NOAA Over Estimating Recreational Catch Data

[Gerry Zagorski]

Something we’ve talked about forever….

https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/noaa-overestimates-recreational-catch-data/

[Detour66]

So NOAA is finally admitting their data is flawed by 30-40%. That's a huge amount to be off. But it's no big surprise to us! The big surprise will be if anything is done about it in our favor!

[dales529]

No surprise here. Most anglers don't appreciate all the work that went into trying to overcome this and stopped supporting the groups that tried as they saw no results. I don't blame them (rec anglers) but this exposes what we all knew and couldn't get NOAA to admit. Not saying much will change yet but now more ammunition on the table. Guessing someone i wont name finally retired and the younger ones that knew the data was flawed are speaking out?

[1captainron]

If they are relying on the data from the few Party boats that are left and figuring we have over fished with the numbers I send in......I call total Bullshit!!! Know it for years.....Nothing will change, not in my lifetime.:mad:

[Foul Hook]

I read this article this morning. Go figure!

[Gerry Zagorski]

Truth be told, NOAA has their work cut out for them here since it's very difficult to reliably measure actual recreational catch data...On the commercial side, although not perfect, it's much more straight forward. Commercial fleets weigh and report their landings, equipment used, locations etc, they are also monitored and there is reporting at the point of sale when fish are sold as well. Is there some cheating going on and some flaws in the system? I would think but suffices to say, their catch information is much more reliable.

In contrast MRIP (Marine Recreational Information Program) bases it's recreational catch by interviewing recreational fishermen to find out what they caught, how many days they fish and apply assumptions to it.. Here is the first flaw in the system, the survey data is only a very small sample. I've probably made 300 trips over the last 10 years and have only been surveyed 3 or 4 times... A least in my case, that's a 1% sample rate..

The for hire boats like charter and party boats are required to report their catch data as well but that is only part of the story since they are only part of the overall fishery.

As you can imagine, these methods are nothing more then an educated guess because of the small sampling size as well as the assumptions applied to the data collected.

So what's the answer?

It's obviously impractical for the feds to try and measure and monitor recreational catches like they do on the commercial side. However as you saw in the article, some states have done just that by doing independent surveys with local Universities and data collection to prove the feds wrong. Here is what they found for Red Snapper in Mississippi.

" In September 2019, the state’s private boat recreational red snapper season was open for only five days and yet the federal system says somehow Mississippi produced 2,482 trips per day, harvesting 68,997 pounds of red snapper every day for a total of 344,984 pounds in just those five days … [And] in 2020, the Mississippi season was open for a single day in September and the feds say anglers made 980 trips that day and caught 32,892 pounds of red snapper. Venker notes that the most trips the Mississippi state data system has ever logged in a single day is 513, with an average of 95 trips per day over the last four years."

NOAA assumed 2483 trips per day when the most ever logged by the State was 513... If the state data is correct, that means NOAA assumptions in MRIP were off by a factor of almost 5 X!! This is obviously not "The Best Available Science"

Since the recreational catch data and assumptions are so far from reality, why are they used as the major factor in determining our regulations? Your state gets a quota in the beginning of the year and sets it's regulations to try and achieve but not exceed the quota by restricting the number of days, bag and size limits. At the end of the year the faulty MRIP data shows up and if you caught more than expected, regulations will tighten, if less your get more liberal regulations. It's admittedly more complex than this but in general, this is how it works.

So once again, if the MRIP data is as flawed as we and they know it is, why use it as the major factor in setting regulations? The answer is because that's the law on how fisheries are to be managed per the Magnuson Act.

In my opinion and what common sense tells me, the regulations should be based on actual stock assessments, not what MRIP spits out. It should also be based on the reality of what is happening on the water. Seabass is the prefect example. According to stock assessments this fishery is totally rebuilt yet the regulations are more restrictive every year. Beside the stock assessment, all you need to do is go fishing for a few days and you'll see you can hardly avoid catching a Seabass, even if you're not targeting them.

Yes, stock assessments can also be flawed but that along with some sample fishing is way better than the game of chance by pulling the handle on the MRIP slot machine every year.

Having said all this, I do think fisheries management is coming around.. Evidence of the change was discussed here in the fight to giving fisheries management some flexibility in the Magnuson Act and to take stock assessments into account when deciding regulations.

Some will argue that it's not enough, it was watered down and the regulations still don't reflect the reality of the stocks and what we see fishing every day. All this is true but like most things that involve change in federal policy, this is a marathon and not a sprint. We all need to say involved all the time if we want change. Not just once a year when we get the regulations handed down to our state by the feds. By that time it's too late and the only thing we get input on is which of the crappy options we want.

