National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Front Matter
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), also known as NOAA Fisheries, is responsible for the stewardship of the nation’s marine resources and the habitats from which they are derived. In support of this mission, NOAA Fisheries collects information on marine recreational angling through the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP)––a state–regional–federal partnership and survey program that includes in-person, telephone, mail-in, and other complementary surveys to estimate total recreational catch. MRIP is designed to support the needs of fisheries scientists and managers responsible for conducting assessments of fish stocks and using that information to establish commercial and recreational fishing regulations that optimize the management and sustainable use of fisheries resources.

Marine recreational fishing is conducted across the nation and is a positive driver of the American marine—or blue—economy. Defined as “fishing for sport or pleasure” in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), it is distinct from commercial or subsistence-oriented fishing in several ways, including the number of participants and diversity of their fishing motivations. With high demand for recreational fishing and pressure of direct harvest on many marine fish stocks, effective marine recreational fisheries management is critical to ensuring the quality and ecological sustainability of this activity. To this effect, the 2007 reauthorization of the MSA mandated that Regional Fishery Management Councils set annual catch limits (ACLs) to prevent overfishing for all managed species in federal waters, as well as accountability measures to prevent ACLs from being exceeded. Councils are responsible for the development of fishery management plans and associated regulations for resources of significance in their respective regions in accordance with a suite of national standards for conservation and management. They are required to account for the total catch from all sources to determine an ACL; therefore, both the determination and implementation of ACLs rely on accurate fisheries data and directly impact management of the fishery.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

Recreational fisheries catch data tend to be difficult to collect relative to commercial catch data because of the large numbers of participants and access points and lack of mandatory catch reporting. Survey sampling used to collect recreational catch data covers only a small proportion of anglers and relies on recall as well as direct observation of catches after the actual catch has occurred, which tends to result in catch data that are more uncertain, more sensitive to details of survey design, and less timely relative to the data collected for commercial fisheries.

In 2017, an ad hoc committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (the National Academies) published Review of the Marine Recreational Information Program, which assessed progress in updating marine recreational fisheries data collection through MRIP over the previous decade and identified potential areas for improvements or modifications to the program that would increase data quality for sustainable fisheries management. That report explored the difficulty and complexity of collecting catch data on recreational fisheries, highlighting that in some cases, enforcement of ACLs requires short recreational fishing seasons, which further complicates data collection, monitoring, and management. The 2017 report noted that establishing MRIP had resulted in significant improvements to recreational catch and effort surveys. However, the demands of in-season management of ACLs often exceeded the spatiotemporal design of the surveys, in some cases resulting in estimates of harvest with a high degree of imprecision that required the application of accountability measures, such as early season closures and reductions in future recreational ACLs, to offset potential exceedance of the ACL.

The 2017 National Academies study concluded that implementation of ACLs, combined with the enforcement of accountability measures, had created tension, particularly in recreational fisheries, where stakeholders expressed concern over the use of MRIP data to estimate catch limits and determine whether they had been exceeded. The difficulties of estimating recreational catches in an accurate, precise, and timely manner with sufficient spatiotemporal resolution to inform in-season monitoring and management against ACLs could result in not only management problems for recreational and mixed-use fisheries, but also an erosion of trust in the management system among recreational fisheries stakeholders.

Shortly thereafter, the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2018, or Modern Fish Act (MFA), amended parts of the MSA to reflect the differences between commercial and recreational fisheries management and required that NOAA take further action to improve federal recreational fisheries management. The MFA also called for a new National Academies study on how well MRIP meets the needs of in-season management of fisheries with ACLs, and how survey methods or management strategies might be modified to better meet those needs (see Box S.1 for the full Statement of Task for this study). In 2020, members of the National Academies committee undertaking this study met virtually on seven occasions to gather information. At each meeting, members heard from state and federal employees, as well as regional stakeholders. They also received written input from stakeholders during the information-gathering process necessary to develop this report and the recommendations and conclusions presented therein.

