These weighting factors are derived from the annual standard 

error of standardized CPUE (Table 10).

Given the lognormal observation errors, the observation equations for each annual period 

indexed by T = 1,..., N are

(4) T TT I qKP = ⋅ν

The joint distribution of the error terms over the two CPUE standardization periods defines the 

observation error likelihood function p(IT|θ) for the Deep7 bottomfish CPUE indices through 

time.

Prior Distributions

Prior distributions are employed to represent existing knowledge and beliefs about the likely 

values of model parameters in the exact same manner as the 2011 assessment (Table 11). In 

particular, the carrying capacity parameter, the intrinsic growth rate parameter, the production 

shape parameter, the catchability parameter, the process and observation error variance 

parameters, and the initial biomass as a proportion of carrying capacity parameters each have 

prior distributions as described in Brodziak et al. (2011). Unobserved biomass states are also 

assigned the same priors as in the 2011 assessment and are expressed as the proportion of 

carrying capacity, conditioned on the previous proportion, and the catchability parameter (Table 

11).

Posterior Distribution

Independent samples from the joint posterior distribution of the production model parameters are 

numerically simulated to estimate model parameters and make inferences. In comparison to the 

2011 benchmark stock assessment, the only change in the 2014 model is that there are two time 

period of CPUE observations, 1949-1993 and 1994-2013, and two associated catchability 

parameters, q1 and q2, and observation error variances, τ1 and τ2.The joint posterior distribution 

of model parameters, p(θ|D), is proportional to the product of the priors and the joint likelihood 

of the CPUE data given the catch and CPUE data D

(5)

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1

1

222

12 12

1 11 1

(| )

| ||

N N N N

T TT T

T T T T N

p D pK pR pM pQ pQ p p p

pC pP pI pI

θ σττ

θ θθ = = = = +

∝ ⋅

∏ ∏∏ ∏

We use a numerical Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulation to generate sequences of 

estimates from the posterior distribution or model solution. Parameter estimation for 

multiparameter and nonlinear Bayesian models like the bottomfish production model is typically 
13

based on simulating a large number of independent samples from the posterior distribution 

(Gelman et al., 1995). In this case, MCMC simulation (Gilks et al., 1996) is applied to 

numerically generate samples from the posterior distribution. The WinBUGS software (Lunn et 

al., 2000; Spiegelhalter et al., 2003) and R Language (R Development Core Team, 2009) using 

the R2WinBUGS package (Sturtz et al., 2005) were applied to program the production model, to 

set the initial conditions, to perform the MCMC calculations, to generate model diagnostics, and 

to summarize the assessment model results. 

Production model results include the stock status of the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main

Hawaiian Islands relative to maximum sustainable yield (MSY) based reference points. Time 

series of the relative harvest rate (e.g., in 2007 the relative harvest rate is the ratio H2007/HMSY) 

and relative biomass (e.g., the ratio B2007/BMSY) are calculated for MHI Deep7 bottomfish using 

the ratio of mean values from the joint posterior distribution of model parameters. Probabilities 

of overfishing and becoming overfished are calculated based on an overfishing definition of 

H>HMSY, and an overfished definition of B<0.75*BMSY. 

Convergence Diagnostics

MCMC simulations are conducted in an identical manner for the baseline assessment model and 

all sensitivity analyses described below. Two chains of 110,000 samples are simulated from the 

posterior distribution in each model run. The first 10,000 samples of each simulated chain are 

excluded from the estimation process. The 10,000 sample burn-in period removes dependence of 

the MCMC chains on the initial conditions. Next, each chain is thinned by 4 to reduce 

autocorrelation, e.g., every fourth sample from the posterior distribution is stored and used for 

inference. As a result, a total of 50,000 samples from the posterior distribution are available to 

summarize model results. 

Convergence of the simulated MCMC chains to the posterior distribution is confirmed using the 

Geweke convergence diagnostic (Geweke et al., 1992), the Gelman and Rubin diagnostic 

(Gelman and Rubin, 1992; Brooks et al., 1998) and the Heidelberger and Welch stationarity and 

half-width diagnostics (Heidelberger and Welch, 1992). These diagnostic tests are implemented 

in the R Language (R Development Core Team, 2009) using the CODA software package (Best 

et al., 1996; Plummer et al., 2006). The set of convergence diagnostics are monitored for key 

model parameters (intrinsic growth rate, carrying capacity, production function shape parameter, 

catchability coefficient, MSY-parameters, and error variances) to verify convergence of the 

MCMC chains to the posterior distribution (e.g., Ntzoufras, 2009).
14

Model Diagnostics

Residuals from the baseline model fit to CPUE by time period are used to measure the goodness 

of fit of the production model. These log-scale observation errors εT of observed minus predicted 

Deep7 bottomfish CPUE are

(6) ε TT T = − log log (I QKP ) ( )

Any nonrandom pattern in the CPUE residuals would suggest that the observed CPUE may not 

conform to one or more model assumptions. The RMSE of the CPUE fit provides a simple 

diagnostic of the model goodness of fit with lower RMSE indicating a better fit.

Comparisons of the prior distributions and estimated posterior distributions are made to show 

whether the observed catch and standardized CPUE data are informative for estimating model 

parameters. This comparison includes the priors and posteriors for the following model 

parameters: carrying capacity, production shape, intrinsic growth rate, initial proportion of 

carrying capacity, observation error variance, process error variance, catchability parameters, 

BMSY, MSY, and HMSY.

Sensitivity Analyses

Sensitivity analyses are conducted to evaluate how model results would be affected if different 

assumptions are made regarding the mean value of key prior distributions. These sensitivity 

analyses are conducted to confirm the expected results from the more extensive sensitivity 

analyses conducted in the 2011 stock assessment (Brodziak et al. 2011). The sensitivity of the 

production model results to the prior mean for intrinsic growth rate is evaluated by fitting the 

model using two different prior means for R. In this case, the prior mean for R is reduced by 25% 

and increased by 25%. Similarly, the sensitivity of the production model results to the prior mean 

for carrying capacity is evaluated by fitting the model when the prior means for K, M, and P1 are 

reduced by 25% and increased by 25%. 

Annual Catch Limit Projections for 2015-2016

Stock Projections

Stock projections are conducted to provide information on the risk that the Deep7 bottomfish 

complex would experience overfishing or become overfished under alternative annual catch 

limits in fishing years 2015 and 2016. The stock projections start with estimates of exploitable 

bottomfish biomass and all other model parameters taken directly from the joint posterior 

distribution in the 2014 base case model. We use a grid of possible annual catch limits for the 
15

commercial fishery to approximate the effects of different commercial harvest amounts on the 

resource. This grid consists of commercial catches of 0, 2, 4, ..., up to 1000 in units of thousands 

of pounds, i.e., the grid ranges from no commercial catch to 1,000,000 pounds of commercial 

catch. Simulations are conducted for each commercial catch value in the grid; each simulation 

consists of 41,000 MCMC samples with 1,000 discarded for burn-in and a sampling rate of 1 in 4 

values. Unreported catch in the projections is treated as a random variable using the same 

approach as used in the base case model. That is, each simulated unreported catch is sampled 

from a uniform distribution centered at its expected value from the unreported catch ratio and 

commercial catch with a range of -20% to +20%.

As in the 2011 stock assessment, estimated posterior distributions of bottomfish production 

model parameters in 2013 are projected forward for fishing years 2014-2016 to estimate future 

probable stock status under alternative future realized annual catch limits for the commercial 

fishery. In particular, we calculate the probability of overfishing, P*, under alternative future 

catches. These stock projections account for uncertainty in the distribution of estimates of model 

parameters in the estimation of P* for use in determining the overfishing level and setting annual 

catch limits (ACLs) or annual catch targets (ACTs) based on projected catch levels, noting that if 

there is no adjustment in the risk of overfishing due to catch or management uncertainty then the 

ACL is the same as the ACT.

The stock projections are conducted assuming the ACLs in fishing years 2015 and 2016 are 

equal as assumed in the 2011 stock assessment projections. The amount of the 2014 annual catch 

limit of 346,000 pounds of commercial Deep7 Hawaii bottomfish that is expected to be caught in 

fishing year 2014 is projected at several different values ranging from 70% to 94% of the 

commercial ACL set by the WPRFMC. These assumed 2014 catches are 244, 276, 310, and 325 

thousand pounds corresponding to percentages of 70%, 80%, 90%, and 94% of the 2014 ACL 

being caught. It should be noted that in-season summaries of HDAR catch reports indicate that 

about 83% of the 2014 ACL had been caught between September 1, 2013 and June 27, 2014. By 

projecting a range of 2014 commercial catches, the effects of different amounts of annual catch 

of commercial Deep7 Hawaii bottomfish in fishing year 2014 are examined. This provides a 

characterization of the effects of the as-yet not completed Deep7 bottomfish harvest in fishing 

year 2014.
16

RESULTS

In this section, production model outcomes are described. The results include: model diagnostics, 

exploitable biomass and fishing mortality estimates to assess stock status, sensitivity analyses, 

and projection analyses.

Convergence Diagnostics

Convergence diagnostics indicated the MCMC simulation to estimate the posterior distribution 

of production model parameters converged. In particular, none of the Geweke diagnostics were 

greater than 2 standard deviations. The Gelman and Rubin potential scale reduction factors were 

equal to unity for parameters confirming convergence to the posterior distribution. The 

Heidelberger and Welch stationarity and half-width diagnostic tests were also passed by all of 

the parameters at a confidence level of α = 0.05. Overall, the convergence diagnostics and 

relatively low autocorrelations supported the convergence of the 2014 assessment model.

Model Diagnostics

Model residuals indicated that the production model provided a good fit to the standardized 

CPUE observations during both the 1949-1993 (Figures 4.1 and 4.2) and 1994-2013 (Figures 5.1 

and 5.2) time periods. Model residuals did not exhibit significant trends in either time period and 

also conformed to error distribution assumptions (Figures 4.2 and 5.2).

Stock Status

Production model estimates indicated that HMSY was about 6.6% and that BMSY was about 

13.5 million pounds of exploitable Deep7 bottomfish biomass with an associated maximum 

sustainable yield of roughly 415 thousand pounds (Table 11). Estimates of production model 

parameters were also compared to the results of a simple update of the 2011 assessment using the 

single time series CPUE (Table 10). Overall, the comparison indicated that the results were 

similar and that there was a slightly lower HMSY and higher BMSY using the single time series 

of CPUE (Table 11).

Based on the 2014 assessment update for Deep7 bottomfish (Table 11), the mean estimates of the 

MSY-based biological reference points of maximum sustainable yield (MSY ± one standard 

error, expressed in units of reported catch), the harvest rate to produce MSY (HMSY ± one 

standard error), and the exploitable biomass to produce MSY (BMSY ± one standard error), were:
17

1) MSY = 415,000 pounds (± 164,000 pounds)

2) HMSY = 6.6% (± 2.4%)

3) BMSY = 13.5 million pounds (± 3.9 million pounds). 

In comparison to the 2011 assessment, the 2014 assessment estimates of maximum sustained 

yield MSY =415,000 pounds and BMSY=13.5 million pounds were 0.5% and 7% lower than the 

2011 estimates (Brodziak et al. 2011), respectively, while the 2014 assessment estimate of the 

harvest rate to produce MSY HMSY=6.6% was 7% higher than the 2011 estimate. Overall, 2014 

assessment estimates of exploitable biomass by year were moderately lower than the 2011 

assessment estimates although the time trends were very similar and there was no statistically 

significant difference between the 2014 and 2011 estimates. Similarly, 2014 assessment 

estimates of harvest rates by year were moderately higher than 2011 assessment estimates but 

had a very similar trend and differences were not statistically significant. 

