Data and Management Strategies for Recreational Fisheries with Annual Catch Limits (2021) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Existing Recreational Fisheries Surveys and ACL-Based Fisheries Management
3 Existing Recreational Fisheries Surveys and ACL-Based Fisheries Management
Pages 41-72
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 41... ...
statistical extensions o current methods statistical to currentthat methods statistical could that enhance methods couldMRIP's enhance that couldMRIP's enhance MRIP's t. CRITERIA FOR RECREATIONAL FISHING SAMPLE SURVEYS OR CENSUSES SAMPLE TIONAL ISHING SAMPLE FISHING SURVEYS SURVEYS FourSAMPLE ORkeyCENSUSES SURVEYS ORare criteria CENSUSES highlyOR CENSUSES relevant when considering the use of MRIP and other recreational fishing sample surveys or censuses for in-season management of fisheries with annual catch limits henering relevant considering the when use (ACLs)
|
From page 42... ...
of estimates; The precision the of MRIP estimates design, numis a ber methods, functionof of a number iability has ation large ofPSE a number but low precision. of "controllable" Total Error Thefeatures precision of uses Estimateof the of sample MRIP estimates design andissample a function selection: of a number the survey of sample size; the complexityTofotdata al E the for rror sample of designE outside st im (i.e., at ofmultiple-stage, e its initial intent; clustering and (4)
|
From page 43... ...
program in the South of Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE) , Effort, and Total Catch Atlantic and Gulf Regions and the almost complete transition to electronic reporting for all major for-hire logbook programs (Vessel Trip Reporting [VTR]
|
From page 44... ...
Noncovered for-hire vessels FHS (in combination with APAIS intercept sampling logbook programs VTR, provides data to adjust SEFHIER, and Southeast estimates for trips by for-hire Region Headboat Survey) vessels not covered by FHS, SEFHIER, or VTR.
|
From page 45... ...
NOTE: APAIS = Access Point Angler Intercept Survey; CPUE = catch per unit of effort; FES = Fishing Effort Survey; FHS = For-Hire Survey; LPS = Large Pelagic Survey (LPS) ; MRIP = Marine Recreational Information Program; SEFHIER = Southeast Region For-Hire Electronic Reporting Program; VTR = Northeast Vessel Trip Reporting (VTR)
|
From page 46... ...
Timeliness is governed by the primary aims of the survey program, the complexity of the survey design, and the procedures and time required for data cleaning, data processing, estimation, and quality assurance/quality control functions that must occur after the survey data are collected. Timeliness is of key importance if recreational fishing survey estimates are to be used effectively for in-season management.
|
From page 47... ...
states and territories, the fraction of fishable marine water that is covered by the MRIP surveys and catch estimates is far from complete. However, in terms of total numbers of recreational fishing trips or total recreational catch, the MRIP surveys and the data they generate cover more than 95 percent of all U.S.
|
From page 48... ...
Data for other Pacific islands, the Alaska region, and the Puerto Rico region were not available for 2018. SOURCE: NOAA Fisheries, 2020; see https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/fisheries-united-states-2018.
|
From page 49... ...
Ad hoc Regional Implementation Teams have been established to develop MRIP Regional Implementation Plans for the Caribbean, the Pacific Islands, and Alaska and for Atlantic highly migratory species. In all cases, the teams are set up to include representatives from, at a minimum, the NOAA Fisheries Office of Science and Technology; the applicable NOAA Fisheries Regional Office and Fisheries Science Center; and the applicable Interstate Marine Fisheries FIGURE 3.2 MRIP organizational chart (effective November 2018)
|
From page 50... ...
With partial MRIP support, each of these states fields its own recreational fishing survey programs: California Recreational Fisheries Surveys, Oregon Ocean Recreational Boat and Shore/Estuary Boat Surveys, and Washington Ocean and Puget Sound Sampling Programs. The State of Alaska manages its own Saltwater Logbook program, an annual Statewide Harvest Survey, and special Southeast Alaska dockside intercept surveys each August and September to support its data needs for fishery stock assessment and limited in-season management (Chinook Salmon in Southeast Alaska)
|
From page 51... ...
In Hawaii, recreational catch and effort data are collected through the Hawaii Marine Recreational Fishing Survey angler intercepts and the MRIP FES programs. The Western Pacific Fisheries Information Network (WPacFIN)
|
From page 52... ...
As of March 2021, all APAIS intercept data on recreational catch for the Atlantic Coastal and Gulf Coast regions were captured electronically, making raw data potentially available within a short period of time after the actual intercept sampling has taken place. Note that the APAIS intercept interviews also provide information on nonresident angler trips that are not covered by the FES sample frame or charter/guided trips not covered by the permit frame for the FHS.
|
From page 53... ...
and Alaska Saltwater Logbook Program and Statewide Harvest Survey, and the Hawaii Marine Recreational Fishery Survey and data collections of WPacFIN. In addition, MRIP supports the LPS to collect catch and effort data for the highly specialized recreational fisheries for Tuna, Sharks, Swordfish and other Billfishes, and other offshore species.
|
From page 54... ...