This study concluded that MRIP and the data collections conducted by its federal contractors and regional and state partners were not designed for the purposes of in-season management of recreational fisheries with ACLs. However, this report recognizes the improvements that NOAA Fisheries has made to the MRIP program since 2017 and the unique aspects of recreational fishing that set it apart from commercial or subsistence fishing. It documents the differences among recreational fisheries survey programs, as well as the diversity of in-season, ACL-based management approaches and the management needs of each region. It also presents conclusions regarding outstanding challenges limiting the extent to which current survey methods in each region meet the needs of the defined in-season management of recreational fisheries with ACLs. In response

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

to these challenges, the report presents approaches to optimizing MRIP data and complementary data for in-season management and provides survey design and methodology options for improving or supplementing the program on a regional or fisheries basis. Further, the report considers the use of alternative management options that have the potential to address management challenges associated with recreational fisheries with ACLs while also serving broader social and economic management objectives.

U.S. FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND ASSESSMENT

Management of marine recreational fisheries occurs at the intersection of law, policy, and science. It also crosses both federal and state jurisdictions. Regional differences exist regarding the execution, intersection with other management authorities, and practical application of federal requirements in the monitoring and management of marine recreational fisheries.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

The Magnuson-Stevens Act and Establishment of ACLs

Marine fisheries in U.S. federal waters are managed under the MSA, which acknowledged the social and economic importance of fishery resources. The MSA established a national program for fisheries conservation and management, including the creation of eight Regional Fishery Management Councils (Councils) composed of representatives of commercial and recreational fishing, NOAA Fisheries, and the marine fisheries agencies of the coastal states.

For all stocks in need of conservation and management, the MSA requires that Councils set ACLs to prevent overfishing and accountability measures to ensure that catches are constrained to ACLs. ACLs are determined on the basis of scientific stock assessments and represent the maximum amount of fish that can be harvested without exceeding the exploitation rate that is estimated to provide the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) from the stock. As required by the MSA, a Council cannot exceed the recommended biologically acceptable levels of catch (determined by its Scientific and Statistical Committee) when setting an ACL, and its fishery management plans must include reference points (or reasonable proxies) for all managed species to make determinations of stock status. Reference points, such as MSY, optimum yield, acceptable biological catch, and ACLs, serve as thresholds that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of management measures in preventing overfishing.

The Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act and Recreational Fisheries Management

The 2018 MFA did not alter the MSA’s fundamental requirement for ACLs and accountability measures. Instead, it clarified that management approaches for commercial and recreational fisheries should be tailored to the needs of each sector, and highlighted specific approaches that Councils could consider for recreational fisheries management. These include additional methods, such as extraction rates, fishing mortality targets, harvest control rules, and traditional or cultural practices of native communities for managing recreational fisheries. The degree to which Councils employ these methods is determined by the quality and availability of information, and the potential effectiveness of their use is typically evaluated based on the total catch likely to be produced. Ultimately, a variety of approaches are used to monitor stocks and ensure that ACLs are not exceeded. In-season accountability measures compare harvest with the ACL as the fishery is under way, and may trigger a closure or other adjustments (e.g., changes to possession limits or season length), while postseason accountability measures may modify future harvest limits to account for overages.

Stock assessments are central to the fisheries management process and vary greatly in complexity depending on the quality and quantity of available data. While stock assessment models and outputs are similar, each Council region has developed a process for scheduling, conducting, and reviewing assessments that meets regional needs and ensures the quality of science. Implementation of MRIP has greatly improved the recreational catch data used in stock assessments, although challenges remain in obtaining high-quality and timely estimates of recreational fisheries catch.

MRIP and the Management and Monitoring of Recreational Harvest

Recreational monitoring programs often use a combination of mail or Internet surveys, telephone interviews, creel surveys, and dockside sampling to estimate the level of catch and other relevant information about the fishery. The accurate and timely estimate of recreational fisheries catch is challenging in the design of monitoring programs and statistical analyses because it occurs over a large number of diffuse access points (boat ramps, marinas, private docks) and is conducted by a large number of participants. These and other characteristics of recreational fisheries make census-based approaches to monitoring and managing catch inherently difficult.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

Recreational ACL management therefore tends to rely on a two-step process of (1) instituting size, season, and bag limits that are forecast to result in the ACLs being met, and (2) monitoring of catches using a survey-based approach to provide a catch estimate, normally after the recreational season has ended. The setting of size, season, and bag limits to achieve the recreational ACL involves forecasting catches in relation to these limits. Several forecasting approaches may be used to project how a given set of management measures (e.g., size, season, and bag limits) will perform compared with an ACL. Actual performance (i.e., realized versus projected catch) depends on management uncertainty, which includes both implementation uncertainty (how well management measures met expectations) and uncertainty in estimates of catch. Pursuit of in-season management is focused primarily on reducing management uncertainty to avoid or minimize forgone fishing opportunities.

RECREATIONAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT SURVEYS

In-season management of recreational fisheries varies by region, and is informed by a combination of MRIP and state-sponsored recreational fishing surveys and data collection programs at the regional and state levels, with the aim of meeting each region’s diverse data needs. As a result of technical, logistic, and funding constraints, the degree to which data needs are fully met varies among regions and fisheries. While MRIP surveys and catch estimates do not cover all fishable U.S. marine waters, the program covers more than 90 percent of all U.S. marine recreational fishing trips and catch in terms of total numbers of recreational fishing trips or total recreational catch. Within their intended scope and design constraints, MRIP data are critically important for fisheries management. Recognizing the limitations, including concerns with precision, most states desire access to raw MRIP data. By utilizing existing infrastructure already developed by regional Fishery Information Networks (FINs), MRIP Regional Implementation Teams provide the framework for integrating regional and state partner input, identifying regional priorities, and ensuring coordination in the development of strategies for addressing stock assessment and management needs for Council-managed recreational fisheries. In many instances, these needs include the development and implementation of specialized recreational fishing surveys (either supplemental or alternative) to address MRIP data limitations.

One of the evolving needs of today’s fisheries managers is data on recreational catch that are accurate, precise, and timely and of sufficient resolution to inform in-season monitoring and management against ACLs. Compared with MRIP surveys, supplemental or alternative surveys have achieved a variety of benefits, including greater timeliness of estimates; greater spatial resolution; provision of additional information; and in some cases, possibly, greater precision of estimates. Compared with MRIP surveys—including the Access Point Angler Intercept Survey (APAIS), Fishing Effort Survey (FES), For-Hire Survey, Northeast Vessel Trip Reporting (VTR) program, Southeast Region Headboat Survey, Southeast Region For-Hire Electronic Reporting (SEFHIER) Program, and Large Pelagic Survey (LPS)—alternative or supplemental surveys have been shown to provide different estimates for recreational catches for the same fishery. Differences among estimates can be moderate, or quite substantial.

Alternative and supplemental surveys have improved timeliness through the use of new technologies (e.g., mobile apps and tablets), as well as reduced lag times in data processing and release. Some alternative surveys, such as Louisiana’s LA Creel, Mississippi’s Tails n’ Scales, Alabama’s Snapper Check, and Florida’s State Reef Fish Survey, have been certified by NOAA Fisheries, indicating acceptance of their survey designs and estimation methods as scientifically sound and eligible for use in assessment and management. Pacific Recreational Fisheries Information Network surveys are currently in the process of certification.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

While the implementation of MRIP surveys is generally standardized, there is a precedent for adapting coverage to regional characteristics and needs. Given the colder climate of New England, both APAIS and FES are now conducted only during the warmer part of the year in the Northeast region. Public perceptions of differences between MRIP and alternative surveys in methodology, final catch estimates, and the precision of the estimates are a source of consternation among anglers, fisheries managers, and other stakeholders, contributing to expressions of concern over the use of data from MRIP to estimate and monitor catch limits. One specific area of concern relates to the need for and challenges of survey intercalibration1 (see Chapter 3).

Recommendation: Current efforts by the Marine Recreational Information Program and its partners in the area of survey intercalibration should continue and, where significant differences among surveys exist in terms of final estimates or precision, the causes of the differences should be determined and communicated to the public.

OPTIMIZING THE USE OF MRIP AND COMPLEMENTARY DATA FOR IN-SEASON MANAGEMENT

Several attributes of marine recreational fisheries make them difficult to characterize and monitor. While MRIP was developed to address some of these challenges and to generate estimates of recreational fisheries catch and effort that are better suited for use in stock assessment and management, MRIP surveys were neither intended nor designed to support in-season monitoring of recreational catch. The main products of the MRIP general survey are bi-monthly catch estimates that are informative at the annual scale. While annual estimates of landings and discards are usually adequate for stock assessments of commonly encountered species, annual estimates at the state and regional levels are often considered inadequate for managing recreational fisheries with ACLs and typically lack adequate precision for species that are rarely intercepted. Modifications to data collection designs and methods and extensions of current statistical methods may enhance MRIP’s contribution to in-season management.