Estimates of the exploitable biomass of the Deep7 bottomfish complex exhibited a long-term 

decline from high values in the 1960s-1970s to lower values around BMSY in the early 1990s 

(Table 12 and Figure 6). Exploitable biomass fluctuated around BMSY in the late-1980s and has 

been below BMSY since the mid-1990s. Harvest rates were relatively low in the 1960s to mid1970s, increased to peak in 1989, and steadily declined to the mid-2000s (Table 12 and Figure 

7). Harvest rates declined from about twice HMSY in the late-1980s to range from about 60% to 

110% of HMSY since 2001.

The 2014 assessment results for the main Hawaiian Islands Deep7 bottomfish complex indicate 

that the stock was not depleted in 2013 (B2013/BMSY=0.86, Table 12 and Figure 6) but that there 

was a relatively high risk (45% probability) that the stock complex was overfished (Table 12 and 

Figure 6). The 2014 assessment results also indicate that the stock complex was not experiencing 

overfishing (H2013/HMSY=0.77, Table 12 and Figures 7 and 8). In fishing year 2013, there was a 

45% probability that exploitable biomass was below the limit of 0.75*BMSY and a 31% chance 

that the harvest rate exceeded HMSY. As a result, the Deep7 bottomfish stock complex was 

categorized as not being overfished and not experiencing overfishing in 2013. It is important to 

note that, while the probability that the stock complex is in an overfished condition has decreased 

slightly from 47% to 45% in recent years, the probability the stock complex was overfished in 

2013 is 45%.

Sensitivity Analyses

Results of the sensitivity analyses for the prior means of intrinsic growth rate, carrying capacity, 

initial proportion of carrying capacity, and production model shape parameters showed that most 

quantities of interest were not sensitive to a ±25% change in the mean (Table 13). Overall, the 

results appeared to be most sensitive to a change in the prior mean of the initial proportion of 

carrying capacity in 1949 and least sensitive to change in the prior mean of the production shape 

parameter. 
18

Stock Projections

Under the constant 2-year ACL stochastic projection scenarios evaluated, projected probabilities 

of overfishing, biomasses, harvest rates, and probabilities of depletion of Deep7 bottomfish 

showed the distribution of outcomes that would likely occur if alternative annual catch limits 

were set and realized in the main Hawaiian Islands during 2015-2016 (Table 14 and Figures 9, 

10, 11, and 12). Results of the stochastic projections indicated that the Deep7 ACL in 2015 that 

would produce approximately 50% chance of overfishing in 2015 (i.e., H2015 exceeding HMSY) 

ranged from 312,000 to 316,000 pounds depending on the amount of 2014 commercial catch; 

these values are close to the 2012-2013 ACTs of 325,000 pounds (Table 15 and Figure 9). For 

comparison, the smallest Deep7 2015 ACL for commercial catch that would lead to a roughly 

41% chance of overfishing was either 266,000 or 264,000 pounds depending on the amount of 

2014 commercial catch (Table 15 and Figure 9). Annual catch limits for commercial catches of 

Deep7 bottomfish in 2015 ranging from 116,000 to 382,000 pounds corresponded to risks of 

overfishing ranging from 10% to 60%. In 2015, the Deep7 annual catch limit to achieve a low 

risk of overfishing (P*=25%) in 2015 was estimated to be ACL25% = 190,000 or 186,000 pounds 

depending on the amount of 2014 commercial catch and the Deep7 ACL to achieve a high risk of 

overfishing (50%) was estimated to be ACL50% = 316,000 or 312,000 pounds depending on the 

amount of 2014 commercial catch. A 2015 ACL of 346,000 pounds would result in a 55% to 

56% risk of overfishing depending on the amount of 2014 commercial catch. Sensitivity analyses 

of the projection results to the amount of 2014 commercial catch indicate that the projected 

outcomes were not sensitive to catches ranging from 244,000 to 325,000 pounds (Table 15 and 

Figure 12) corresponding to a range of 70% to 94% of the 2014 ACL.

SUMMARY

The 2014 Deep7 bottomfish stock assessment update includes new information on commercial 

marine license effects for standardizing CPUE since 1994. This new information for estimating 

the relative abundance trend of bottomfish was incorporated into the stock assessment and 

changed mean estimates of exploitable biomass, harvest rates and biological reference points for 

the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main Hawaiian Islands in comparison to the 2011 stock 

assessment, although the differences are not significant. The Deep7 bottomfish stock complex in 

the main Hawaiian Islands was categorized as not being overfished and not experiencing 

overfishing in 2013. It is important to note that, while the probability that the stock complex is in 

an overfished condition has decreased slightly in recent years, it remains relatively high and the 

probability the stock complex was overfished in 2013 is 45%. The smallest Deep7 annual catch 

limit for commercial catch that would lead to a P*=41% chance of overfishing was about 

266,000 or 264,000 pounds depending on the amount of 2014 commercial catch; this was 

approximately the risk of overfishing chosen for setting the ABC and ACL in 2012-2013. In 

comparison, the Deep7 ACL to achieve a high risk of overfishing (50%) in 2015 was estimated 

to be ACL50% = 316,000 or 314,000 pounds depending on the amount of 2014 commercial catch; 

these values are just below the ACT in 2012-2013.
19

REFERENCES

Andrews, A. H., R. L. Humphreys, E. E. DeMartini, R. S. Nichols, and J. Brodziak. 2011. 

Bomb radiocarbon and lead-radium dating of opakapaka (Pristipomoides filamentosus). 

Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., NOAA, Honolulu, HI 96822-

2396. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent. Admin. Rep. H-11-07, 58 p. + Appendices.

Andrews, A. H., R. L. Humphreys, E. E. DeMartini, R. S. Nichols, and J. Brodziak. 2012. 

Comprehensive validation of a long-lived life history for a deep-water snapper 

(Pristipomoides filamentosus) using bomb radiocarbon and lead-radium dating, with 

daily increment data. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 69:1-20. doi:10.1139/f2012-109.

Best, N., M. Cowles, and K. Vines. 

1996. CODA: Convergence diagnostics and output analysis software for Gibbs sampling 

output, Version 0.30. MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK.

Brodziak, J., R. Moffitt, and G. DiNardo. 

2009. Hawaiian bottomfish assessment update for 2008. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. 

Mar. Fish. Ser., NOAA, Honolulu, HI 96822-2326. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent. 

Admin Rep. H-09-02, 93 p.

Brodziak, J., and G. Ishimura. 

2011. Development of Bayesian production models for assessing the North Pacific swordfish 

population. Fish. Sci. 77:23-34.

Brodziak, J., D. Courtney, L. Wagatsuma, J. O’Malley, H. Lee, W. Walsh, A. Andrews, R. 

Humphreys, and G. DiNardo. 2011. Stock assessment of the main Hawaiian Islands Deep7 

bottomfish complex through 2010. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo., NOAA-TMNMFS-PIFSC-29, 176 p. + Appendix.

Brooks, S. P., and A. Gelman. 

1998. Alternative methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. Journal of 

Computational and Graphical Statistics, 7:434–455.

Burnham, K., and D. Anderson. 

2002. Model selection and multimodel inference, 2nd Ed. Springer Verlag, New York, 488 p.

Courtney, D. and J. Brodziak. 

2011. Review of unreported to reported catch ratios for bottomfish resources in the main

Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. Mar. Fish. Ser., NOAA, 

Honolulu, HI 96822-2396. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent. Internal Rep. IR-11-017, 45 p. 
20

DeMartini, E., K. Landgraf, and S. Ralston. 

1994. A recharacterization of the age-length and growth relationships of Hawaiian snapper, 

Pristipomoides filamentosus. U.S. Dept. Commer. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOAA-TMNMFS-SWFSC-199, 14 p.

U.S. Department of Commerce [DOC]. 

2007. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act as amended through 

January 12, 2007, Public Law 94-265. Available at 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/msa2005/docs/MSA_amended_msa%20_20070112_FINAL.p

df.

Gavaris, S. 

1980. Use of a multiplicative model to estimate catch rate and effort from commercial data. 

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37:2272-2275.

Gelman, A., and D. Rubin. 

1992. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science 7:457-

511.

Gelman, A., J. Carlin, H. Stern, and D. Rubin. 

1995. Bayesian data analysis. Chapman and Hall, New York, NY, 526 p.

Geweke, J. 

1992. Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to calculating posterior 

moments. In Bernardo et al. [1992], p. 169-193.

Gilks, W. R., S. Richardson, and D. J. Spiegelhalter. [Eds.] 

1996. Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice. Chapman and Hall, London. 486 p.

Hamm, D., and H. K. Lum. 

1992. Preliminary results of the Hawaii small-boat fisheries survey. Honolulu Lab., 

Southwest Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., NOAA, Honolulu, HI 96822-2396. 

Southwest Fish. Sci. Cent. Admin. Rep. H-92-08, 35 p.

Heidelberger, P. and P. Welch. 

1992. Simulation run length control in the presence of an initial transient. Operations 

Research 31:1109-1144.

Hospital, J., and C. Beavers. 

2013. Catch shares and the Main Hawaiian Islands bottomfish fishery: Linking fishery 

conditions and fisher perceptions. Marine Policy 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.08.006.

Lamson, M. R., B. McNaughton, and C. J. Severance. 

2007. Analysis and expansion of the 2005 Hawaii State/Western Pacific Regional Fishery 

Council Bottomfish Fishermen Survey. 16 p. Submitted to the Western Pacific Regional 
21

Fishery Management Council on 29 May 2007 [A Draft Report Presented to the 95th 

SSC and Council Meetings of the WPFMC] Received from Personal Communication 

with Craig J. Severance (sevc@hawaii.edu) October 9, 2010

Lunn, D.J., A. Thomas, N. Best, and D. Spiegelhalter.

2000. WinBUGS -- a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. 

Statistics and Computing, 10:325--337.

Martell, S. J. D., J. Korman, M. Darcy, L. B. Christensen, and D. Zeller. 

2011. Status and trends of the Hawaiian bottomfish stocks: 1948-2006. A report submitted 

under Contract No. JJ133F-06-SE-2510 September 2006. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent., 

Natl. Mar. Fish. Ser., NOAA, Honolulu, HI 96822-2396. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent. 

Admin. Rep. H-11-02C, 57 p. 

Martinez-Andrade, F. 2003. A comparison of life histories and ecological aspects among 

snappers (Pisces: Lutjanidae). PhD Dissertation, Louisiana State University.

McAllister, M., E. Babcock, E. Pikitch, and M. Prager. 

2001.Application of a non-equilibrium generalized production model to South and North 

Atlantic swordfish: Combining Bayesian and demographic methods for parameter 

estimation. 2000. Col. Vol. Sci. Pap. ICCAT, 51(5):1523-1550.

Meyer, R., and R. Millar. 

1999. BUGS in Bayesian stock assessments. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 56:1078–1086.

Moffitt, R., and F. Parrish. 

1996. Habitat and life history of juvenile Hawaiian pink snapper, Pristipomoides 

filamentosus. Pacific Science 50: 371-381.

Moffitt, R., D. Kobyashi, and G. DiNardo. 

2006. Status of the Hawaiian bottomfish stocks, 2004. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. 

Mar. Fish. Ser., NOAA, Honolulu, HI 96822-2326. Pacific Islands Fish. Sci. Cent. 

Admin. Rep. H-06-01, 45 p.

Moffitt, R., G. DiNardo, J. Brodziak, K. Kawamoto, M. Quach, M. Pan, K. Brookins, C. Tam, 

and M. Mitsuyatsu. 

2011. Bottomfish CPUE standardization workshop proceedings August 4-6, 2008. Pacific 

Islands Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. Mar. Fish. Ser., NOAA, Honolulu, HI 96822-2396. Pacific 

Islands Fish. Sci. Cent. Internal Rep. IR-11-003, 17 p.