Since 2017, MRIP bi-monthly and annual catch estimates have used VTR effort reports for vessels also sampled in the FHS telephone survey; the VTR can provide coverage of fishing trips by for-hire vessels that are not covered in the FHS telephone survey frame. The VTR does not provide coverage of charter and guide boat operations that fish exclusively in state waters and do not hold a permit to fish in federally managed waters.
|
From page 55... ...
The catch and effort data collected through the SRHS program are integrated with the FHS effort data and the APAIS intercept and at-sea sampling programs to produce MRIP bi-monthly and annual estimates of catch. Southeast Atlantic For-Hire Electronic Reporting Program NOAA Fisheries launched the SEFHIER ("Sea Fire")
|
From page 56... ...
MRIP Certification Process for Specialized and Alternative Surveys Several states have designed and initiated recreational fishing surveys as alternatives or supplements to MRIP. Four of these surveys -- 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 capable of providing the best scientific information available.
|
From page 57... ...
• The survey design and/or estimation methods are collecting data and/or producing information that meet science and management needs. SOURCE: Excerpted from NOAA Fisheries (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/recreational-fishing-data/recreational fishing-survey-design-certification)
|
From page 58... ...
In fact, the MAFMC's 2013 Omnibus Recreational Accountability Amendment4 actually removed the ability of the NOAA Fisheries regional administrator to close the recreational fishery in season if recreational harvest was projected to exceed the ACL. An argument in support of this restriction was that in-season closures had a disproportionate negative impact on states with fishing seasons later in the year.
|
From page 59... ...
Gulf of Mexico All five states in the Gulf of Mexico have developed alternative or supplemental surveys to MRIP for estimating recreational fishing effort and catch (see Table 3.3)
|
From page 60... ...
The Council uses catch estimates provided by each state for in-season management and stock assessments. The state
|
From page 61... ...
Weekly catch estimates for all Salmon stocks are produced by state agencies for purposes of managing the fishery relative to available allocation. State fishery managers track catch closely throughout the season and coordinate with NOAA Fisheries and other state managers to close the fisheries when catch is projected to reach the subarea allocation.
|
From page 62... ...
for effort; dockside and on-board interview, boat-based Human-made: On-site effort count, on-site interview, shore-based Beaches and banks: effort phone survey; on-site interview, shore-based PR: private access and nighttime effort: off-site phone survey; proxy interviews from PR, boat-based Species/taxa Salmon, Halibut, and All finfish species, except All finfish species, All species in Pacific other selected finfish forage fish plus Dungeness Crab Fishery Management Council (PFMC) fishery management plans (FMPs)
|
From page 63... ...
The state agencies adopt conforming rules and monitor catches. Groundfish in-season management is implemented by NOAA Fisheries and state agencies.
|
From page 64... ...
stock assessment, the pre-2003 catch was estimated based on the assumption that recreational catch would be proportional to the Hawaii population size, and the recreational fishery participation would increase with overall population in Hawaii. High uncertainty tends to be associated with the Hawaii Marine Recreational Fishing Survey's recreational catch estimates.
|
From page 65... ...
stock assessment, the pre2003EXISTING catch was estimated based on the assumption that recreational catch would be proportional to65the RECREATIONAL FISHERIES SURVEYS Hawaii population size, and the recreational fishery participation would increase with overall population in Hawaii. U.S.High uncertainty Territories tends to be of American associated Samoa, Guam, with andthethe Hawaii Marine Recreational Fishing Survey's Commonwealth recreational catch estimates.
|
From page 66... ...
components of the total catch estimator. Panel A describes estimation for the shore and private boat domains.
|
From page 67... ...
for the shore and private boat fishing modes are based on retrospective trip reporting by anglers responding to the FES mail survey. Following each 2-month wave of data collection, the FES data gathered in that wave are used to estimate total angler effort, E, for each coastal state and fishing mode (shore, private boat)
|
From page 68... ...
Consequently, it is approximately 2 weeks after the end date of the bi-monthly wave before the majority of the raw data can be assembled and undergo the required data management, quality control, and scientific review steps that must be completed before final estimates are compiled and published. MRIP releases its bi-monthly and annual catch estimates by species and recreational fishery domain through the NOAA Fisheries website.7 Fisheries managers and the public can access the individual-level catch data from the APAIS intercept program website.8 Annual species-specific catch estimates (commercial and recreational)
|
From page 69... ...
For instance, MRIP is designed as a general survey, and its precision is greatest for annual estimates at larger geographic scales; the precision of MRIP estimates is much lower for shorter periods of time and smaller geographic areas. The FIGURE 3.5 The timeliness of data collection and processing for component surveys of Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico recreational catch estimates.
|
From page 70... ...
and various methodologies involved in these surveys can pose challenges for fisheries managed across multiple states or regions, as more cohesive, regionwide estimates of recreational catch are needed for Council-managed fisheries. Improvements in the timeliness and precision of catch and effort estimates for recreational fisheries have been described as high priorities in several recent regional MRIP implementation plans.
|
From page 71... ...
Conclusion: 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. Recommendation: Current efforts by the Marine Recreational Information Program and its partners in the area of survey inter-calibration should continue and, where significant differences between surveys exist in terms of final estimates or precision, the causes of the differences should be determined and communicated to the public.
|
From page 72... ...
2019b. Marine Recreational Information Program, Research and Evaluation Team Review of the iAngler and iSnapper Reporting Programs.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.