Fishing Forum

Ahoy,
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council recently met in Orange Beach, Alabama. The following is a quick summary of some of the topics I thought might be of interest.

If you have any questions or if you want any of the supporting council documents please contact me directly at Emily.Muehlstein@gulfcouncil.org

Your Chum,
Emily Muehlstein
Fisheries Outreach Specialist
Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council

Red Snapper
The Council requested that the Southeast Fisheries Science Center rerun the red snapper projections using the 2009-2010 landings data to generate an alternative acceptable biological catch level for 2011. Council can only set the total allowable catch levels for each species at or below the acceptable biological catch level recommended by their statistical and scientific committee. The intent of this action is to increase the acceptable biological catch level for 2011 so that the Council can consider adding the red snapper that was not harvested in 2010 to the 2011 recreational total allowable catch.

No official report was give regarding the duration of the 2011 recreational red snapper season in the Gulf. The regional administrator of National Marine Fisheries expects that the final numbers will be reported sometime before the end of April, 2011. He informally speculated that the 2011 recreational red snapper season would last anywhere between 45 and 55 days.

Grouper Allocation-
For several species, the Gulf Council establishes commercial and recreational allocations by assigning each sector a percentage of the total allowable harvest. In Reef Fish Amendment 30B the Council set interim, or temporary, allocations that allow each sector a percentage of the total harvest for gag and red grouper. Currently, red grouper is allocated 76% commercial and 24% recreational; gag is allocated 39% commercial and 61% recreational; and allocation options for black grouper are included in the Generic ACL/AM amendment. The Council plans to discuss a review of the allocations for gag, black, and red grouper.

Reef Fish Amendment 32-
Reef Fish Amendment 32 is an amendment to the reef fish management plan that deals with the rebuilding of the gag stock and the management of red grouper. This plan looks at management options that include changes in bag limits, size limits, seasonal closures, commercial quota adjustments, adjustments to multi-use commercial IFQ shares, time and area closures, and accountability measures for gag and red grouper. The Council reviewed the amendment and selected preferred alternatives for each action. Amendment 32 will go to public hearings in the first two weeks of May, 2011. For more information on public hearing dates and locations please visit: http://www.gulfcouncil.org/council_meeti...etings.php


Mackerel
Public hearings scheduled for amendment 18 will be postponed until sometime shortly after the Council meeting in June, 2011. This amendment addresses annual catch limits, annual catch targets, and accountability measures for cobia, king mackerel, and Spanish mackerel in the Gulf of Mexico.

Sector Separation- Review of Scenarios
Sector separation refers to the division of the recreational sector allocation in separate for-hire and private angler allocations. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council has considered sector separation in the Generic Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures amendment over the past year; and most recently decided to place the issue into a standalone amendment.

NOAA Fisheries presented a projection model for comparing red snapper fishing season lengths with and without sector separation. The model provides the Council and the public with an opportunity to evaluate the relative benefits and tradeoffs of sector separation under a variety of scenarios.

The proportion of red snapper landings in the recreational sector has been shifting away from the for-hire vessels and towards private vessels since 1986. The number of vessels with federal for-hire reef fish permits has declined by approximately 30-35 boats annually. Conversely, the number of private angler licenses sold throughout the Gulf Coast has been increasing steadily, and the costal population has been increasing. As the number of for-hire permits declines and the number of private recreational fishermen increases the majority of red snapper landings has shifted away from the for-hire and towards the private anglers. For the time period between 1986-2009 historical catch indicates that 57% of the fish were caught by for-hire while 43% were caught by private anglers. Between 2008 and 2009 the reverse is true, and private anglers harvested 57% while the for-hire group harvested the remaining 43%.
The model that was developed to analyze possible sector separation scenarios allows for multiple variables and inputs. Twelve example scenarios were presented to Council comparing different allocations; different average red snapper weights; different percentages of state for-hire landings; and different trends in fishing participation. For each example presented the model generates how the number of fishing days will change and how much the total allowable catch will change for each group. Overall, the results of the model indicated that the for-hire sector benefits from sector separation when their allocation is greater than 46% and the private sector benefits from sector separation when their allocation is greater than 54%.