Musick, J. 

1999. Criteria to define extinction risk in marine fishes: the American Fisheries Society 

Initiative. Fisheries 24(12):6-14.
22

Musick, J., M. Harbin, S. Berkeley, G. Burgess, A. Eklund, L. Findley, R. Gilmore, J. Golden, D. 

Ha, G. Huntsman, J. McGovern, S. Parker, S. Poss, E. Sala, T. Schmidt, G. Sedberry, H. Weeks, 

and S. Wright. 

2000. Marine, estuarine, and diadromous fish stocks at risk of extinction in North America 

(Exclusive of Pacific Salmonids). Fisheries 25(11): 6-28.

Ntzoufras, I. 

2009. Bayesian modeling using WinBUGS. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, 

492 p.

Plummer, M., N. Best, K. Cowles, and K. Vines. 

2006. “CODA: Convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC”, R News 6(1), 7-11, 

available at http://CRAN.R-project.org/doc/Rnews/Rnews_2006-1.pdf.

Punt, A.

2003. Extending production models to include process error in the population dynamics. Can. 

J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 60:1217-1228.

R Development Core Team. 

2009. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical 

Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org.

Radtke, R. 

1987. Age and growth information from the otoliths of the Hawaiian snapper, Pristipomoides 

filamentosus. Coral Reefs 6:19-25.

Ralston, S., and G. Miyamoto. 

1983. Analyzing the width of daily otolith increments to age the Hawaiian snapper, 

Pristipomoides filamentosus. Fish. Bull. 81(3): 523-535.

Searle, S. 

1987. Linear models for unbalanced data. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 535 p.

Spiegelhalter, A., N. Best, B. Carlin, and A. van der Linde. 

2002. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J. R. Statist. Soc. B. 64:583-639.

Spiegelhalter, D., A. Thomas, N. Best, and D. Lunn. 

2003. WinBUGS User Manual. Available at: 

http://www.mrc.bsu.carn.ac.uk/bugs/winbugs/manual14.pdf

Stokes, K. 

2009. Report on the Western Pacific stock assessment review 1 Hawaii deep slope 

bottomfish. Center for Independent Experts, stokes.net.nz Ltd., Wellington 6035, New 

Zealand, 27 p. 
23

Sturtz, S., Ligges, U., and Gelman, A. 

2005. R2WinBUGS: A Package for Running WinBUGS from R. Journal of Statistical 

Software 12(3): 1-16.

Western Pacific Fishery Management Council [WPRFMC]. 

2007. Main Hawaiian Islands Bottomfish Seasonal Closure Announcement. Available at: 

http://www.wpcouncil.org/index.htm\

Zeller, D., M. Darcy, S. Booth, M. K. Lowe, and S. Martell. 

2008. What about recreational catch? Potential impact on stock assessment for Hawaii 

bottomfish fisheries. Fisheries Research 91:88-97.
24

TABLES
25

Table 1.--List of species in the Hawaiian bottomfish management unit species complex. The 

current stock assessment provides an assessment of the status of the set of Deep7 bottomfish 

species; these seven species are used for reporting fishery catch and CPUE and are included in 

production model analyses in this assessment. The primary bottomfish species were assessed in 

the 2005 assessment and the 2008 assessment update and are listed for comparison (Moffitt et 

al., 2006; Brodziak et al. 2009).

Common name Local name Scientific name Deep 7

species

Primary 

bottomfish 

species

Pink snapper Opakapaka Pristipomoides filamentosus × ×

Longtail snapper Onaga Etelis coruscans × ×

Squirrelfish snapper Ehu Etelis carbunculus × ×

Sea bass Hapuupuu Hyporthodus quernus × ×

Grey jobfish Uku Aprion virescens ×

Snapper Gindai Pristipomoides zonatus × ×

Snapper Kalekale Pristipomoides seiboldii × ×

Blue stripe snapper Taape Lutjanus kasmira

Yellowtail snapper Yellowtail kalekale Pristipomoides auricilla ×

Silver jaw jobfish Lehi Aphareus rutilans × ×

Amberjack Kahala Seriola dumerili

Thick lipped trevally Butaguchi Pseudocaranx dentex ×

Giant trevally White ulua Caranx ignobilis ×

Black jack Black ulua Caranx lugubris ×

Table 2.--Habitat areas (km2) for Deep7 bottomfish by island group in the main Hawaiian 

Islands. “EFH” is Essential Fish Habitat, “BRFA” is Bottomfish Restricted Fishing Area, and 

“HAPC” is Habitat Area of Particular Concern. 

Island Group EFH non-EFH BRFA non-BRFA HAPC non-HAPC Total Area

Hawaii 2206.6 71091.1 1079.0 72218.7 1016.6 72281.1 73297.8

Maui-Nui 5553.2 33589.2 541.3 38601.0 3774.7 35367.7 39142.4

Oahu 1429.8 37795.7 274.1 38951.3 587.0 38638.4 39225.4

Kauai 1422.1 52717.3 177.5 53961.9 708.5 53430.9 54139.4

Total 10611.7 195193.2 2072.0 203733.0 6086.8 199718.1 205804.9

Areas in square kilometers
26

Table 3.1.--Time series of economic information for the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main

Hawaiian Islands during 2002-2012 including number of commercial marine licenses (CMLs) 

that report landings of Deep7 bottomfish, number of CMLs that reported sales of Deep7 

bottomfish, number of vessels reporting landings of Deep7 bottomfish, the average number of 

trips per reporting vessel, the total ex-vessel revenue from sales of Deep7 bottomfish, and the 

total inflation-adjusted (expressed in 2012 USD) ex-vessel revenue from sales of Deep7 

bottomfish.

Year 

(Prior to 2007 this is 

calendar year. Since 

2007, this is fishing 

year from WPRFMC)

Number of 

commercial 

marine licenses 

(CML) that 

reported 

landings of 

Deep7 per year

Number of 

CML that 

reported 

landings of 

sold Deep7 

per year

Number of 

vessels that 

reported 

landings of 

Deep7 per 

year

Average 

number of 

annual trips 

per 

reporting 

vessel

Total ex-vessel 

revenue from 

sale of Deep7 

species 

(nominal $) per 

year

Total ex-vessel 

revenue from sale 

of Deep7 species 

adjusted for 

inflation (2012 $) 

per year

2002 384 339 551 5.4 $1,157,824 $1,573,305

2003 348 335 360 8.0 $1,220,325 $1,620,486

2004 358 350 392 7.0 $1,281,303 $1,647,005

2005 373 362 401 6.5 $1,278,913 $1,584,093

2006 332 326 376 6.3 $1,162,571 $1,360,219

2007 351 349 359 6.5 $1,182,015 $1,319,333

2008 476 468 490 6.7 $1,446,323 $1,548,052

2009 459 446 479 5.8 $1,244,382 $1,325,537

2010 471 446 489 7.0 $1,566,279 $1,633,624

2011 479 477 491 6.3 $1,463,915 $1,472,328

2012 458 424 465 6.4 $1,640,055 $1,640,055

Average 2002-2012 408 393 441 6.5 $1,331,264 $1,520,367
27

Table 3.2.--Time series of economic information for the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main

Hawaiian Islands during 2002-2012 including average price per pound, inflation-adjusted 

average price per pound (2012 $), total ex-vessel revenue from sales of non-Deep7 bottomfish, 

total inflation-adjusted ex-vessel revenue (2012 $), total revenue from sales of Deep7 bottomfish, 

and total inflation-adjusted revenue (2012 $) from sales of Deep7 bottomfish.

Year 

(Prior to 2007 this is 

calendar year. Since 

2007, this is fishing 

year from WPRFMC)

Average 

price per 

pound 

(nominal $) 

of sold 

Deep7 per 

year

Average 

price per 

pound 

(nominal 

2012 $) of 

sold Deep7 

per year

Total exvessel 

revenue from 

sold nonDeep 7 

species 

(nominal $) 

per year

Total ex-vessel 

revenue from 

sold non-Deep 7 

species adjusted 

for inflation 

(2012 $) per 

year

Total 

bottomfish 

revenue 

(nominal $) 

per year

Total 

bottomfish 

revenue 

(2012 $) per 

year

2002 $5.15 $7.00 $96,320 $130,884 $1,254,144 $1,704,189

2003 $5.27 $7.00 $178,017 $236,391 $1,398,342 $1,856,877

2004 $5.61 $7.21 $226,089 $290,618 $1,507,392 $1,937,624

2005 $6.15 $7.62 $250,032 $309,696 $1,528,945 $1,893,789

2006 $6.22 $7.28 $253,946 $297,119 $1,416,517 $1,657,338

2007 $6.12 $6.83 $217,322 $242,569 $1,399,337 $1,561,902

2008 $5.65 $6.05 $367,163 $392,988 $1,813,486 $1,941,040

2009 $6.08 $6.48 $560,746 $597,316 $1,805,128 $1,922,854

2010 $5.91 $6.16 $486,609 $507,532 $2,052,888 $2,141,156

2011 $6.33 $6.37 $596,283 $599,710 $2,060,198 $2,072,038

2012 $6.83 $6.83 $872,750 $872,750 $2,512,805 $2,512,805

Average 2002-2012 $5.94 $6.80 $373,207 $407,052 $1,704,471 $1,927,419
28

Table 3.3.--Time series of economic information for the Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main

Hawaiian Islands during 2002-2012 including the percent of total revenue from sales of Deep7 

bottomfish, the Gini coefficient for individual vessel revenue per year, the total revenue for 

active vessels per year, the total inflation-adjusted revenue (2012 $) for active vessels per year, 

and the Deep7 bottomfish fishery season length (days) per year.

Year 

(Prior to 2007 this is 

calendar year. Since 

2007, this is fishing 

year from WPRFMC)

Percent of 

total 

revenue 

from sale 

of Deep7 

species per 

year

Gini 

coefficient 

for revenue 

of individual 

vessels per 

year

Total 

revenue per 

active vessel 

(nominal $) 

per year

Total 

revenue per 

active vessel 

2012 $) per 

year

Season 

length 

(days) 

per year

2002 92% 0.78 $2,276 $3,093 365

2003 87% 0.79 $3,884 $5,158 365

2004 85% 0.77 $3,845 $4,943 366

2005 84% 0.77 $3,813 $4,723 365

2006 82% 0.78 $3,767 $4,408 365

2007 84% 0.69 $3,898 $4,351 198

2008 80% 0.73 $3,701 $3,961 233

2009 69% 0.72 $3,769 $4,014 231

2010 76% 0.71 $4,198 $4,379 192

2011 71% 0.76 $4,196 $4,220 366

2012 65% 0.72 $5,404 $5,404 365

Average 2002-2012 80% 0.75 $3,886 $4,423 310
29

Table 4.--Reported commercial catches (units are 1000 pounds) of Deep7 bottomfish in the main

Hawaiian Islands as reported in the HDAR fishery logbook database by fishing year (July 1st -

June 30th), 1949-2013.