I'll admit, I've grown tired and am tempted to give up, no sense in fighting, we never see any results. If the people in Mississippi had this attitude, NOAA would not have been called out on MRIP. This article gives me some hope and some renewed energy to stay in the fight. I hope it does the same for some of you.

[Broad Bill]

No surprise here. Most anglers don't appreciate all the work that went into trying to overcome this and stopped supporting the groups that tried as they saw no results. I don't blame them (rec anglers) but this exposes what we all knew and couldn't get NOAA to admit. Not saying much will change yet but now more ammunition on the table. Guessing someone i wont name finally retired and the younger ones that knew the data was flawed are speaking out?

Don't know if Mr. T is retired or not but the entire system is broken. MRIP is an absolute guess slanted towards higher recreational catch statistics as everyone other than NMFS has been saying for years. Being off 10% in statistical analysis is statistically significant, being off 30 - 40% is a complete abomination. Catch totals is just the tip of the iceberg impacting recreational regulations and fisheries management There was someone who used to post here who pointed that issue out. Weight values of catch by age classes between commercial and recreational sectors vary by 40 - 50% to the detriment of the recreational section. That's an insane difference. Discard mortality percentages for the recreational sector are grossly overstated and grossly understated for the commercial sector. When you see how concentrated these schools have become the last few weeks before heading offshore, when the commercials net them during their fall migration they net hundreds if not over a thousand in a single tow. They all hit the deck, the sizes with the highest market value are attended to first put in the hole and iced down, everything else goes back dead probably an hour later. Dead discard in the commercial sector is more likely closer to 100% of harvest and what's published is I believe in the 25 - 30% range meaning they kill as much as they harvest and NMFS knows that but ignores it in their calculations. There are basic calculations where recreational catch is being overstated in certain fisheries by millions of pounds a year overstating total weight harvested in addition to erroneous MRIP numbers grossly overstating the number of fish caught and or harvested. NMFS maintains most of the larger species and fish harvested are males while acknowledging females in this stock grow larger and live longer, a complete crock of shit and position taken only to support the asinine regulations they've adopted which mandates the harvest of larger fish representing the future of the stock. And as far as annual recruitment is concerned or new fish brought into the fishery annually, they have absolutely no idea what those numbers are yet they allow unabated harvest of the stock during the annual fall spawn by the commercial sector. How many fisheries are closed to the recreational sector during the stocks spawn but with summer flounder it's open season for commercials when the stock needs protection most and is most vulnerable to netting as they're in highly concentrated schools like we've been seeing the last three weeks.

We need science and fisheries management or every stock would be exploited. But that doesn't justify how bad the powers to be have butchered that science in certain cases and how in too many cases decisions are being made for political reasons and not based on what the data supports or reasons that benefit the stock.

[Detour66]

NOAA just has to take into account (which they will not) the days we can't fish due to the weather and the majority of us fish on the weekend with the bays and ocean being very quit during the week. How many days did we lose this season due to wind, storms, extreme heat etc etc?

[Broad Bill]

Mr. Zagorski, I agree with your post but three points I'd add. The biggest problem with commercial counts and operations are threefold. NMFS has federal observers on board and dead discard percentages to catch have been recorded by those observers and proven to be 2, 3 or even 4 times greater than amounts reported through the honor system on vessel trip reports by commercial operators. NMFS ignores those facts and uses vessel trip reports to calculate commercial catch which grossly understates their annual numbers. If you do the math based on those facts, commercial dead discards alone are more than the entire recreational quota itself yet NMFS assigns essentially the same discard mortality rate percentage to commercial as it does to recreational which is a complete fabrication of the facts. Second, while I agree fish processing plants do counts and F&G officers are supposed to be there when boats offload, just remember Carlos Raphael, aka the Codfather, who successfully circumvented those same protocols for decades and sold tens of millions if not over a hundred million worth of fish to the NY marketplace without any of that catch being reported or included in NMFS commercial catch statistics. Illicit commercial netting is rampant with the prices on fish today and there's simply not enough law enforcement to address it. Third and probably the most important as it relates to summer flounder, allowing 10% of the annual commercial harvest to occur during the one and only spawn in September / October is the most reckless decision management of this stock has made. They've agreed to allow a small percentage of the commercial annual quota during this timeframe while risking the entire future of the stock they're supposed to be managing and protecting. If they addressed that one fact alone, we'd see fishing like we've seen these last three weeks every season and all season long.

[Capt Sal]

Great job working for NOAA. Hang out at the Sea Shore and turn in BS fish harvest reports.

[Captain Rich]

We have all known about this, but now I have seen it on two different sites, maybe it will get some traction now.

[1captainron]

So, if I keep a few Sea Bass over the weekend.....will I still get in trouble? :mad:

[frugalfisherman]

We have all known about this, but now I have seen it on two different sites, maybe it will get some traction now.

They will absolutely positively never ever in a million years admit they were wrong.