Improving the Precision, Timeliness, and Availability of MRIP Estimates

Mobile apps for smartphones and tablets, for example, offer technologies for improving the efficiency and timeliness of recreational fisheries data reporting. With strong support from fishery managers and stakeholders, MRIP and other recreational fisheries data collection programs have greatly improved the development and use of mobile apps and other electronic data collection and reporting platforms. Since 2017, there has been substantial progress on the use of electronic logbooks by the for-hire sector and the ability of interviewers to capture and submit data electronically. In 2021, the Gulf Fisheries Information Network transitioned all APAIS data collection in the Gulf Region to tablet-based systems and is using automated data transfer to reduce the time needed to deliver the data for MRIP processing. While mobile apps and other technological integrations can improve the efficiency of data collection, however, these technologies alone will not speed up the process if other systemic bottlenecks exist.

Depending on the species and region, final MRIP bi-monthly wave estimates require input from multiple data sources. Relative to the time that a fishing trip actually occurs, each of the contributing data streams can have very different reporting time lags before MRIP can access or utilize the data. While FES, LPS, VTR, and SEFHIER data collections are centrally administered by NOAA or its contractors, the rest of the data collected to generate MRIP’s bi-monthly estimates is largely

___________________

1 The calibration of multiple surveys operating in the same geographic area and covering the same species and fisheries.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

decentralized and led by regional commissions, science centers, and state fish and wildlife agencies. MRIP can expect to have all of the needed data within 1 month after the close of each data collection wave, after which an additional 2 weeks of time is needed for MRIP staff to conduct final assessments and review before releasing the official estimates to fishery managers and the public. With additional resources, MRIP might be able to shorten by roughly 2 weeks the time between the end of its current bi-monthly reporting period and the release of preliminary estimates. This would put additional stress on existing MRIP staff and systems, however, and for purposes of inseason management, the benefits of a modest advance in the release of preliminary estimates for bi-monthly waves would be unlikely to justify the costs of accelerating the data processing and estimation phases of each bi-monthly cycle.

It is possible that the raw MRIP data streams could be used to inform more timely catch estimates through such approaches as nowcasting or other in-season projection methods (see Chapter 4).

Recommendation: The Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) should explore the costs and benefits of providing its partner fishery research and management programs in the regions and states with direct access to the continuous streams of raw MRIP data as they are being captured by the MRIP Access Point Angler Intercept Survey and For-Hire Survey, and the for-hire electronic logbook data programs (Vessel Trip Reporting, Southeast Regional Headboat Survey, and Southeast Region For-Hire Electronic Reporting). Legitimate and appropriate accessibility to these data should be coordinated through Regional Interstate Fishery Commission programs such as the Gulf Fisheries Information Network and the Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Program.

Another potential approach to increasing the timeliness of catch estimates is to transition MRIP to monthly rather than bi-monthly waves. Given an approximate doubling of the resources that could be allocated to its survey programs, MRIP could transition to monthly catch estimates with levels of precision comparable to those of the current estimates for bi-monthly waves. For in-season management applications that rely on tracking MRIP estimates of cumulative catch against ACLs, the greatest advantage of moving to a 1-month cycle would come from monitoring cumulative catch at the end of the odd-numbered months. Other applications of MRIP data, including stock assessment and cross-year management of recreational fisheries, would also benefit from MRIP transition to larger sample sizes required to maintain precision for monthly estimation of catch.

Leveraging Supplemental and Ancillary Data

There are a number of supplementary data sources and analytical approaches likely to improve the precision, timeliness, and adaptability of MRIP data for recreational fisheries subject to ACLs. Supplemental data in the form of state-specific recreational fishery surveys, species-specific surveys (e.g., Red Snapper), location-specific data, fishing tournament data, and voluntarily reported data (e.g., web portal– and smartphone-reported data) could be used in combination with MRIP estimates to improve in-season management. Significant challenges would remain, however, concerning the calibration and coordination of supplemental recreational catch and effort data with MRIP estimates. The potential for voluntary reporting to enhance fishery data collection has generated much excitement, but in practice, participation in such programs has invariably been extremely low. Unless these patterns are reversed, reliance on such voluntary data collection systems is unlikely to advance MRIP over the coming years. In addition to MRIP’s existing programs to calibrate its data and estimates with those of state surveys, additional statistical methods could be employed to facilitate the integration of data from multiple sources.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

Similarly, a great variety of ancillary variables in readily accessible electronic format exist that potentially could be combined with MRIP catch estimates to improve the annual and in-season catch forecasts made in support of fishery management (see Chapter 4).