Deep7 Bottomfish Reported Catch (1000 pounds) by Species, 1949-1985

Fishing Year Hapuupuu Kalekale Opakapaka Ehu Onaga Lehi Gindai Total

1949 29.9 36.7 112.0 77.2 66.4 5.6 0.2 327.9

1950 18.6 29.2 113.7 75.3 61.2 4.6 0.8 303.4

1951 22.3 31.9 132.7 66.0 72.7 2.8 2.1 330.4

1952 32.6 45.7 139.7 54.4 45.6 9.6 2.9 330.4

1953 22.7 32.5 108.6 50.4 49.9 2.9 2.0 269.0

1954 16.7 40.1 99.1 39.8 65.5 3.9 1.9 266.9

1955 18.3 28.5 77.8 30.1 61.7 1.1 2.6 220.2

1956 28.2 33.0 112.5 40.2 70.2 3.8 3.6 291.5

1957 18.1 29.6 147.7 37.1 84.6 8.7 2.2 327.9

1958 20.9 17.5 93.9 26.8 52.2 2.4 2.0 215.8

1959 16.7 19.4 92.2 23.0 65.6 2.1 1.5 220.6

1960 12.8 19.3 70.6 19.4 39.2 1.6 1.2 164.1

1961 7.2 19.6 56.2 13.0 36.6 1.0 0.4 134.0

1962 10.5 17.6 84.5 16.4 51.1 1.8 0.8 182.8

1963 13.3 18.5 96.8 23.9 60.8 2.7 0.8 216.7

1964 11.2 23.5 95.2 24.7 47.1 1.0 2.3 205.1

1965 12.9 14.8 106.3 21.5 69.2 1.3 1.0 226.9

1966 11.9 13.6 71.4 18.1 64.1 2.0 0.8 181.9

1967 12.4 9.6 123.0 18.4 68.4 2.4 0.8 235.0

1968 11.3 6.9 84.5 19.9 69.5 2.2 0.8 195.0

1969 10.9 4.2 85.8 16.2 53.9 5.9 0.5 177.4

1970 19.8 5.1 69.5 15.9 43.5 2.7 1.4 158.0

1971 14.5 4.3 59.1 15.3 39.3 1.8 0.9 135.2

1972 17.9 8.2 118.7 21.4 58.9 4.4 1.2 230.8

1973 14.8 5.1 93.3 14.6 35.6 4.5 1.3 169.2

1974 14.6 4.9 135.2 21.1 43.6 4.9 1.5 225.7

1975 23.2 6.0 116.2 21.9 45.1 8.4 1.4 222.1

1976 22.4 7.9 105.5 31.3 80.2 10.3 1.2 258.9

1977 30.5 8.6 106.3 35.9 84.7 7.3 1.6 274.9

1978 28.7 9.8 154.6 35.7 66.5 9.8 2.6 307.7

1979 29.6 7.7 146.0 22.5 53.0 12.1 2.9 273.8

1980 17.7 7.0 151.0 17.0 31.3 17.8 2.4 244.3

1981 16.9 8.2 197.3 21.1 42.7 19.9 1.9 308.0

1982 21.7 8.1 177.7 24.4 65.9 30.0 1.6 329.4

1983 32.8 15.0 230.4 28.0 72.8 28.5 2.7 410.2

1984 29.7 13.4 159.4 36.2 86.6 16.5 3.6 345.4

1985 33.2 22.7 203.7 44.0 173.9 25.6 4.6 507.6
30

Table 4 (continued)

Deep7 Bottomfish Reported Catch (1000 pounds) by Species, 1986-2013

Fishing Year Hapuupuu Kalekale Opakapaka Ehu Onaga Lehi Gindai Total

1986 26.5 25.4 181.4 61.9 196.5 27.7 3.8 523.2

1987 32.3 28.4 267.4 49.2 175.6 38.7 3.3 594.8

1988 10.4 18.2 301.9 42.1 157.2 38.2 2.1 570.0

1989 13.6 11.1 308.2 38.5 145.3 45.3 1.7 563.7

1990 14.2 15.5 210.3 37.6 141.5 34.9 2.8 456.8

1991 14.9 18.3 135.8 30.8 102.9 18.9 3.5 325.1

1992 15.3 28.0 173.1 31.9 91.8 17.2 5.1 362.4

1993 13.3 16.9 138.6 23.8 52.6 11.2 3.8 260.1

1994 10.4 17.9 173.6 23.2 68.4 11.6 4.0 309.1

1995 19.5 21.8 198.0 27.2 73.5 14.4 4.5 358.9

1996 10.3 20.3 145.8 29.1 69.6 10.4 3.2 288.7

1997 14.0 22.8 160.4 26.1 61.3 11.8 3.0 299.5

1998 12.7 24.4 149.6 26.4 70.8 9.4 3.4 296.6

1999 9.9 11.1 103.6 19.5 59.3 8.7 2.3 214.4

2000 13.1 15.9 165.9 26.7 72.1 11.1 3.2 308.0

2001 15.4 15.3 124.8 26.5 62.9 11.5 3.6 260.0

2002 9.0 10.3 103.5 16.9 59.6 10.8 2.4 212.4

2003 9.4 12.0 127.7 16.3 68.8 8.5 2.1 244.8

2004 7.9 8.0 87.2 19.2 75.7 4.9 2.1 205.0

2005 10.4 7.8 104.4 22.6 89.6 6.9 2.0 243.7

2006 7.2 5.2 72.1 18.7 74.1 6.3 1.6 185.3

2007 7.5 6.1 92.4 19.4 85.5 8.4 2.3 221.7

2008 6.6 5.5 96.2 18.2 55.7 11.0 2.8 196.0

2009 7.9 9.6 132.9 24.5 59.2 16.7 3.6 254.5

2010 8.2 8.2 105.4 24.7 57.9 6.1 2.8 213.4

2011 8.2 9.9 148.4 24.5 67.7 11.6 3.1 273.4

2012 9.1 11.3 105.1 25.7 52.6 7.9 3.7 215.3

2013 10.5 12.3 95.7 30.1 66.9 13.0 3.4 231.9

Average

1949-2013 16.5 16.2 131.3 29.2 72.2 10.9 2.3 278.7

1950-1959 21.5 30.7 111.8 44.3 62.9 4.2 2.2 277.6

1960-1969 11.4 14.7 87.4 19.2 56.0 2.2 0.9 191.9

1970-1979 21.6 6.8 110.4 23.6 55.1 6.6 1.6 225.6

1980-1989 23.5 15.7 217.8 36.2 114.8 28.8 2.7 439.7

1990-1999 13.4 19.7 158.9 27.6 79.2 14.9 3.6 317.2

2000-2009 9.4 9.6 110.7 20.9 70.3 9.6 2.6 233.1

2010-2013 9.0 10.4 113.7 26.3 61.3 9.6 3.2 233.5
31

Table 5.--Estimates of unreported Deep7 bottomfish catches (1000 pounds) in the main

Hawaiian Islands by fishing year (July 1st -June 30th), 1949-2013.

Deep7 Bottomfish Unreported Catch (1000 pounds) by Species, 1949-1985

Fishing Year Hapuupuu Kalekale Opakapaka Ehu Onaga Lehi Gindai Total

1949 30.5 1.1 321.3 85.7 48.5 0.2 0.0 487.3

1950 19.0 0.9 326.3 83.6 44.7 0.2 0.1 474.7

1951 22.8 1.0 381.0 73.3 53.0 0.1 0.3 531.4

1952 33.2 1.4 400.8 60.4 33.3 0.4 0.4 529.9

1953 23.2 1.0 311.6 56.0 36.4 0.1 0.3 428.5

1954 17.0 1.2 284.4 44.2 47.8 0.2 0.3 395.0

1955 18.7 0.9 223.2 33.4 45.0 0.0 0.4 321.7

1956 28.8 1.0 322.8 44.6 51.2 0.2 0.5 449.2

1957 18.5 0.9 423.8 41.1 61.7 0.3 0.3 546.7

1958 21.3 0.5 269.5 29.8 38.1 0.1 0.3 359.6

1959 17.1 0.6 264.5 25.6 47.9 0.1 0.2 356.0

1960 13.0 0.6 202.5 21.6 28.6 0.1 0.2 266.6

1961 7.3 0.6 161.3 14.4 26.7 0.0 0.1 210.5

1962 10.7 0.5 242.6 18.2 37.3 0.1 0.1 309.6

1963 13.5 0.6 277.7 26.6 44.4 0.1 0.1 362.9

1964 11.5 0.7 273.3 27.4 34.4 0.0 0.3 347.7

1965 13.2 0.4 305.1 23.9 50.5 0.1 0.1 393.3

1966 12.1 0.4 204.9 20.1 46.8 0.1 0.1 284.6

1967 12.6 0.3 353.0 20.4 50.0 0.1 0.1 436.5

1968 11.5 0.2 242.5 22.1 50.7 0.1 0.1 327.2

1969 11.1 0.1 246.4 17.9 39.4 0.2 0.1 315.2

1970 20.2 0.2 199.4 17.6 31.8 0.1 0.2 269.5

1971 14.8 0.1 169.7 17.0 28.7 0.1 0.1 230.4

1972 18.3 0.2 340.6 23.7 43.0 0.2 0.2 426.3

1973 15.1 0.2 267.8 16.2 26.0 0.2 0.2 325.7

1974 14.9 0.1 388.0 23.4 31.8 0.2 0.2 458.8

1975 23.7 0.2 333.4 24.3 32.9 0.3 0.2 415.0

1976 22.8 0.2 302.8 34.7 58.6 0.4 0.2 419.7

1977 31.1 0.3 305.2 39.8 61.9 0.3 0.2 438.7

1978 29.3 0.3 443.8 39.6 48.5 0.4 0.4 562.4

1979 30.1 0.2 419.0 25.0 38.7 0.5 0.4 514.0

1980 18.1 0.2 433.4 18.9 22.9 0.7 0.4 494.5

1981 17.3 0.2 566.3 23.4 31.1 0.8 0.3 639.5

1982 22.1 0.2 510.1 27.1 48.1 1.2 0.2 609.1

1983 33.4 0.5 661.3 31.1 53.1 1.1 0.4 781.0

1984 30.3 0.4 457.3 40.1 63.2 0.7 0.5 592.6

1985 33.9 0.7 584.5 48.9 126.9 1.0 0.7 796.6
32

Table 5 (continued)

Deep7 Bottomfish Unreported Catch (1000 pounds) by Species, 1986-2013

Fishing Year Hapuupuu Kalekale Opakapaka Ehu Onaga Lehi Gindai Total

1986 27.1 0.8 520.6 68.7 143.5 1.1 0.6 762.2

1987 32.9 0.9 767.4 54.6 128.2 1.5 0.5 986.0

1988 10.6 0.5 866.5 46.7 114.7 1.5 0.3 1040.9

1989 13.9 0.3 884.6 42.7 106.1 1.8 0.3 1049.6

1990 14.5 0.5 603.5 41.7 103.3 1.4 0.4 765.3

1991 15.2 0.5 389.7 34.2 75.1 0.8 0.5 516.0

1992 15.6 0.8 496.9 35.4 67.0 0.7 0.8 617.1

1993 13.5 0.5 397.8 26.5 38.4 0.4 0.6 477.7

1994 10.6 0.5 498.3 25.8 49.9 0.5 0.6 586.1

1995 19.9 0.7 568.4 30.2 53.7 0.6 0.7 674.0

1996 10.5 0.6 418.4 32.3 50.8 0.4 0.5 513.5

1997 14.3 0.7 460.3 29.0 44.8 0.5 0.5 549.9

1998 11.8 2.0 402.6 24.7 42.0 0.5 0.8 484.4

1999 8.4 1.4 260.1 15.0 27.2 0.6 0.8 313.4

2000 10.0 2.9 386.9 15.8 23.2 0.9 1.4 441.0

2001 10.4 3.5 268.5 11.2 11.7 1.0 1.9 308.2

2002 5.3 2.9 204.2 4.2 2.9 1.1 1.5 222.1

2003 5.6 3.4 251.9 4.1 3.4 0.9 1.3 270.5

2004 4.7 2.2 172.1 4.8 3.7 0.5 1.3 189.3

2005 6.1 2.2 205.9 5.6 4.4 0.7 1.2 226.2

2006 4.2 1.5 142.3 4.7 3.7 0.6 1.0 157.9

2007 4.4 1.7 182.3 4.9 4.2 0.9 1.4 199.8

2008 3.9 1.6 189.7 4.5 2.8 1.1 1.7 205.2

2009 4.7 2.7 262.1 6.1 2.9 1.7 2.2 282.5

2010 4.9 2.3 208.0 6.2 2.9 0.6 1.7 226.5

2011 4.8 2.8 292.8 6.1 3.3 1.2 1.9 313.0

2012 5.4 3.2 207.3 6.4 2.6 0.8 2.2 227.9

2013 6.2 3.5 188.8 7.5 3.3 1.3 2.1 212.7

Average

1949-2013 16.0 1.0 355.7 28.3 42.8 0.6 0.6 445.0

1950-1959 21.9 0.9 320.8 49.2 45.9 0.2 0.3 439.3

1960-1969 11.7 0.4 250.9 21.3 40.9 0.1 0.1 325.4

1970-1979 22.0 0.2 317.0 26.1 40.2 0.3 0.2 406.1

1980-1989 24.0 0.5 625.2 40.2 83.8 1.2 0.4 775.2

1990-1999 13.4 0.8 449.6 29.5 55.2 0.6 0.6 549.8

2000-2009 5.9 2.4 226.6 6.6 6.3 0.9 1.5 250.3

2010-2013 5.3 2.9 224.2 6.6 3.0 1.0 2.0 245.0
33

Table 6.--Estimates of total Deep7 bottomfish reported and unreported catches (1000 pounds) in 

the main Hawaiian Islands used in the stock assessment by fishing year (July 1st -June 30th), 

1949-2013.

