Today,
red snapper management in the Gulf of Mexico may be the most bitterly debated
issue in fisheries management.
By
1990, the stock was badly overfished. Abundance had fallen so low that the
population retained only 2.6% of its spawning potential.
Since then, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) implemented a
successful recovery plan. Spawning potential has more
than quadrupled, and is now at about half the level that, managers
believe, will support a sustainable fishery in the long term.
NMFS
had to overcome three separate threats to the stock: recreational overfishing,
commercial overfishing and bycatch of juvenile red snapper in shrimp trawls. A lawsuit brought by a number
of angling and conservation groups helped to resolve the
bycatch issue.
Commercial overfishing ended in
2007, after NMFS adopted a catch share program, which assigned a
portion of the harvest to each fishermen, based on their landings history.
That
left recreational overharvest as the last problem that managers needed to fix.
Unfortunately, it proved to be the most intractable problem of all.
The
conventional management tools, bag limits, size limits and seasons, just did
not work. Managers continually imposed tighter regulations, going from a 7-fish bag limit, 13-inch
minimum size and no closed season in 1990 to a 2-fish bag limit, 16-inch
minimum size and 9 day season in 2016. However, predicting the pace
and size of recreational landings proved to be as difficult as catching mercury
in a sieve. It just couldn’t be done.
States
compounded the problem by adopting regulations that were far more liberal than
the federal rules. Because all red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico are managed as
a single unit, fish caught in state waters when the federal season is closed
are still counted in the overall catch, and force federal managers
to adopt even more restrictive regulations.
State
fishing seasons also provide an opportunity for anglers to
poach red snapper in federal waters. A shortage of
enforcement agents makes it very unlikely that they will be seen slipping over
the state/federal boundary; whilea few of them do get caught, the penalties imposed are relatively
light.
Recreational
overharvest grew so bad that a group of commercial fishermen sued NMFS in 2014,
demanding that the agency hold anglers accountable for their excess landings.
The judge in that case, Guindon v. Pritzker,
ultimately ordered the agency to hold the recreational sector accountable for
its overfishing.
But
long before the judge handed down her ruling, people close to the red snapper
issue realized that traditional means of regulating landings—bag limits, size
limits and seasons—would not be enough to end recreational excesses.
In
2009, the Coastal Conservation
Association (CCA) presented a paper entitled “Is there a better way to
manage U.S. shared commercial and recreational fisheries?” to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf Council),
which proposed doing away with the traditional notions of commercial and
recreational allocation.
Instead, CCA suggested that managers
“Issue
individual non-reusable tags for red snapper that would account for the [Total
Allowable Catch],”
and
then
“Place
all of [the] tags, perhaps clumped into variable units of 10 to 100, up for
public auction every year. Let anyone who so desires to place their best bid
and distribute to the highest bidders…”
Each
tag would entitle the holder to land one red snapper, and there were no
restrictions on what could be done with the tags or the fish. According to the
CCA paper,
“Those
who buy tags can use them any way they desire—take the fish home and eat it,
give them as Christmas presents, sell them, take their fish to a market and
sell them.”
Needless
to say, anyone who failed to place a high enough bid would be locked out of the
fishery for that year.
The proposal was not
well-received by some in the angling community, and quickly faded
into obscurity.
CCA
and other “anglers’ rights” organizations then began trying to strip federal managers of their authority to regulate red
snapper, and hand that authority over to the states, which wouldn’t
have to abide by the conservation and stock rebuilding requirements imposed by
federal law.
Others
worked within the federal system to expand public access to red snapper,
without threatening the recovery of the stock. They came up with an entirely
new concept, which blends aspects of both
recreational and commercial fishing.
The
so-called “catch share experience” superficially resemble a traditional charter
boat trip. Anglers go out with a licensed captain, and catch their snapper on
rod and reel. However, they don’t pay the captain for taking them out, and they
can’t take any of the fish that they catch home. Such fish don’t count against
the recreational quota, and recreational rules do not apply.
Instead,
all fish caught count against the commercial quota. The anglers fish as unpaid
crew, pursuant to commercial regulations, and all fish landed are sold to a
fish dealer at the end of the day. Anglers may purchase some of the fish from
the fish dealer if they so choose. The boat must have a limited-entry reef fish
permit, and the operator must have purchased or leased commercial red snapper
quota before going out on a trip.
Before
leaving the dock, the boat must call in to NMFS, as required by law, to let
them know that it was making a commercial red snapper trip. From that moment
until the boat returns to the dock, its location is continually tracked by a
satellite-based vessel monitoring system. The boat must notify NMFS before
returning, and provide both an estimate of the fish on board and the time and
place where they will be landed, so that NMFS could, if it wished, inspect the
catch.
Once
fishing begins, every red snapper is kept, if of legal size. That can feel
wrong to anglers, until they realize that all of the fish are counted against
the commercial quota, and that such quota is going to be caught, almost in its
entirety, at some point before the year’s end.
However,
the practice of keeping all of the fish eliminates a wasteful practice that is
reportedly common in the recreational fishery, that of “highgrading,” in which
anglers keep their two snapper limit but then keep on fishing, and repeatedly
dump smaller, dead snapper overboard as they catch a larger ones to take their
place.
Once
the fish are brought in and offloaded, the vessel operator must promptly
download the day’s landings to a NMFS website, which automatically deducts them
from the boat’s catch share quota. NMFS also charges 3% of the value of such
landings, to help fund the catch share program.
It
seems to be a classic win-win situation.
Anglers
can, if they choose, catch red snapper throughout the year accessing part of
the commercial quota without affecting the recreational quota at all. They can
also take home a reasonable number of fish, at a cost no greater than what they
would pay for a traditional charter trip.
The
captains offering the trips profit by selling their fish, while; the fish house
makes money by selling some of those fish to the anglers, and packing out the
rest.
Perhaps
most important of all, the red snapper wins because all of the fish caught are
counted, and can’t lead to more overfishing.
For
that reason, some members of the
conservation community applaud catch share trips. There seems to be
little or no opposition from commercial fishermen. However, there has been some
push-back from the recreational sector.
“It’s
the ultimate blurring of the line between recreational and commercial. Under
this scenario, that distinction doesn’t exist as it all just deteriorates down
to who owns the fish, and it isn’t the public anymore.”
It’s
a curious comment coming from an organization that once suggested that NMFS
auction off the right to catch snapper to the highest bidder.
Both Venker and Bob Zales, who operates a Florida-based charter boat, express concern that the catch share trips will lead to for-hire vessels purchasing catch shares from the commercial sector, and such purchases leading to catch shares for charter boats at some point down the road.
What
neither explains is why making more fish available to the recreational sector,
through a process that would match willing buyers with willing sellers, would
be a bad thing, when those fish would otherwise remain completely outside
anglers’ reach.
There
is little doubt that catch share experience trips will generate additional
debate in the future, but there should be no doubt at all that, right now, they
allow anglers to access red snapper that they had no access to before.
There
should also be little doubt that catch share experience trips are just one
example of what can happen when bright and creative people try to work within
the federal management system to make things better, instead of just trying to
tear the system down.
-----
This post first appeared in "From the Waterfront," the blog of the Marine Fish Conservation Network, which may be found at http://www.conservefish.org/blog/
-----
This post first appeared in "From the Waterfront," the blog of the Marine Fish Conservation Network, which may be found at http://www.conservefish.org/blog/
No comments:
Post a Comment