Recommendation: The National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Offices, Science Centers, and state agencies should explore and identify ancillary variables that have high correlations with the Fishing Effort Survey and Access Point Angler Intercept Survey response propensities, effort, catch per unit effort, and catch estimates and supplemental survey estimates for potential use in annual and in-season forecasting models. Ancillary variables available electronically with high frequency (i.e., daily or weekly) would be most useful for in-season management catch forecasts.

Because stock assessments rely on long time series of consistently collected data, and many federally managed stocks straddle state and survey boundaries, intercalibration of surveys will be essential whenever a single survey is insufficient to support all assessment and management needs. Rigorous survey intercalibration requires temporal and spatial overlap between surveys (see Chapter 4).

Recommendation: Interstate Fisheries Commissions, states, NOAA Fisheries, and other members of the Marine Recreational Information Program Regional Implementation Teams should anticipate and take into account the need for intercalibration and continued survey development when new recreational fisheries surveys and survey methods are considered. These needs should also be clearly communicated to anglers, fishery managers, and other stakeholders.

Further development of in-season management approaches utilizing novel statistical methods and additional data sources has the potential to incrementally improve the timeliness and precision of annual catch management. Potential development of modeling and statistical integration methods that draw on MRIP, supplementary, and auxiliary data may improve timely forecasting and tracking of statistics on recreational catch. Combining MRIP survey data with supplemental survey data using multiple-frame methods, for example, may decrease the variance of catch estimates, depending on the relative sample sizes and catch variances of the combined surveys (see Chapter 4).

Recommendation: The National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Offices and state agencies should explore the possibility of using the following statistical methods, parameters, and approaches as appropriate for the issue at hand:

  • Multiple-frame methods and related methods to combine Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) data with data from supplemental surveys to reduce the variance (percent standard errors [PSEs]) of catch estimates;
  • Covariances in catch estimates across MRIP domains, conditional expectations and conditional variances of catch (encompassing identification of the best conditioning variables, including ancillary variables), and the possible use of control variates to reduce the PSE of catch forecasts;
  • Bayesian modeling methods that could provide a consistent framework for updating annual and in-season catch forecasts and projections utilizing data streams of different precision and frequency, including MRIP estimates of given precision available by year and by 2-month wave, and estimates from other, supplemental sources that may have different precision and be available with different frequency;
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
  • The combination of uninformative priors, an assumption of catch proportional to abundance, and Bayesian updating for forecasting the catch of rare-event species and possibly estimating the population sizes of such species;
  • Alternative statistical definitions of outlier catch estimates and the adoption of standard definitions to facilitate consistency in management actions;
  • Change in detection methods in time-series data analysis to help answer the question of when an outlier should trigger management change; and
  • Contemporaneous correlation in the errors across MRIP domains (the Seemingly Unrelated Regression method, its extension to situations with heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation, and its implementation within a Bayesian forecasting model could help reduce the variance and PSEs of catch forecasts).

ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR MARINE RECREATIONAL FISHERIES

America’s fisheries are among the best-managed in the world, a success attributable in no small part to the MSA. In addition to virtually eliminating overfishing, the law has contributed to the long-term stability of fish stocks, a profitable fishing industry, and a growing blue economy. As noted above, however, the implementation of ACLs combined with the enforcement of accountability measures has created tension in recreational fisheries where the difficulties of estimating recreational catches in an accurate, precise, and timely manner with sufficient resolution to inform in-season monitoring and management against ACLs may result in not only direct management problems but also an erosion of trust in the management system among stakeholders. In response to the recommendations of recreational fisheries organizations and Regional Fishery Management Councils, the MFA specified that NOAA Fisheries and Councils can implement alternative management approaches more suitable to the nature of recreational fishing as long as they still adhere to the conservation principles and requirements established by the MSA. The committee identified several such alternative management approaches with good potential that could be pilot tested (see Chapter 5).

Recommendation: NOAA Fisheries and the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) should work in coordination with the Regional Fishery Management Councils, Interstate Fisheries Commissions, and states to, on a region-by-region basis, test the feasibility and potential benefits of alternative management approaches for some recreational fisheries. The committee recommends pilot testing of the following approaches:

  • The use of harvest tags for low-ACL, rare-event species; species of concern; species under Endangered Species Act (ESA) recovery plans; or other species that may not be well suited for sampling by a general recreational fisheries survey such as MRIP.
  • Implementation of a private recreational fisheries license endorsement (or permitting program) focused on identifying the subset of licensed anglers that target Council-managed species (e.g., offshore components of the fisheries). This license registry could then be used to assist in the development of specialized surveys that could improve recreational fisheries data collection for sampling domains that are challenging for MRIP.