Deep7 Bottomfish Total Catch (1000 pounds), 1949-2013

Fishing Year

Reported 

Catch Total

Unreported 

Catch 

Estimate

Total Catch 

Estimate Fishing Year

Reported 

Catch Total

Unreported 

Catch 

Estimate

Total Catch 

Estimate

1949 327.9 487.3 815.2 1986 523.2 762.2 1285.4

1950 303.4 474.7 778.0 1987 594.8 986.0 1580.7

1951 330.4 531.4 861.8 1988 570.0 1040.9 1610.9

1952 330.4 529.9 860.4 1989 563.7 1049.6 1613.3

1953 269.0 428.5 697.5 1990 456.8 765.3 1222.1

1954 266.9 395.0 662.0 1991 325.1 516.0 841.1

1955 220.2 321.7 541.8 1992 362.4 617.1 979.5

1956 291.5 449.2 740.7 1993 260.1 477.7 737.8

1957 327.9 546.7 874.7 1994 309.1 586.1 895.2

1958 215.8 359.6 575.4 1995 358.9 674.0 1032.9

1959 220.6 356.0 576.6 1996 288.7 513.5 802.2

1960 164.1 266.6 430.6 1997 299.5 549.9 849.4

1961 134.0 210.5 344.5 1998 296.6 484.4 781.0

1962 182.8 309.6 492.4 1999 214.4 313.4 527.9

1963 216.7 362.9 579.6 2000 308.0 441.0 749.0

1964 205.1 347.7 552.7 2001 260.0 308.2 568.2

1965 226.9 393.3 620.2 2002 212.4 222.1 434.5

1966 181.9 284.6 466.4 2003 244.8 270.5 515.4

1967 235.0 436.5 671.5 2004 205.0 189.3 394.3

1968 195.0 327.2 522.3 2005 243.7 226.2 470.0

1969 177.4 315.2 492.6 2006 185.3 157.9 343.2

1970 158.0 269.5 427.5 2007 221.7 199.8 421.5

1971 135.2 230.4 365.6 2008 196.0 205.2 401.2

1972 230.8 426.3 657.1 2009 254.5 282.5 537.0

1973 169.2 325.7 494.9 2010 213.4 226.5 439.9

1974 225.7 458.8 684.5 2011 273.4 313.0 586.4

1975 222.1 415.0 637.1 2012 215.3 227.9 443.3

1976 258.9 419.7 678.6 2013 231.9 212.7 444.6

1977 274.9 438.7 713.6 Average Reported Unreported Total

1978 307.7 562.4 870.1 1949-2013 278.7 445.0 723.7

1979 273.8 514.0 787.8 1950-1959 277.6 439.3 716.9

1980 244.3 494.5 738.9 1960-1969 191.9 325.4 517.3

1981 308.0 639.5 947.4 1970-1979 225.6 406.1 631.7

1982 329.4 609.1 938.6 1980-1989 439.7 775.2 1214.9

1983 410.2 781.0 1191.1 1990-1999 317.2 549.8 866.9

1984 345.4 592.6 938.0 2000-2009 233.1 250.3 483.4

1985 507.6 796.6 1304.3 2010-2013 233.5 245.0 478.5
34

Table 7.1.--Reported commercial catches (thousands of pounds) of Deep7 bottomfish by 

Hawaiian Island group and by fishing year (July 1st -June 30th), 1949-2013, with partial years of 

data for 1948 and 2014.

Main Hawaiian Island Group Main Hawaiian Island Group

Fishing 

Year

 Hawaii 

Reported 

Catch

MauiMolokaiLanai 

Reported 

Catch

 Oahu 

Reported 

Catch

 Kauai 

Reported 

Catch

Total 

Reported 

Catch By 

Island Group

Fishing 

Year

 Hawaii 

Reported 

Catch

MauiMolokaiLanai 

Reported 

Catch

 Oahu 

Reported 

Catch

 Kauai 

Reported 

Catch

Total 

Reported 

Catch By 

Island Group

1948* 27.0 88.9 23.8 41.7 181.5 1986 142.7 260.6 33.5 86.4 523.2

1949 63.1 176.2 20.7 67.8 327.9 1987 133.5 312.5 52.9 95.9 594.8

1950 69.7 159.4 17.3 56.9 303.4 1988 172.8 281.4 66.2 48.3 568.7

1951 68.0 200.3 8.4 42.5 319.2 1989 160.7 291.9 71.1 40.0 563.7

1952 34.3 196.2 33.6 37.1 301.2 1990 120.3 230.0 68.9 37.7 456.8

1953 43.0 166.3 11.9 38.6 259.8 1991 68.9 189.5 26.6 40.0 325.1

1954 55.2 181.6 7.7 20.8 265.3 1992 98.0 202.5 14.4 47.6 362.4

1955 38.2 144.3 10.4 27.3 220.2 1993 60.3 142.6 33.5 23.7 260.1

1956 54.7 169.7 14.4 37.8 276.6 1994 54.6 185.2 35.4 33.8 309.0

1957 94.6 189.4 10.9 22.8 317.7 1995 66.1 208.4 38.2 46.1 358.9

1958 43.0 132.2 14.8 21.0 211.0 1996 50.5 173.5 32.9 31.7 288.7

1959 43.7 108.8 7.8 43.7 204.0 1997 66.0 168.4 40.3 24.7 299.5

1960 27.3 124.4 2.4 9.4 163.5 1998 58.1 180.2 24.6 33.8 296.6

1961 13.8 106.9 2.5 5.9 129.0 1999 42.8 130.8 25.2 15.7 214.4

1962 23.7 135.4 4.3 19.4 182.8 2000 65.7 183.4 39.3 19.6 308.0

1963 10.4 164.1 7.9 28.1 210.5 2001 60.5 149.4 21.6 28.5 260.0

1964 16.5 141.9 6.4 36.7 201.5 2002 44.2 121.3 17.9 29.0 212.4

1965 31.6 169.0 11.6 12.2 224.4 2003 43.0 136.3 31.8 33.6 244.8

1966 17.1 152.6 5.5 6.6 181.9 2004 34.9 133.6 16.7 19.8 205.0

1967 26.0 177.3 11.3 16.7 231.3 2005 31.6 155.7 18.6 37.8 243.7

1968 18.7 157.4 11.6 7.3 195.0 2006 33.9 107.7 12.4 31.2 185.3

1969 12.4 146.4 10.7 8.0 177.4 2007 51.2 119.0 19.9 31.6 221.7

1970 13.3 121.9 5.2 17.5 158.0 2008 55.5 103.0 23.1 14.4 196.0

1971 13.5 97.6 9.8 14.2 135.2 2009 85.4 138.5 15.7 14.9 254.5

1972 48.0 150.0 19.4 10.9 228.3 2010 48.5 133.7 14.2 17.6 213.9

1973 43.1 107.9 12.9 5.4 169.2 2011 45.0 173.6 24.4 30.4 273.4

1974 60.3 141.8 20.9 2.7 225.7 2012 46.8 136.4 9.4 22.7 215.3

1975 55.4 137.9 15.5 13.3 222.1 2013 52.7 151.4 11.7 16.2 231.9

1976 64.4 153.8 24.3 16.4 258.9 2014* 43.5 99.1 9.8 12.4 164.8

1977 64.7 165.5 13.1 31.6 274.9 Average

1978 80.2 174.9 28.0 24.6 307.7 2010-2013 48.2 148.8 14.9 21.7 233.6

1979 85.3 139.7 16.6 32.3 273.8 1949-2013 60.0 164.0 21.6 31.2 276.8

1980 91.1 126.1 15.6 11.5 244.3 1950-1959 54.4 164.8 13.7 34.9 267.8

1981 105.5 172.3 21.8 8.3 308.0 1960-1969 19.7 147.5 7.4 15.0 189.7

1982 89.5 186.9 32.1 20.9 329.4 1970-1979 52.8 139.1 16.6 16.9 225.4

1983 111.9 192.3 25.5 80.4 410.2 1980-1989 118.0 221.5 38.9 61.2 439.5

1984 78.2 174.6 22.1 70.5 345.4 1990-1999 68.6 181.1 34.0 33.5 317.2

1985 93.7 216.5 48.2 149.3 507.6 2000-2009 50.6 134.8 21.7 26.0 233.1
35

Table 7.2.--Annual proportion of reported commercial catches (thousands of pounds) of Deep7 

bottomfish by Hawaiian Island group and by fishing year (July 1st -June 30th), 1949-2013, with 

partial years of data for 1948 and 2014.