Gag Interim Rule- Final Action
A 2009 stock assessment determined that gag is both overfished and undergoing overfishing. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is mandated by the Magnuson-Stevens Act to end overfishing and to create a fisheries management plan that will rebuild the stock in 10 years or less. An interim rule was put into place at the beginning of 2011 that set the recreational bag limit for gag at zero, and limited the commercial harvest of gag to 100,000 pounds. This rule was put into place to temporarily end overfishing while management options for the future harvest and rebuilding of gag were developed and implemented in Reef Fish Amendment 32.
Because amendment 32 will not be implemented until 2012, the Council has finalized a new interim rule.

If approved by the Secretary of Commerce, the new rule will set the 2011 recreational gag season to begin at 12:00 a.m. on September 16th and closes at 11:59 p.m. on November 15th. The commercial quota will be set for 2011 at a total of 430,000 pounds (including the previously released 100,000 pounds).

The total allowable catch for 2011 has been set at 1.28 million pounds. That amount is split between the recreational and commercial sectors so that the recreational sector is allotted 61% (781,000 pounds) and the commercial sector is allotted 39% (499,000 pounds).

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission approved its own rule amendment that will align Florida state regulations with the proposed federal interim rule.

Greater Amberjack-
In October of 2010 the Council approved a regulatory amendment to close the recreational greater amberjack season for the months of June and July. A proposed rule was published, and during the public comment period that followed, comments were overwhelmingly opposed to the proposal. As a result, NOAA fisheries reopened the public comment period for and additional 15 days, but there was no change to the results. The regional administrator of NOAA Fisheries announced that the recreational greater amberjack season will close for June and July as scheduled, unless the Council requests an action to not publish the final rule. He also noted that estimates show in the absence of the June-July closure the 2011 recreational amberjack season will likely close sometime between August and the end of October. Following a review of written comments received by NOAA Fisheries, and public testimony received during the Council meeting, the Council took no action, thereby reaffirming its decision to implement a June and July Closure.


The results of the 2010 amberjack update stock assessment were presented to the Council by NOAA’s Southeast Fisheries Science Center. The assessment update concluded that the current greater amberjack stock continues to be overfished, and that the stock is only 31% of the size it needs to be in order to no longer considered overfished. The assessment also concluded that the greater amberjack stock is undergoing overfishing with a fishing mortality rate at almost twice of what it should be. According to the update projections it is unlikely that the stock will be rebuilt by the end of 2010, which is the 10th and final year for the amberjack rebuilding plan.

The Council’s Scientific and Statistic Statistical Committee concluded that the update assessment represented the best available scientific information data, but felt the projections were not reliable, and had too much uncertainty. The Scientific and Statistical Committee did not provide specific recommendations about the status of the stock; however, based on the information contained within the assessment, the acceptable biological catch needs to be reduced from the current level. Further, the Scientific and Statistical Committee recommended an overfishing limit of 2.38 million pounds and an acceptable biological catch of 1.78 million pounds. The Council requested that staff begin developing an amendment to adjust the total allowable catch.
[signature]

How is the council obtaining population numbers for use when making/altering the regulations? Is the data scientifically confirmed, and how reliable is it/ the source? In other words, does the council use numbers based on a best guess, or are they actually using numbers estimated by actually taking a biologist crew on the water, and getting real time information?
[signature]

Bryan,
The data used by the Council and NOAA Fisheries is professional scientific data. It is however, very highly criticized, not because it is bad or slanted, but because it is often very limited. The Council is mandated by congressional law to use the "best available scientific data," to estimate the number of fish in the Gulf. To obtain that "best available" a species is chosen, every scientists (not just government employees but also university researchers, independent scientists, etc) and every paper published on the species of interest is gathered to compile as much information as possible on that species. They use the data they have to make an estimation which is then sent out nationally and internationally to be reviewed by other scientists. Once everyone agrees that the information used could provide the estimate made the Council can then deem it the best available and use it in making management decisions.
But, in the case of amberjack here in the Gulf sometimes the "best available science" still isn't considered good enough for management decisions.
Like I said in the beginning of this post, the science is very highly criticized. There is often a lack of good- comprehensive data because fish are hard to study!
[signature]

Specifically, how is the data collected? Is it collected by fishing reports from anglers? (we caught such and such of such and such), are the scientists going out on a dive boat, and observing the populations? Recording and logging data? Tagging fish? etc.......

Using angler data is skewed and not scientific or accurate in any way. You never know what you'll get. There are some anglers that believe if they tell you what they are catching, they are affraid you'll think they are catching too many fish and the population will go down. Then, there are people that think if they tell you they suck and didn't catch anything, that there isn't anything to catch.