The use of specialized MRIP supplemental surveys to improve the quality and timeliness of recreational fisheries data for Council-managed species would rely on robust planning and coordination with the MRIP Regional Implementation Team and all of its component partners in the region (Interstate Fisheries Commissions, Regional Fishery Management Council, states in the

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×

region, and NOAA Fisheries). The implementation of supplemental recreational fisheries surveys solely at the state level and not in close coordination with the full suite of regional partners would likely create difficulties for regional, Council-based assessment and management (see Chapter 5).

Recommendation: Implementation of the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) supplemental surveys focused on regional or Council-managed species should be accomplished in close coordination with the Interstate Fisheries Commissions, NOAA Fisheries, and other members of the MRIP regional implementation teams.

The need for timeliness of recreational catch information is driven largely by the fact that ACLs are set and monitored on a strictly annual basis. The relatively short-term consequences of ACL underages or overages result in a high value being placed on meeting the ACL exactly every year. A generalized carry-over provision for recreational ACL underages and overages attributable to implementation error (e.g., closing the season too early) would reduce the need for precise catch management on an annual basis by allowing deviations to be corrected in the following year. Carryover provisions have been allowed since the 2016 revision of National Standard 1 guidelines, which specify that their use is permitted as long as overfishing is prevented every year (see Chapter 5).

Recommendation: NOAA Fisheries and the Councils should further evaluate approaches to establishing criteria for the use of carry-over provisions, as well as limits on the amount of unused annual catch limit (ACL) or acceptable biological catch that could be carried forward. Implementation of such carry-over approaches could allow the recreational sector to achieve a high level of ACL utilization in a way that would be both practical and cost-effective while reducing risks of extreme overages and subsequent payback.

The development and application of accountability measures in recreational fisheries is challenging given the precision and timing of MRIP estimates (see Chapter 5).

Recommendation: NOAA Fisheries should review the National Standard 1 guidelines to ensure that agency guidance with respect to recreational accountability measures aligns with the timeliness and precision of harvest estimates produced by the Marine Recreational Information Program.

Adoption of mandatory, electronic catch reporting schemes combined with intercept sampling for verification has the potential to bring recreational catch monitoring to a level of precision and timeliness comparable to that achieved in commercial catch monitoring programs. Implementation of such mandatory reporting schemes could be considered for some recreational fisheries where precise monitoring and management are considered crucial. Precise monitoring such as that which could be achieved by using mandatory reporting could also allow, and be further enhanced by, the adoption of rights-based management approaches in recreational fisheries.

Balancing stakeholder needs and the cost of responsiveness to those needs requires consideration of the economic cost and benefits as well as benefits to long-term biological sustainability. The concept of optimum yield (as defined by the MSA) offers opportunities for better informing this discussion (see Chapter 5).

Recommendation: NOAA Fisheries and the Councils should develop a process for engaging recreational fisheries stakeholders in a more in-depth discussion of optimum yield and how it can be used to identify and prioritize management objectives that are better suited to the cultural, economic, and conservation goals of the angling community.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 2
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26185.
×
Page 10
Next: 1 Introduction »
Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $50.00 Buy Ebook | $40.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Marine recreational fishing is a popular activity enjoyed by more than 9 million Americans annually and is a driver of the American ocean-or blue-economy. To ensure that fish populations are not overexploited, the NOAA Fisheries' Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) monitors recreational catch through a variety of in-person, telephone, mail-in, and other surveys. NOAA Fisheries' management of recreational catch also must take into account annual catch limits (ACLs) established to prevent overfishing for all managed species in federal waters.

While MRIP has worked to improve recreational catch surveys over the past decade, the surveys were never designed to meet the demands of in-season management of ACLs. In some cases, estimates of harvest have triggered accountability measures such as early season closures and reductions in future recreational ACLs, which have been a source of contention with the recreational fishing community. This report presents approaches for optimizing MRIP data and complementary data for in-season management and considers alternatives for managing recreational fisheries with ACLs to better serve both social and economic management objectives.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!