Main Hawaiian Island Group Main Hawaiian Island Group

Fishing 

Year

 Hawaii 

Proportion

MauiMolokaiLanai 

Proportion

 Oahu 

Proportion

 Kauai 

Proportion

Fishing 

Year

 Hawaii 

Proportion

MauiMolokaiLanai 

Proportion

 Oahu 

Proportion

 Kauai 

Proportion

1948* 0.15 0.49 0.13 0.23 1986 0.27 0.50 0.06 0.17

1949 0.19 0.54 0.06 0.21 1987 0.22 0.53 0.09 0.16

1950 0.23 0.53 0.06 0.19 1988 0.30 0.49 0.12 0.08

1951 0.21 0.63 0.03 0.13 1989 0.29 0.52 0.13 0.07

1952 0.11 0.65 0.11 0.12 1990 0.26 0.50 0.15 0.08

1953 0.17 0.64 0.05 0.15 1991 0.21 0.58 0.08 0.12

1954 0.21 0.68 0.03 0.08 1992 0.27 0.56 0.04 0.13

1955 0.17 0.66 0.05 0.12 1993 0.23 0.55 0.13 0.09

1956 0.20 0.61 0.05 0.14 1994 0.18 0.60 0.11 0.11

1957 0.30 0.60 0.03 0.07 1995 0.18 0.58 0.11 0.13

1958 0.20 0.63 0.07 0.10 1996 0.18 0.60 0.11 0.11

1959 0.21 0.53 0.04 0.21 1997 0.22 0.56 0.13 0.08

1960 0.17 0.76 0.01 0.06 1998 0.20 0.61 0.08 0.11

1961 0.11 0.83 0.02 0.05 1999 0.20 0.61 0.12 0.07

1962 0.13 0.74 0.02 0.11 2000 0.21 0.60 0.13 0.06

1963 0.05 0.78 0.04 0.13 2001 0.23 0.57 0.08 0.11

1964 0.08 0.70 0.03 0.18 2002 0.21 0.57 0.08 0.14

1965 0.14 0.75 0.05 0.05 2003 0.18 0.56 0.13 0.14

1966 0.09 0.84 0.03 0.04 2004 0.17 0.65 0.08 0.10

1967 0.11 0.77 0.05 0.07 2005 0.13 0.64 0.08 0.15

1968 0.10 0.81 0.06 0.04 2006 0.18 0.58 0.07 0.17

1969 0.07 0.83 0.06 0.04 2007 0.23 0.54 0.09 0.14

1970 0.08 0.77 0.03 0.11 2008 0.28 0.53 0.12 0.07

1971 0.10 0.72 0.07 0.10 2009 0.34 0.54 0.06 0.06

1972 0.21 0.66 0.08 0.05 2010 0.23 0.62 0.07 0.08

1973 0.25 0.64 0.08 0.03 2011 0.16 0.63 0.09 0.11

1974 0.27 0.63 0.09 0.01 2012 0.22 0.63 0.04 0.11

1975 0.25 0.62 0.07 0.06 2013 0.23 0.65 0.05 0.07

1976 0.25 0.59 0.09 0.06 2014* 0.26 0.60 0.06 0.08

1977 0.24 0.60 0.05 0.11 Average

1978 0.26 0.57 0.09 0.08 2010-2013 0.21 0.64 0.06 0.09

1979 0.31 0.51 0.06 0.12 1949-2013 0.21 0.61 0.07 0.11

1980 0.37 0.52 0.06 0.05 1950-1959 0.20 0.62 0.05 0.13

1981 0.34 0.56 0.07 0.03 1960-1969 0.10 0.78 0.04 0.08

1982 0.27 0.57 0.10 0.06 1970-1979 0.22 0.63 0.07 0.07

1983 0.27 0.47 0.06 0.20 1980-1989 0.28 0.51 0.08 0.13

1984 0.23 0.51 0.06 0.20 1990-1999 0.21 0.58 0.11 0.10

1985 0.18 0.43 0.09 0.29 2000-2009 0.22 0.58 0.09 0.11
36

Table 8.--Model selection analyses for the generalized linear model (GLM) to standardize Deep7 

bottomfish CPUE during 1949-1993 and 1994-2013 using Akaike’s information criterion (AIC). 

For the 1949-1993 time period, the best-fitting GLM (Base_1949-1993) had the same structure 

(Year, Area, Quarter, and Area*Quarter effects) as in the previous assessment. For the 1994-

2013 time period, the best-fitting GLM (Base_1994-2013_CML) included a Hawaii commercial 

marine license effect and did not include an Area*Quarter effect. The iteratively reweighted least 

squares estimation algorithm did not converge for the GLM parameters including both 

commercial marine license and Area*Quarter effects.

Table 9.1.--Analysis of deviance table for the best-fitting GLM used to standardize Deep7 

bottomfish CPUE during 1949-1993.

GLM Selection for Deep7 Main Hawaiian Islands Bottomfish CPUE Standardizations, 1949-1993 and 1994-2013

Model Name

Structure of CPUE 

Predictor R-square

Number 

of Data 

Points

Mean 

Square 

Error

Number of 

Parameters AIC Value ∆AIC

Model 

Relative 

Likelihood

Model 

Probability

Base_1949-1993 Y+A+Q+A*Q 0.239 95905 1.209 369 18900.5 0.0 1.00 1.00

Base_1949-1993_wo_AQ Y+A+Q 0.231 95905 1.218 126 19189.1 288.6 0.00 0.00

Model Name

Structure of CPUE 

Predictor R-square

Number 

of Data 

Points

Mean 

Square 

Error

Number of 

Parameters AIC Value ∆AIC

Model 

Relative 

Likelihood

Model 

Probability

Base_1994-2013_CML Y+A+Q+L 0.534 63636 0.651 2086 -23103.4 0.0 1.00 1.00

Base_1994-2013_AQ_CML Y+A+Q+A*Q+L Did not converge 63636 2329

Base_1994-2013_AQ Y+A+Q+A*Q 0.244 63636 1.029 346 2516.8 25620.2 0.00 0.00

Base_1994-2013_wo_AQ Y+A+Q 0.233 63636 1.039 103 2632.7 25736.1 0.00 0.00

CPUE Standardization for 1949-1993

Degrees 

of 

Freedom Sum of Squares

Mean 

Square F Value Pr > F

Model 369 36288.022 98.342 81.37 < 0.0001

Error 95536 115457.082 1.209

Corrected Total 95905 151745.104

R-Square = 0.239

Effects

Degrees 

of 

Freedom

Type III Sum of 

Squares

Mean 

Square F Value Pr > F

Y(year) 42 4118.523 98.060 81.14 < 0.0001

A(area) 81 26479.943 326.913 270.51 < 0.0001

Q(quarter) 3 68.195 22.732 18.81 < 0.0001

A*Q(area-quarter interaction) 243 1226.161 5.046 4.18 < 0.0001
37

Table 9.2.--Analysis of deviance table for the best-fitting GLM used to standardize Deep7 

bottomfish CPUE during 1994-2013.

CPUE Standardization for 1994-2013

Degrees 

of 

Freedom Sum of Squares

Mean 

Square F Value Pr > F

Model 2086 46005.456 22.054 33.86 < 0.0001

Error 61550 40094.533 0.651

Corrected Total 63636 86099.989

R-Square = 0.534

Effects

Degrees 

of 

Freedom

Type III Sum of 

Squares

Mean 

Square F Value Pr > F

Y(year) 19 234.493 12.342 18.95 < 0.0001

A(area) 81 1022.561 12.624 19.38 < 0.0001

Q(quarter) 3 362.524 120.841 185.51 < 0.0001

L(license) 1983 25908.310 13.065 20.06 < 0.0001
38

Table 10.--Estimates of standardized CPUE for Deep7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands 

during 1949-1993 and during 1994-2013 used in the baseline assessment model. The single timeseries estimate of standardized Deep7 CPUE during 1949-2013 and nominal Deep7 CPUE are 

included for comparison.

Fishing 

Year

Two-Series 

MHI Deep7 

Bottomfish 

Standardized 

CPUE (lbs/trip) 

from 2014 

Assessment

Standardized 

CPUE Two 

Standard Error 

Offset (2σ, 

lbs/trip)

Single-Series 

MHI Deep7 

Bottomfish 

Standardized 

CPUE 

(lbs/trip) from 

2014 

Assessment

Standardized 

CPUE Two 

Standard Error 

Offset (2σ, 

lbs/trip)

Nominal Deep7 

Bottomfish Deep 

Handline CPUE 

Used in CPUE 

Standardization 

(lbs/trip)

Nominal 

CPUE Two 

Standard 

Error Offset 

(2σ, lbs/trip)

1949 188.6 12.6 179.1 11.6 106.8 9.2

1950 208.3 14.1 195.3 12.8 108.7 7.6

1951 214.4 15.1 205.4 14.0 134.4 9.2

1952 251.2 19.6 240.7 18.3 177.4 13.1

1953 240.7 20.8 232.9 19.6 180.9 15.5

1954 289.3 25.8 277.7 24.1 218.9 19.8

1955 366.6 39.3 365.7 38.1 292.1 28.0

1956 307.7 29.3 295.9 27.4 226.1 21.8

1957 340.5 30.7 334.8 29.3 244.3 19.0

1958

1959

1960

1961 376.8 46.7 371.5 44.8 257.4 28.8

1962 421.6 45.3 404.7 42.3 268.7 23.3

1963 261.8 26.1 253.0 24.5 185.7 18.0

1964 289.1 28.0 277.4 26.2 176.7 16.7

1965 361.5 32.1 343.9 29.6 186.7 14.9

1966 307.6 27.9 299.1 26.3 191.1 16.3

1967 296.3 23.5 284.2 21.9 163.3 12.0

1968 283.2 24.4 280.3 23.4 178.5 15.3

1969 266.7 22.7 262.0 21.6 155.8 12.7

1970 248.6 21.4 241.2 20.2 145.1 13.3

1971 224.5 18.9 218.7 17.9 117.5 10.2

1972 247.8 18.1 239.6 17.0 116.4 8.8

1973 233.8 18.2 225.4 17.0 112.3 9.0

1974 224.9 15.8 218.4 14.9 112.6 7.4

1975 220.9 15.7 214.1 14.9 113.8 8.2

1976 237.1 16.7 231.0 15.9 136.4 9.6

1977 189.5 12.9 182.4 12.1 122.3 8.2

1978 189.2 12.6 183.0 11.9 119.5 7.6

1979 217.3 15.5 209.2 14.5 141.2 10.2

1980 184.9 11.9 179.7 11.3 101.1 6.1

1981 189.6 11.6 184.6 11.0 94.2 4.3

1982 172.3 10.5 167.0 9.9 89.1 4.5

1983 177.5 10.3 170.0 9.6 94.7 4.5

1984 141.5 8.4 137.2 7.9 85.2 4.5

1985 155.9 8.7 150.7 8.2 85.5 3.3

1986 156.6 8.7 151.2 8.2 92 4.1

1987 179.0 10.0 172.8 9.4 101.5 3.5

1988 206.8 11.4 199.1 10.7 97.2 2.9

1989 197.7 10.9 192.4 10.3 94.4 3.1

1990 177.0 9.9 171.6 9.4 89.8 3.3

1991 164.8 9.6 158.3 9.0 80.9 3.1

1992 154.1 8.9 146.2 8.2 80.4 3.3

1993 111.6 6.7 138.0 8.1 72.6 3.3
39

Table 10 (continued)

Fishing 

Year

Two-Series 

MHI Deep7 

Bottomfish 

Standardized 

CPUE (lbs/trip) 

from 2014 

Assessment

Standardized 

CPUE Two 

Standard Error 

Offset (2σ, 

lbs/trip)

Single-Series 

MHI Deep7 

Bottomfish 

Standardized 

CPUE 

(lbs/trip) from 

2014 

Assessment

Standardized 

CPUE Two 

Standard Error 

Offset (2σ, 

lbs/trip)

Nominal Deep7 

Bottomfish Deep 

Handline CPUE 

Used in CPUE 

Standardization 

(lbs/trip)

Nominal 

CPUE Two 

Standard 

Error Offset 

(2σ, lbs/trip)

1994 103.0 5.0 152.3 8.8 83.1 3.5

1995 109.4 5.2 155.2 8.8 86.3 3.9

1996 98.5 4.7 140.1 8.0 73.7 2.9

1997 98.9 4.6 142.9 8.0 70 2.5

1998 92.8 4.3 134.4 7.6 71.3 2.7

1999 97.9 4.8 139.7 8.4 70.4 2.7

2000 111.6 5.2 160.5 9.2 79.5 3.1

2001 103.8 4.9 153.2 8.9 74 2.9

2002 93.1 4.5 142.3 8.7 74.6 3.9

2003 95.7 4.6 148.8 9.0 82.2 3.9

2004 90.5 4.5 138.1 8.5 76.1 3.3

2005 100.2 4.9 159.4 9.9 90.3 4.1

2006 100.5 5.1 149.7 9.6 82.2 4.1

2007 105.1 5.1 158.9 9.8 82.2 4.1

2008 120.6 6.1 191.5 12.3 85.4 3.7

2009 111.6 5.2 171.6 10.3 80 3.1

2010 97.1 4.6 144.6 8.9 75.3 3.5

2011 107.0 4.8 155.8 9.2 80 3.1

2012 103.4 4.6 147.7 8.9 72.2 3.1

2013 107.4 4.8 146.7 8.9 77.6 3.3
40

Table 11.--Assumed prior distributions and mean parameter estimates for the Deep7 bottomfish stock complex based on the 2014 base 

case assessment production model results (mean estimate in boldface with estimated standard deviation immediately below) along 

with a comparison of results if the 2011 stock assessment was a strict update. Assumed priors are the same as used in the 2011 

assessment. Parameter estimates are labeled as: r, the intrinsic growth rate per year; K, the carrying capacity (million pounds); M, the 

production model shape parameter; P1, the proportion of biomass to K in 1949; q, the catchability coefficient; τ2

, observation error 

variance; σ2, process error variance; CT, the error in unreported catch estimates; HMSY, the exploitation rate (% of annual exploitable 

biomass harvested) to produce MSY; BMSY, the exploitable biomass (million pounds) to produce MSY; MSY for total catch, the 

estimate of MSY as the sum of reported and unreported catch (million pounds); MSY for reported catch, the estimate of MSY as 

reported catch only (million pounds); PMSY, the proportion of carrying capacity to produce MSY; H2010, the harvest rate in 2010; 

B2010, the exploitable biomass in 2010; H2013, the harvest rate in 2013; B2013, the exploitable biomass in 2013. “Base Case 2014 

Assessment” indicates the 2014 base case assessment that includes commercial marine licenses for CPUE standardization and two 

time periods for CPUE (1949-1993 and 1994-2013), and “Updated Base Case 2011 Assessment” indicates model results that use the 

2011 base case CPUE assumption of only one time period for CPUE from 1949-2013 and exclude commercial marine licenses for 

CPUE standardization. 

