The blue crab and the Chesapeake Bay are synonymous. Callinectes sapidus is the crab's mellifluous scientific name. Callinectes means beautiful swimmer in Greek, and sapidus is Latin for tasty.

 The blue crab has enormous symbolic and actual importance. The green, yellow, orange and blue crustacean supplies a livelihood for watermen who ply the bay in search of the elusive prey, and sport for amateurs armed with mesh nets and chicken necks dangled from strings. Millions of bay aficionados relish extracting the delicate meat from steamed hard shells, while soft shells, whose molting heralds summer, are to die for. That's the good news.

 The bad news is that the blue crab is in jeopardy.

 Scientists are increasingly concerned that the crab may be the next threatened bay species. First, it was the rockfish, which rebounded from scarcity in the 1980s only after Maryland and Virginia heavily regulated commercial fishing.

 Then, over the past few decades, oysters were decimated by overharvesting, pollution and parasites. In the 1970s, the annual harvest averaged 15 million bushels; in 2003, it was 53,000. Finally, in the '80s and '90s, a severe depletion of shad led Maryland and Virginia to impose commercial fishing moratoriums that have slowed the decline.

 In the 1990s, the annual blue crab catch was 140 million crabs, but that was last year's total bay population. This prompted the creation of a blue crab regulatory review committee, which analyzed the crab's status, evaluated the potential of 22 regulatory measures imposed in 1994 to reverse low abundance and spawning potential, and proposed improvements.

 The committee, composed mainly of crab experts from Maryland, North and South Carolina, and Virginia, discovered no evidence that the strictures had increased bay-wide stocks or harvests.

 It did, however, blame water pollution, continuing losses in underwater grasses and overharvesting. The committee proposed short-term measures: decreasing the season by a month and the time that no-harvest zones can be fished, requiring larger escape hatches in most crab pots and restricting the winter dredge fishery. It also offered long-term proposals, such as a procedure for tagging crab pots.

 At last month's meeting of the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the agency that regulates crabbing, members agreed that the Chesapeake icon's state was dire. It voted unanimously to impose the near-term limitations. The debate emphasized concerns for crab health and the watermen, who are already devastated by losing oysters and shad, and it reflected the intrinsic tension involved in the agency's statutory mandate to restore the bay and revive its seafood fisheries.

 The restrictions may be another nail in the coffin for watermen. However, juvenile crabs' sharp decline suggests that they might go the way of oysters, requiring dramatic action to restore the legendary crustacean. Only time, the crabs, the watermen and the bay will tell. – Washington Post

Don't expect to find much local salmon on store shelves this season: Fish managers, aghast at plummeting salmon numbers, proposed to halt salmon fishing this year from Oregon to the Mexico border.

 The action by the Pacific Fishery Management Council, meeting in Sacramento on Friday, could lead to the largest ever closure of the salmon fishery, a mainstay of the coastal economy and culture.

 Recreational salmon fishing, which draws thousands of visitors to the Oregon coast each summer, also would be suspended -- except for the northernmost coast near the mouth of the Columbia River.

 The fisheries council, which makes recommendations to federal agencies, outlined a few alternative scenarios that could provide very limited commercial and recreational fishing opportunities. But most agreed even that is a long shot.

 "The likelihood of that being approved is very slim," said Rod Moore of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association and a member of the council.

 Council members recognize the wide-reaching economic impact of the proposed closure, expected to stretch from Cape Falcon in Oregon to the Mexico border, he said. But they see no choice given the sudden collapse of salmon numbers.

 "It's going to hurt everyone from the guy on the boat to the processor to recreation-related enterprises in coastal communities to the folks who come to the coast to enjoy fishing," he said.

 The closure is meant to protect Sacramento River fall Chinook salmon, usually one of the healthiest salmon populations in the West. But it is expected to fall this year to the lowest levels since records have been kept. Even with no fishing, it's unlikely enough salmon will make it back to the river this fall to supply sufficient eggs for fish hatcheries, Moore said.

 The situation is unprecedented, officials said.

 Sacramento River salmon spend much of the summer off Oregon's coast and account for as much as 80 percent of the state's ocean salmon catch.

 The fishing closure would cover the section of coast where Sacramento River fish are concentrated, while helping to protect Oregon coastal salmon populations that are also down sharply.

 Many biologists believe a key factor in the salmon decline was unusually warm weather in 2005, when the fish that should be returning this year first headed to sea. The strange warmth delayed upwelling of nutrients, and the ocean food chain collapsed, leaving seabirds to wash up dead on beaches and young salmon with little to eat.

 "The conditions were so bad, I don't think they lived much more than a month," said Bill Peterson, an oceanographer with the National Marine Fisheries Service in Newport. "They were dead two years ago."

 Other factors that could affect fish in the Sacramento River include large diversions of water for irrigation and household use in central and Southern California.

 More than 95 percent of Oregon's commercial ocean salmon catch last year came from the area that would be closed under Friday's proposal. Ports in the closure zone accounted for more than 90 percent of the recreational salmon catch.

 Some Oregon salmon still will be caught on the Columbia River, which is not affected by the closure but where separate restrictions apply to protect imperiled salmon runs.

 Supermarkets probably will make up for the lack of Oregon-caught salmon with fish from Washington, British Columbia and Alaska. But the salmon that is available could cost more.

 "It's going to be a real disappointment for a lot of consumers," said Steve Fick of Fishhawk Fisheries in Astoria.

 The fisheries council will meet again in Seattle in April and make a formal recommendation to federal agencies on whether to impose the closure. The U.S. secretary of commerce makes the final decision. – The (Portland) Oregonian