The truth is, only about 10% of the anglers along our coast catch 90% of the fish. The ones that don't catch anything, are the ones that don't have a clue as to how to catch them. That logic, which is fact, simply makes commercial and recreational angler data skewed and unusable. I can't tell you how many times i've parked my boat in the middle of another dozen, and consistently caught fish, while the other boats checked me out through thier binocs in discussed, wondering what I was doing different. It's tactics. But, i'm assuming that your council's advisors are angler too, and understand this concept. I for the life of me wouldn't be able to understand how a council could hire people to make a decision on fishing limits, if they themselves are not anglers. Those should not be political positions, and again, i'm going to assume they are not.

So, if you're not using angler derived data, what type of scientific data are you using? I'm asking questions that all of us anglers want to know, and I do appreciate your efforts to answer these questions. We are only trying to preserve the fishery for our children later on down the road. A fishery, by which, becomes less viable if there is nothing we can keep. Why spend 300 dollars in fuel to go offshore, if you come back empty handed? Though the council's reasoning seems to be legit, we want to know that the decisions are being made responsibly, and not with a "best guess" type of situation by a bunch of politicians that don't have a clue. The impact of drastic changes to the economy from boat retailers to tackle retailers, is dramatic as well. Every time a new reg is put in place, or a season closed, it creates more and more of a economic drag. So, the entire industry is effected. This is the other reason we need to know how things are happening and why.
[signature]

There are two categories of data types: fisheries dependent and fisheries independent.

Fisheries dependent data is data derived from fishing from commercial, for-hire, and private anglers.

The commercial catch is monitored in a number of ways: each boat has an electronic "vessel monitoring system" that watches the boat around the clock to know when they are fishing and where; for each trip there is a "trip ticket" that is filled out at the fish house where they are mandated to land to count the catch that is sold; commercial boats also have NOAA observers on board that watch all fishing activity to count not only what comes on board but to gather data on discards and bycatch.

For-hire boats are monitored with log books. Captains fill out records of each trip to monitor what is being caught. Larger headboats also have observers on board to collect data on catch, bycatch, and discarded fish.

The private recreational sector is monitored by the NOAA "marine recreational information program (MRIP)." This includes a combination of dock side intercept surveys where folks stop boats as they land to measure and count their catch. Also there is a phone survey conducted to calculate the number of trips taken by fishermen.

Also, trends in historical catch levels are monitored over time. In other words, if there is no huge change in fishing pressure but the number of fish being caught declines drastically then it might indicate that the fish just aren't there to be caught.

Fisheries independent data is data derived from other types of experiments independent of the fishing industry,including:
Underwater video surveillance
Surveys of areas using different gear types (nets, longlines, traps, spears, etc.)
Biological assessments are done on different species to gather age, growth, and reproduction data.
Fish tagging programs are used to follow fish movement and distribution etc.
Genetic identification programs identify breeding groups and their success and distribution etc.
There are also tons of independent studies to measure mortality (death) of fish from natural causes and after being caught and handled.

These two types of information are used together to estimate the biomass of the fish stock being considered. If you're interested in some more detail I can send you some resources I've found that explain all of the stock assessment process. Email me at Emily.Muehlstein@gulfcouncil.org and I will pass them along.

And finally, the council (and its advisory panels) is made up of fishermen (commercial, recreational, for-hire) and a representative from each states marine resource department. All of their names, phone numbers, addresses, and statements of financial interest can be found on out website at:
http://www.gulfcouncil.org/about/fishery...embers.php
Although positions are political appointments, the members are not politicians they are folks who applied from the general public and were selected to serve.
[signature]

Is the same process they use up north here? Seems you have all bases covered. We as fisherman here in the NE don't always agree on limits put on us, when we see alot of one species. Fluke comes to mind.
[signature]

I appreciate the response and explination. It seems your area council is far more squared away than ours. (SAFMC) I've met them, and they are idiots that take wild guesses.

We recently went through a ban on black sea bass, in the form of a closed season during the PRIME months to catch them; if for no other reason, they were one of the few species in our area that could be targeted in the winter months. This ticked off A LOT of anglers, commercial and recreational alike. We had to protest and raise hell, and now they are going to pull the closed season, and just reduce the catch limit. (which is what they should have done to begin with) The BSB population is not depleted to begin with.
[signature]