Assumed Priors r K M P1 q1949-1993 q1994-2013

τ

2

1949-

1993

τ

2

1994-

2013 σ2 CT

Distribution Lognormal Lognormal Gamma Lognormal Uniform Uniform Inversegamma

InversegammaInversegamma

Uniform

Mean 0.1 18.0 

million lbs 1 0.53 [10-5

, 105] [10-5, 105] 0.83 0.83 0.083 Unreported 

catch

CV 25% 50% 140% 20% NA NA 20%

Deep 7 MHI 

Bottomfish 

Assessment r K M P1 q1949-1993 q1994-2013

τ

2

1949-

1993

τ

2

1994-

2013 σ2

Base Case 0.110 24.600 2.06 0.58 15.3 11.9 0.072 0.146 0.026

2014 Assessment 0.027 8.266 1.48 0.10 4.6 5.7 0.018 0.055 0.010

Updated Base Case 0.106 27.360 1.76 0.58 13.0 0.050 0.022

2011 Assessment 0.025 9.378 1.28 0.1 4.3 0.010 0.008

(continued next page)
41

Table 11 (continued)

Deep 7 MHI 

Bottomfish 

Assessment HMSY BMSY

MSY 

for 

Total 

Catch

MSY for 

Reported 

Catch PMSY H2010 B2010 H2013 B2013

Base Case 6.6% 13.460 0.863 0.415 0.56 5.0% 11.320 5.1% 11.630

2014 Assessment 2.4% 3.903 0.342 0.164 0.08 2.6% 6.428 2.9% 6.745

Updated Base Case 6.0% 14.510 0.839 0.404 0.54 3.7% 13.470 3.8% 13.340

2011 Assessment 2.1% 4.267 0.324 0.156 0.08 1.3% 5.333 1.4% 5.397
42

Table 12.--Estimates of exploitable biomass and harvest rate time series of Deep7 bottomfish in 

the main Hawaiian Islands and stock status information by fishing year, 1949-2013. Overfished 

is defined as B<0.75*BMSY, and overfishing is defined as H>HMSY. 

Year

Mean 

Exploitable 

Biomass (B, 

1000,000 lbs)

Relative 

Mean 

Exploitable 

Biomass 

(B/BMSY)

Probability 

of Being 

Overfished

Mean Harvest 

Rate (H)

Relative 

Mean 

Harvest 

Rate 

(H/HMSY)

Probability 

of 

Overfishing

1949 14.090 1.05 0.07 6.4% 0.97 0.47

1950 15.090 1.12 0.05 5.8% 0.87 0.35

1951 16.120 1.20 0.03 6.0% 0.91 0.40

1952 17.190 1.28 0.02 5.6% 0.86 0.34

1953 18.100 1.34 0.02 4.4% 0.66 0.15

1954 19.320 1.44 0.01 3.9% 0.59 0.10

1955 20.460 1.52 0.01 3.0% 0.46 0.05

1956 21.160 1.57 0.01 4.0% 0.61 0.11

1957 21.540 1.60 0.01 4.7% 0.71 0.19

1958 21.480 1.60 0.01 3.1% 0.47 0.05

1959 21.760 1.62 0.01 3.1% 0.47 0.05

1960 22.000 1.63 0.01 2.3% 0.34 0.02

1961 22.400 1.66 0.01 1.8% 0.27 0.01

1962 22.680 1.68 0.00 2.5% 0.38 0.03

1963 22.030 1.64 0.00 3.0% 0.46 0.04

1964 21.840 1.62 0.00 2.9% 0.44 0.04

1965 21.920 1.63 0.00 3.2% 0.49 0.06

1966 21.340 1.59 0.01 2.5% 0.38 0.03

1967 20.860 1.55 0.01 3.7% 0.55 0.08

1968 20.060 1.49 0.01 3.0% 0.45 0.04

1969 19.370 1.44 0.01 2.9% 0.44 0.04

1970 18.690 1.39 0.02 2.6% 0.39 0.03

1971 18.190 1.35 0.02 2.3% 0.35 0.02

1972 17.970 1.34 0.02 4.1% 0.63 0.13

1973 17.390 1.29 0.03 3.2% 0.49 0.06

1974 16.970 1.26 0.03 4.6% 0.69 0.18

1975 16.470 1.22 0.04 4.4% 0.66 0.16

1976 16.080 1.19 0.05 4.8% 0.72 0.21

1977 15.350 1.14 0.07 5.2% 0.79 0.28

1978 14.960 1.11 0.08 6.6% 0.99 0.50

1979 14.660 1.09 0.10 6.1% 0.92 0.42

1980 14.130 1.05 0.12 5.9% 0.89 0.39

1981 13.830 1.03 0.13 7.7% 1.17 0.66
43

Table 12 (continued)

Year

Mean 

Exploitable 

Biomass (B, 

1000,000 lbs)

Relative 

Mean 

Exploitable 

Biomass 

(B/BMSY)

Probability 

of Being 

Overfished

Mean Harvest 

Rate (H)

Relative 

Mean 

Harvest 

Rate 

(H/HMSY)

Probability 

of 

Overfishing

1982 13.260 0.99 0.17 7.9% 1.20 0.69

1983 12.920 0.96 0.19 10.3% 1.56 0.88

1984 12.260 0.91 0.25 8.5% 1.29 0.76

1985 12.490 0.93 0.22 11.6% 1.76 0.93

1986 12.630 0.94 0.20 11.3% 1.71 0.92

1987 13.200 0.98 0.15 13.3% 2.01 0.96

1988 13.450 1.00 0.14 13.3% 2.02 0.96

1989 13.060 0.97 0.18 13.8% 2.09 0.97

1990 12.220 0.91 0.26 11.3% 1.71 0.91

1991 11.560 0.86 0.34 8.2% 1.25 0.72

1992 11.070 0.82 0.40 10.0% 1.52 0.85

1993 10.490 0.78 0.50 8.1% 1.22 0.68

1994 10.700 0.79 0.49 9.8% 1.49 0.79

1995 10.750 0.80 0.50 11.5% 1.74 0.85

1996 10.510 0.78 0.53 9.4% 1.42 0.73

1997 10.470 0.78 0.54 10.1% 1.53 0.76

1998 10.330 0.77 0.56 9.6% 1.45 0.72

1999 10.370 0.77 0.56 6.5% 0.99 0.48

2000 10.630 0.79 0.53 9.0% 1.37 0.68

2001 10.430 0.77 0.55 7.0% 1.07 0.53

2002 10.330 0.77 0.56 5.5% 0.83 0.36

2003 10.420 0.77 0.55 6.4% 0.98 0.47

2004 10.450 0.78 0.55 4.9% 0.75 0.30

2005 10.710 0.80 0.53 5.7% 0.86 0.39

2006 10.880 0.81 0.52 4.1% 0.62 0.20

2007 11.200 0.83 0.50 4.9% 0.74 0.29

2008 11.450 0.85 0.47 4.6% 0.69 0.25

2009 11.480 0.85 0.47 6.1% 0.92 0.42

2010 11.320 0.84 0.48 5.0% 0.76 0.31

2011 11.430 0.85 0.47 6.7% 1.01 0.48

2012 11.430 0.85 0.47 5.1% 0.77 0.31

2013 11.630 0.86 0.45 5.1% 0.77 0.31
44

Table 13.--Sensitivity analyses for posterior estimates of production model parameters to a 25% 

increase (1.25*mean) and a 25% decrease (0.75*mean) in the mean values of the prior 

distributions for intrinsic growth rate (r), carrying capacity (K), initial proportion of carrying 

capacity in 1949 (P1), and production model shape parameter (M).

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

r 0.11 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.11 0.03

K 24.42 8.13 27.30 9.26 23.38 7.41 21.61 6.73 27.61 9.87

M 2.10 1.48 1.84 1.38 2.11 1.48 2.31 1.53 1.87 1.43

P1 0.58 0.10 0.46 0.08 0.68 0.12 0.58 0.10 0.57 0.10

B MSY 13.44 3.91 14.58 4.22 12.92 3.69 12.20 3.33 14.72 4.54

B1949 14.07 4.94 12.31 4.07 15.94 5.64 12.53 4.14 15.64 5.80

B1949/BMSY 1.05 0.24 0.85 0.19 1.24 0.30 1.04 0.23 1.07 0.25

B2013 11.87 6.76 10.73 6.13 12.54 7.11 10.40 5.73 12.65 7.67

B2013/BMSY 0.89 0.41 0.75 0.38 0.97 0.43 0.86 0.40 0.86 0.41

H MSY 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.02

H1949 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.02

H1949/HMSY† 0.97 1.17 0.86 1.00 0.96

H2013 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.03

H2013/HMSY† 0.69 0.82 0.65 0.73 0.72

MSY 0.87 0.35 0.88 0.34 0.84 0.35 0.85 0.31 0.87 0.38

Parameter

Base case 1.25*r 0.75*r 1.25*K 0.75*K

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

r 0.11 0.03 0.08 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.11 0.03

K 24.97 8.13 27.16 8.77 22.57 7.87 25.29 8.38 24.37 8.21

M 1.97 1.42 2.20 1.60 1.93 1.34 1.79 1.24 2.30 1.67

P1 0.58 0.10 0.58 0.10 0.58 0.10 0.58 0.10 0.58 0.10

B MSY 13.55 3.76 15.08 4.37 12.21 3.63 13.49 3.86 13.62 3.98

B1949 14.27 4.89 15.56 5.19 12.99 4.78 14.47 5.01 14.00 4.90

B1949/BMSY 1.06 0.23 1.05 0.25 1.07 0.23 1.08 0.24 1.04 0.23

B2013 10.85 5.63 11.93 6.65 11.47 6.50 11.95 6.72 11.82 6.68

B2013/BMSY 0.80 0.33 0.80 0.38 0.94 0.42 0.89 0.41 0.87 0.40

H MSY 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.02

H1949 0.06 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.06 0.02

H1949/HMSY† 0.99 1.12 0.89 0.99 0.96

H2013 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03

H2013/HMSY† 0.78 0.89 0.60 0.73 0.68

MSY 0.84 0.31 0.76 0.33 0.94 0.36 0.83 0.34 0.90 0.35

Parameter

Base case 1.25*P1 0.75*P1 1.25*M 0.75*M
45

Table 14.--Stochastic projection results showing the estimates of annual catch limits for commercial catches (1000 pounds) of Deep7 

bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands in fishing years 2015 and 2016 that would produce probabilities of overfishing in 2015 of 

0%, 5%, 10%, ..., 50% and greater assuming that annual commercial catch in 2014 was 244,000 pounds, or 70% of the 2014 annual 

catch limit of 346,000 pounds, as well as mean projected harvest rates, exploitable biomasses, and probable stock status conditions. 

Overfished is defined as B<0.75*BMSY, and overfishing is defined as H>HMSY. 

Probability of Overfishing 

Deep7 Bottomfish in the 

main Hawaiian Islands in 

Fishing Year 2015

Annual Catch Limit for 

Commercial Catch (1000 

pounds) of Deep7 

Bottomfish in Fishing 

Years 2015 and 2016

Expected 

Harvest Rate 

in 2015

Probability of 

Overfishing in 

2016

Expected 

Harvest Rate 

in 2016

Mean Exploitable 

Biomass (1000,000 

pounds) in 2016

Probability of being 

overfished in 2016

0.00 14 0.3% 0.00 0.3% 12.890 0.37

0.05 84 2.0% 0.05 1.9% 12.740 0.38

0.10 120 2.9% 0.10 2.8% 12.670 0.38

0.15 148 3.6% 0.15 3.5% 12.610 0.39

0.20 172 4.1% 0.19 4.1% 12.560 0.39

0.25 196 4.7% 0.24 4.7% 12.510 0.39

0.30 220 5.3% 0.29 5.3% 12.460 0.40

0.35 244 5.9% 0.34 6.0% 12.410 0.40

0.40 268 6.4% 0.39 6.6% 12.360 0.40

0.41 274 6.6% 0.40 6.8% 12.350 0.40

0.45 296 7.1% 0.45 7.4% 12.300 0.41

0.50 324 7.8% 0.50 8.2% 12.240 0.41
46

Table 15.--Stochastic stock projection results showing the estimates of annual catch limits for commercial catches (1000 pounds) of 

Deep7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands in fishing years 2015 and 2016 that would produce probabilities of overfishing in 

2015 of 0%, 5%, 10%, ..., 50% given that the annual 2014 commercial catch is 244, 276, 310, or 325 thousand pounds, or 70%, 80%, 

90%, or 94% of the 2014 annual catch limit of 346,000 pounds. Overfished is defined as B<0.75*BMSY, and overfishing is defined as 

H>HMSY. 

Probability of 

Overfishing Deep 7 

Bottomfish in the 

main Hawaiian 

Islands in Fishing 

Year 2015

Annual Catch Limit for 

Commercial Catch 

(1000 pounds) of Deep 

7 Bottomfish in Fishing 

Year 2015 if the 2014 

Commercial Catch is 

244,000 pounds

Annual Catch Limit for 

Commercial Catch 

(1000 pounds) of Deep 

7 Bottomfish in Fishing 

Year 2015 if the 2014 

Commercial Catch is 

276,000 pounds

Annual Catch Limit for 

Commercial Catch 

(1000 pounds) of Deep 

7 Bottomfish in Fishing 

Year 2015 if the 2014 

Commercial Catch is 

310,000 pounds

Annual Catch Limit for 

Commercial Catch 

(1000 pounds) of Deep 

7 Bottomfish in Fishing 

Year 2015 if the 2014 

Commercial Catch is 

325,000 pounds

0.00 14 16 12 12

0.05 84 82 82 80

0.10 120 116 114 112

0.15 148 142 140 140

0.20 172 168 164 162

0.25 196 190 186 186

0.30 220 212 210 210

0.35 244 238 232 234

0.40 268 262 256 260

0.41 274 266 264 264

0.45 296 286 284 286

0.50 324 316 312 316
47

FIGURES
48

Figure 1.--Location of the three Hawaiian bottomfish fishing zones: the main Hawaiian Islands 

(MHI) Zone, the Mau Zone, and the Hoomalu Zone. Together, the Mau and Hoomalu Zones are 

known as the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI). The current stock assessment is for the 

Deep7 bottomfish complex in the main Hawaiian Islands. 
49

Figure 2.--Description of the Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources (HDAR) fishery reporting 

areas used to report and characterize Deep7 bottomfish commercial fishery catch data in the 

main Hawaiian Islands.
50

Biomass in proportion to carrying capacity

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Surplus production

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

M = 0.25 

M = 1 

M = 4 

Figure 3.--Effects of alternative production model shape parameter values (M, not natural 

mortality) on the relationship between the surplus production of biomass and the exploitable 

biomass as a proportion of carrying capacity curve.
51

Observed Standardized CPUE Versus Predicted CPUE of Deep7 Bottomfish

in the Main Hawaiian Islands by Fishing Year, 1949-1993

Fishing Year

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990

Bottomfish CPUE (pounds/trip)

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Observed

Predicted

Figure 4.1.--Observed versus predicted CPUE of Deep7 bottomfish CPUE in the main Hawaiian 

Islands by fishing year during 1949-1993.
52

Fishing Year

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990

Standardized residual

-2

-1

0

1

2

Standardized Log-Scale Residuals of the Predicted Fit to Standardized CPUE 

of Deep7 Bottomfish in the Main Hawaiian Islands by Fishing Year, 1949-1993

Trend: No, P=0.10

Normality: Yes, P=0.93

Constant variance: Yes, P=0.27

Figure 4.2.--Standardized residuals of observed versus predicted CPUE of Deep7 bottomfish 

CPUE in the main Hawaiian Islands by fishing year during 1949-1993 along with P-values for 

linear regression hypothesis tests of whether standardized residuals had a time trend, were 

normally distributed, and had constant variance.
53

Observed Standardized CPUE Versus Predicted CPUE of Deep7 Bottomfish

in the Main Hawaiian Islands by Fishing Year, 1994-2013

Fishing Year

1995 2000 2005 2010

Bottomfish CPUE (pounds/trip)

85

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

Observed

Predicted

Figure 5.1.--Observed versus predicted CPUE of Deep7 bottomfish CPUE in the main Hawaiian 

Islands by fishing year during 1994-2013.
54

Fishing Year

1995 2000 2005 2010

Standardized residual

-2

-1

0

1

2

Standardized Log-Scale Residuals of the Predicted Fit to Standardized CPUE 

of Deep7 Bottomfish in the Main Hawaiian Islands by Fishing Year, 1994-2013

Trend: No, P=0.85

Normality: Yes, P=0.19

Constant variance: Yes, P=0.43

Figure 5.2.--Standardized residuals of observed versus predicted CPUE of Deep7 bottomfish 

CPUE in the main Hawaiian Islands by fishing year during 1994-2013 along with P-values for 

linear regression hypothesis tests of whether standardized residuals had a time trend, were 

normally distributed, and had constant variance.
55

Estimated Deep7 MHI Bottomfish Exploitable Biomass,1949-2013

Fishing Year

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Exploitable biomass (million pounds)

0

10

20

30

40

BMSY

Mean biomass

80% Confidence interval

Figure 6. --Time series of estimates of exploitable biomass of Deep7 bottomfish in the main

Hawaiian Islands along with associated 80% confidence intervals, 1949-2013.
56

Fishing Year

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Exploitation rate

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

HMSY

Mean harvest rate

80% Confidence interval

Estimated Deep7 MHI Bottomfish Exploitation Rate,1949-2013

Figure 7.--Time series of estimates of exploitation rates of Deep7 bottomfish in the main

Hawaiian Islands along with associated 80% confidence intervals, 1949-2013.
57

Biomass as a fraction of BMSY

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Harvest rate as a fraction of HMSY

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Status

1949

2013

Estimated Deep7 MHI Bottomfish Stock Status, 1949-2013

Figure 8. --Time series of estimates of stock status of Deep7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian 

Islands relative to the overfishing harvest rate (HMSY, solid red horizontal line), the exploitable 

biomass to produce maximum sustainable yield (BMSY, dashed green vertical line), and the 

minimum stock size threshold (0.75*BMSY, solid red vertical line), 1949-2013.
58

Annual Catch Limit (1000 pounds) for Commercial Catch

of Deep7 Bottomfish in Fishing Year 2015

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Probability of Overfishing in 2015

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 9.--Stochastic projection results for estimates of annual catch limits of commercial 

catches of Deep7 Hawaiian bottomfish for fishing years 2015-2016 that would produce a range 

of probabilities of overfishing (defined as H>HMSY) in 2015 from 0% to 50% and greater, 

assuming that the total annual 2014 commercial catch was 244,000 pounds, or 70% of the 2014 

annual catch limit.
59

Annual Catch Limits (1000 pounds) for Commercial Catch

of Deep7 Bottomfish in Fishing Years 2015 and 2016

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Probability of Overfishing in 2016

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 10.--Stochastic projection results for estimates of annual catch limits of Deep7 Hawaiian 

bottomfish for fishing years 2015-2016 that would produce a range of probabilities of 

overfishing (defined as H>HMSY) in 2016 from 0% to 50% and greater, assuming that the total 

annual 2014 commercial catch was 244,000 pounds, or 70% of the 2014 annual catch limit.
60

Annual Catch Limits (1000 pounds) for Commercial Catch

of Deep7 Bottomfish in Fishing Years 2015 and 2016

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Average Harvest Rate

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

HMSY

2015

2016

Figure 11.--Stochastic projection results showing estimates of average harvest rates of Deep7 

Bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands for alternative annual catch limits for fishing years 

2015-2016, assuming that the total annual 2014 commercial catch was 244,000 pounds, or 70% 

of the 2014 annual catch limit.
61

Annual Catch Limit (1000 pounds) for Commercial Catch

of Deep7 Bottomfish in Fishing Year 2015

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Probability of Overfishing in 2015

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

2014 Catch is 211,000 lbs

2014 Catch is 244,000 lbs

2014 Catch is 276,000 lbs

2014 Catch is 325,000 lbs

50% Probability

Figure 12.--Stochastic projection results showing the estimates of annual catch limits of Deep7 

Hawaiian bottomfish for fishing years 2015-2016 that would produce a range of probabilities of 

overfishing (defined as H > HMSY) in 2015 from 0% to 50% and greater if the total annual 2014 

commercial catch was 211, 244, 276, or 325 thousand pounds, equivalent to 61%, 70%, 80%, 

and 94% of the 2014 annual catch limit.
62

Availability of NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS

Copies of this and other documents in the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS series issued 

by the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center are available online at the PIFSC Web site 

http://www.pifsc.noaa.gov in PDF format. In addition, this series and a wide range of other 

NOAA documents are available in various formats from the National Technical Information 

Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, U.S.A. [Tel: (703)-605-6000]; URL: 

http://www.ntis.gov. A fee may be charged.

Recent issues of NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS–PIFSC are listed below:

NOAA-TM-NMFS-PIFSC-39 Injury determinations for cetaceans observed interacting with 

Hawaii and American Samoa longline fisheries during 2007-

2011.

A. L. BRADFORD, and K. FORNEY

(January 2014)

40 Forty years of research: Recovery records of green turtles 

observed or originally tagged at French Frigate Shoals in the 

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, 1973-2013.

I. HUMBURG and G. BALAZS

(May 2014)

41 Injury determinations for cetaceans observed interacting with 

Hawaii and American Samoa longline fisheries during 2008-

2012.

A L. BRADFORD and K. FORNEY

(September 2014)

)